Orewa III

February 1st, 2006 at 3:45 pm by David Farrar

Well the left pulled out the full range of hysterical reaction to Orewa III (or arguably IV), and this was before they even knew what was in the speech. Never has so many worked so hard to demonise.

Lindsay Mitchell blogs how Judith Tizard drops into the gutter by saying “The idea of a man who is married to a migrant attacking migrants really does worry me”.

Tony Milne predicted before the speech that “there will be a few dog whistles to red-neck talkback land”.

Russell Brown said he hoped Brash “will manage to get through one of these speeches without actually scapegoating any sector of New Zealand society”. Jeez Russell is it okay if I say I hope Minister xxx can get through a speech without urinating on anyone. I mean is there any more subtle but cunning way to disparage someone than starting it with “I hope they don’t”. Yeah I hope Simon Dallow doesn’t have sex with Wendy Petrie while reading the news also (a view probably shared by Alison Mau). So let’s just say it so people will think he may have done it otherwise.

Anyway after Judith, Tony and Russell getting all excited about Dr Brash’s jihad against immigrants let’s look at what he actually said:

The first of these is immigration, not least because it is intimately connected to economic policy. Indeed, immigration has been thought of by many people as being relevant only to the economy. How do we fill gaps in the workforce? What level of gross immigration is needed to offset the steady outflow of New Zealanders? How do we ensure there are enough people of working age to ensure that older New Zealanders are cared for in their old age?

But just as importantly, how do we do this while retaining the common values that bind us together as a nation? New Zealand is a liberal, tolerant and secular society, a society that embraces the Western Enlightenment ideals of personal liberty, private property and rationality as the basis of decision-making. These are values so central to our society that we hardly even think about them. Immigration can add greatly to our society, but it also has the potential to undermine the glue that holds our society together.

Our current immigration policies have evolved without serious public discussion or debate, and we will be giving careful consideration to this issue through the coming year.

Now read the above again. This is what Judith Tizard claims is “attacking migrants”. How on hell can we have a serious debate about immigration if people like Judith Tizard claim that the above is “attacking migrants”. This is of course Labour arrogance at its very worst – disagree with us and you are a bigot and a racist.

And as for sanely debating immigration (something NZ First has sadly made even more difficult to do) well anyone who thinks we don’t need to talk about the role of values in immigration is living on a different planet to Europe.

Now moving onto the media coverage of Orewa III let me start with the appalling TV coverage last night. The guest on Breakfast TV this morning basically ripped it to shreds as it spent almost more time on the fact John Key arrived late than you know the actual content of the speech. Almost a total triumph of banality.

Almost as laughable has been the 9th floor inspired spin that this speech is somehow a last gasp chance for Brash to cling onto the leadership with vultures circling. Let’s take a reality check:

* Brash achieved the best result for National since 1990
* Brash came within 2% of winning the unwinnable election
* National is actually ahead of Labour in most polls
* A Government traditionally post-election has a honeymoon in the polls where they put on a significant lead. This time there hasn’t even been a one month honeymoon (thanks to our Foreign Minister mainly)
* The economy looks to be seriously slowing down and this normally damages a Government

Don’t get me wrong – I am not at all complacent about the work needed to be done by National to take a commanding lead and keep it. There is a hell of a lot to be done. But these ridiculous attempts to manufacture crisis are well ridiculous. As I said above when TV spends more time almost on the significance of an MP being late to a speech (hmmn must be a cunning plot) than on the actual content of a speech – well no wonder ratings keep dropping.

No tag for this post.

65 Responses to “Orewa III”

  1. Cadmus () says:

    I think Dr Michael Cullen about summed up Brash’s Orewa Speech when he said.

    “It’s the same tired old right-wing rhetoric from the same tired old leader,” Dr Cullen said.

    Or should it also say a tired old Leader desperate to hold power!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Justin () says:

    Cadmus, who the hell is your audience? Do you think you

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Tony Milne () says:

    hmmm, blame the media time is it! Like most things there was a range of good and bad media coverage of the speech.

    I was wrong about the dog whistles (and admitted so on my blog) – more like quiet chirping than dog whistles. I expected dog whistles, because that was why the first two Orewa’s worked so well.

    However, it was rather odd that he included immigration at all, given in every interview since he has refused to talk about it. He looked rather unformortable about it. So why include it at all?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Southern Raider () says:

    Cadmus Cullens best quote so far has to be “we are heading toward the bottom of an economic cycle and their is nothing a government can do to influence this”.

    So let me get this right. Before the election Cullen states that the NZ economy has been running fantastically for 6 years because of his (and Labours) great management and he discredits right wing comments that the country was at the peak of an economic cycle and even Mickey Mouse could have been made to look good during this period.

    Now that the tide has turned the other way the downturn is out of Labours control and is just part of the economic cycle that you have to live with.

    What kind of world do these people live in? They take all the credit for everything when it is going well and then blame everyone else when its not.

    How about taking some responsibility Cullen.

    Also how come when National was in power and there was a economic downturn which they got blaimed for the whole Asia Pac region was suffering.

    This seems to be an isolated incident to NZ only can this time be directly attributable to the left.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. DavidW () says:

    I seem to recall Cullen also saying the the speech contains no solutions.

    Well whoop de doo

    If he doesn’t believe there is a problem why is he so miserable that Brash is not holding out the solutions for a Gummint that is so totally bereft of rational commonsense to pick up and adopt as their own?

    Pulleeese God give me strength to suffer the time till this bunch of tossers get thrown out for the idiots they are. Or if nothing else for the idiots they take the electorate for.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Cadmus () says:

    Justin what is the problem,

    You said…

    “I think I

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Graham watson () says:

    Spot on David. It was interesting to be at the event then see how media, some bloggers and others portrayed it. Russell Browne has displayed his intellectual and analytical capabilities.

    The immigration section was delivered in a balanced way, the point being made that National was not against any race, Pansy Wong for example being the Associate Immigration spokesperson.

    The media was fixated on John Key. He did arrrive late but before the speech, while the Rotarians were talking. Hell, it took me an hour and a half to get from the city, I’m sure he wasn’t the only person late in yesterdays hot and sticky rush hour Auckland traffic.

    Given that he was at the top table he had little choice but to walk the length of the shed to get there. His alternative would have been to sneak around the back and crawl under a tent flap.

    But as he was walking through the shed the media raced like excited schoolkids to get shots of it. It was a source of great amusement for all and sundry, how to try and spin something out of nothing.

    The speech itself made many salient points which the left have tried to deflect by ignoring. Cullen’s statement was the worst “more tired old rhetoric from a tired old leader’. What an embarassment Dr Cullen is. He is nearly as old as Dr Brash, yet unable to respond intelligently to the points raised resorts to the tired old left wing (and some right wingers I won’t name) tactic of ad hominem.

    To attack someone on the basis of age is as bad in my book as attacking someone on the basis of sex, race or religion. This is especially interesting given NZ’s ageing demographic. But I suppose the left have never been consistent and have often got away with playing the person, so why stop?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. icehawk () says:

    “New Zealand is a liberal, tolerant and secular society” – Brash’s Owera speech

    Some of us are.

    Then there are the Exclusive Brethren. Who are none of the above. And they’re so opposed to democratic government that they refuse to vote on religious grounds.

    So do you think a National govt would introduce legislation to prevent immigration to New Zealand by Exclusive Brethren, since they are so out-of-synch with New Zealand’s values and opposed to our democratic form of government?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. David Farrar () says:

    As it happens I would resist immigration from any extreme religions and certainly would mark an application down from exclusive brethen members.

    I am amazed at how many people can’t cope with the fact that the EB endorsing National doesn’t mean National endorses the EB.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. weizguy () says:

    “But just as importantly, how do we do this while retaining the common values that bind us together as a nation? New Zealand is a liberal, tolerant and secular society, a society that embraces the Western Enlightenment ideals of personal liberty, private property and rationality as the basis of decision-making. These are values so central to our society that we hardly even think about them. Immigration can add greatly to our society, but it also has the potential to undermine the glue that holds our society together.”

    If Brash isn’t racist (which I don’t think he is ) then why does he write his speeches in a way that suggests otherwise?

    Tell us what you mean Don. Which people do you want to exclude? Which do you want to encourage? Rather than appearing to say that your are only interested in Western secularists, why not tell us what ideas you are throwing around at caucus?

    Sadly, this seems to be the National party trend at the moment. There doesn’t seem to be any substance when it comes to dealing with social issues. There are plenty of fine thinkers in the party… Instead of wasting their time on Eradicating PC, and rehashing failed schemes from the 90s, shouldn’t they be coming up with new solutions?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. tim barclay () says:

    Typical Cullen looking for Dr Brash to suggest solutions to him. This means that Cullen admits there is a problem but he has no answers. If Cullen had been more disciplined about Government spending the RB could have been less aggressive with the interest rate rises. Dr Brash knows this very well, Cullen knows that Dr Brash knows this and there is fear in his eyes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Russell Brown () says:

    DPF: Yeah I hope Simon Dallow doesn’t have sex with Wendy Petrie while reading the news also (a view probably shared by Alison Mau). So let’s just say it so people will think he may have done it otherwise.

    I thought exactly what I said. I thought that this would be an Orewa speech without an implied out-group, that he’d just hammer the economy and the health bureaucracy and all. And then up pops the Herald’s front-page lead bringing you … immigrants and the threat to our values.

    In the end, there wasn’t much there, and Brash basically struggled to discuss it on Morning Report today. But what *was* it there for? Where was an example, some research, something material for us to consider?

    Is there a political journalist or comentator out there who *hasn’t* speculated that it’s an attempt to wrestle some of the grumpy vote from Peters? Or to drive a wedge between Peters and Labour? If it wasn’t either, it was fairly ineptly presented.

    Tze Ming’s pretty funny on the topic as she comes in and out of her dumpling coma:

    http://publicaddress.net/default,2892.sm

    Cheers,
    RB

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Michael (The Right Wing One) () says:

    Brash makes a speech about the economy, immigration policy and what policy National wants to focus on for the next three years.

    So we get from Labourites – an attack on the Exclusive Brethern, talk of a leadership change in National, and accusations of bigotry.

    Is it just me, or does Labour not want to talk about the things Brash does because his economic prescription, willingness to consult with the public on immigration policy, and wanting to stick to policy, not personality – might actually be good for National and NZ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Mark () says:

    Actually, Tze Ming has failed to write anything even remotely funny on Public Address to date, so I’ll go over and check it out now to see if she can get be to crack a smile. No doubt, more hilarious comments about “whities” or something.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. side show bob () says:

    If what Don is saying is just tired old right wing rheotric why do all the left wing tossers work them selves into such a frenzy. Prehaps they smell the fear of political and social control slipping from their finger nails.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Mark () says:

    If Mohammed Bouyeri can migrate to Holland, surely other Mohammed Bouyeris can migrate to NZ. I tend to get more worried about this than a few Exclusive Brethrens nutters who at least tend to refrain from slaughtering people who criticise them. Of course, this is utterly lost on lefties, who continue to slander Christians whilst sticking up for a religion that is the total opposite of what lefties stand for.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Adolf Fiinkensein () says:

    I’ve had my say elsewhere but clearly the tiredest, oldest dullest boringest hopelessest aspect of the whole speech was the response from Clark, Cullen and their syncophantic followers who burble nonsense around here. Do you people between you comprise the ‘think tank’ for TV3’s newsroom?

    If I were the Gnats I would cease issuing advance copies of any speeches. All they do is cause blood pressure problems in Leftyland.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Russell Brown () says:

    Sadly, this seems to be the National party trend at the moment. There doesn’t seem to be any substance when it comes to dealing with social issues. There are plenty of fine thinkers in the party… Instead of wasting their time on Eradicating PC, and rehashing failed schemes from the 90s, shouldn’t they be coming up with new solutions?

    I think so. With Labour conspicuously short of vitality and new blood, this would be the time for National to expose some new thinking, driven by its new intake. Instead, it’s Wayne Mapp’s frankly silly speech classifying different sorts of political correctness, and a boring, negative Brash speech with a weak dog whistle on immigration.

    Come on, tell me with a straight face you were inspired by it …

    Cheer

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. johnie () says:

    That’s fine, adolf..any speeches you gave would only be of interest to psychiatrists…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Russell Brown () says:

    Oh, and …

    … undermine the glue that holds our society together.

    Undermine glue? Who wrote that?

    Cheers,
    RB

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Graham watson () says:

    Russell,

    you commented

    “this would be the time for National to expose some new thinking, driven by its new intake”

    You may be demonstrating a lack of awareness of policy processes.

    How long do you think the democratic policy forming process, from grass roots to public enunciation takes in either of New Zealand’s major parties? It is refreshing to see political organisations wishing to dialogue with members and the public to produce quality policy.

    I am sure new ideas will filter through over time, via internal democratic processes. I would prefer this to a leader deciding policy on the fly, as with the party of your govt’s new foreign minister.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Craig Ranapia () says:

    RB:

    OH, tell with with a straight face that Don Brash could possibly have said *anything* that you would have approved of. Apart from declaring that the first task of the nest National Government would be to get Haliburton to convert Rangitoto into a muslim-only gulag?

    To be honest, I wasn’t expecting a barn-burner of a speech at this point in the electoral cycle and it would have been a mistake to turn one on. Brash isn’t responsible for the media trying to hype it up, and Labour hacks trying to talk up ethnic cleansing, baby-eating, granny-kicking apocalypse before lunchtime.

    But how about Michsel Cullen’s response? Rather feeble I thought – which spin doctor told someone with that much grey hair, and on the wrong side of sicty, to slip “tired old leader” into every other sentence? And I think it’s about time to tacitly acknowledge that frothing about “the failed policies of the 90’s” is well past its use-by date when people are more concerned about the failed policies of the naughies.

    But I guess Labour has no new ideas beyond dog-whistling to the base and playing the “racist” card no matter how ridiculous it is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Adolf Fiinkensein () says:

    Well johnie, it so happens I actually do give speeches to significant audiences from time to time and they are usually well received. What do you do, when you are not picking your nose, scratching your arse or infesting other people’s blog sites with your five second attention span? I guess you must work for your father in law’s company? It’s the only way the poor bugger could be confident his daughter would not starve. No one else would employ someone who spends so much time during working hours typing inane drivel on the intenet.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. rightkiwi () says:

    Brown says:

    “Followers of conservative intellectual fads will know the score here. It is fashionable in such circles to state that immigrants – translation: Muslim immigrants – must assume the values and customs of their host countries”.

    What on earth is he saying here? That immigrants to NZ should not assume the values and customs of their host countries – these being, in New Zealand’s case, liberal democracy, including the rule of law, free speech etc ….

    Of course immigrants must accept these values and customs, just as one does not go topless in Saudi Arabia – if one does, one is stoned to death and, frankly, fair enough, who are we to argue etc.

    Is Brown saying we should accept people into NZ who are not committed to liberal democracy? Is that the new trendy Grey Lynn line?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. rightkiwi () says:

    In fact, Brown is just a fucking tosser.

    He says: “Anyway, there was a Kiwiblog discussion on Google vs China which had its moments. But it bears noting that the Chinese government is hardly the only one keen to control the flow of information to the public. I am quite outraged by the White House clampdown on James Hansen, NASA’s most senior climate scientist, who persists in saying things about climate change that the administration would not wish the public to hear.”

    THEN HE QUOTES A NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE ABOUT THE ALLEGED SUPRESSION OF INFORMATION!

    The stupid left-wing cunt can’t see the difference between a country where people are KILLED for expressing a view contrary to the govt, and one where the govt of the day tries to spin to stop something becoming public … and is prevented in doing so by the world’s biggest newspaper, none of whose journalists fear arrest or any kind of persecution.

    These left-wing cunts have totally lost perspective in their anti-americanism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. rightkiwi () says:

    weizguy:

    You ask who Brash wants to exclude. Isn’t it obvious from the speech?

    People who do not “embrace the Western Enlightenment ideals of personal liberty, private property and rationality as the basis of decision-making”.

    Don’t you think we should exclude such people? Why on EARTH would be give such people the privilege of a New Zealand Passport?

    It’s not racist to say this. It is why we exclude nazis and should exclude communists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. sagenz () says:

    predictable to see the left commenters have no more idea than their leaders. Has any one of them seriously addressed the arguments of Dr Brash and explained why he is wrong or misguided. Seriously children, stop wittering and give us facts.

    My reading of it was a controlled lament of the steady decline in New zealands outlook caused by this government. He did not offer solutions yet as he covered too many areas. It certainly did not represent anything deserving of this much opposition anguish.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. David Farrar () says:

    Right Kiwi – please disagree with Russell without resorting to hurling abusive terms at him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. SInner () says:

    People who do not “embrace the Western Enlightenment ideals of personal liberty, private property and rationality as the basis of decision-making”.

    Umm – sounds like the definition of labour/green/aliance/NZF voters to me?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Logix () says:

    Sinner,

    Time for a “purge” then?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. davidt () says:

    The democratic system and freedom of speech are not ‘values and customs’. They are laws. Our (public) decisions are based on the the Rule of Law. These things are institutions, not opinions or feelings. If people disobey the laws, they face sanctions, regardless of their personal beliefs. The laws will only fundamentally change if voting behaviour fundamentally changes, (or someone overthrows our institutions). Immigration potentially could change voting behavious over the very long term, but I am optimistic that most people come here because they like our institutions. One of the great things about our institutions is that they can handle a pluralistic society with people who have different values and customs.
    If our institutions and laws are strong, then do you think we need to worry too much about the personal beliefs of immigrants (how are you going to find them out by the way? A civics tests?). If you are worried, maybe we should look at our constitution first. Maybe we should say, ‘we think our laws and institutions are about right, we know what we are doing, lets bind future generations to these fundamentals by making a strong constitution’. Then you wouldn’t have to worry so much about how future generations are going to think and act (whether they are born here or not, whether our school system fails us, or immigration system fails us, by producing generations who reject our fundamentals).

    P.S. DPF – I think it was a mild remark, but isn’t Don Brash’s ‘undermine social glue’ remark also a ‘i hope x doesn’t do y’ remark as well?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. David Farrar () says:

    Brash was referring to a system rather than individuals. And I think it is hard not to agree that immigration, if done badly, can undermine social glue. Europe is a glaring example of that. On the other side the US is generally an example of how positive immigration can be.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. rightkiwi () says:

    DPF: I will try, but you must agree it is difficult.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Paul W () says:

    Graham you comments about Brash’s policy process are simply laughable. Brash’s speech was a missed opportunity and the media coverage I’ve seen bears this out – what coverage he has got highlights his negativity. Brash appears to be positioning National to take advantage an anticipated downturn in the economy, hardly a sophisticated position and not one that requires extensive consultation through the party heirarchy (whether its politic is another matter). Your defence of him is just plain weak, I’m surprised you bothered.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. tim barclay () says:

    Brash has to position the National Party for a downturn in the economy becuase the Labour Party allowed this to happen by spernding like a drunk and forcing the RB to hike up interest rates. Dr Brash understands this very well but Michael Cullen simply focused on the fiscal balance and ignored spending if the Government books balanced.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Anon () says:

    Not getting into the politics, but I for one would find a live-to-air Dallow-Petrie sesh more interesting than the sports news.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Ben Wilson () says:

    I find the media beat up of Brash’s Orewa speeches fascinating. They have become the equivalent of the US state of the Union speeches for National. We really are desperate for news here.

    It began when Brash surprised everyone, including himself, with the poll bounce following one of his speeches there. National came back from it’s near death experience and the newspapers were stoked because finally there was a contest to report on, rather than the All Blacks vs Italy that our political landscape had become.

    This has continued, and the media seem determined to make a tradition out of the opposition leader addressing a rotary club. It puts a lot of pressure on poor old Brash to come up with something interesting to say every year. Must be pretty hard when nothing has really changed in National policy since his ‘world famous in NZ’ Orewa speech.

    I think Labour needs an equivalent, though. They’re as bitter on Orewa as the Wallabies are on the Haka. “How come those guys get to yell and make silly faces and we don’t?”. Labour should find some traditionally sympathetic audience and have a yearly State of the Nation themselves. Perhaps a Trade Union or the Mt Albert Rotarians?

    The media would love it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. culma () says:

    Ben – with left leaning media coverage channels 1 and 2, not surprising that The Don has re instituted a formula that has always worked for National in speeches at Orewa, (bit of a no brainer really).

    I applaud the Don’s approach, he doesn’t fire shots and then not front up, even at times to his own detriment.
    It could be the reason for this is the Don isn’t a career politician and operates as do the rest of us mortals, Ben if you don’t like the content don’t watch or comment on it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Brownie () says:

    If Mohammed Bouyeri can migrate to Holland, surely other Mohammed Bouyeris can migrate to NZ. I tend to get more worried about this than a few Exclusive Brethrens nutters who at least tend to refrain from slaughtering people who criticise them. Of course, this is utterly lost on lefties, who continue to slander Christians whilst sticking up for a religion that is the total opposite of what lefties stand for.

    Posted by: Mark at February 1, 2006 05:20 PM
    This is 100% spot on and something every leftie avoids replying to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. neil morrison () says:

    Having just read the speech I see that in terms of immigration Brash concerntrated on how important it was for NZ, and briefly mentioned the issue of values. If this is merely a “dog whistle” then I take it that Brash’s critics would have absolutely no problem with an iflux of righ-wing Christian Americans following Hillary getting into the Whitehouse (the world should be so lucky).

    The attempt to tar Brash with the racist brush is deaply ironic given that Labour rode into government on the votes of the party that did actually run a racist campaign.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Ben Wilson () says:

    culma, I dispute that 1 & 2 are left leaning, and I was not saying that Brash is wasting his time – Orewa has turned into an event that has done National good in the polls.

    And I typically don’t watch the TV news much, since it’s the slowest most painful way to get news ever invented. Before it starts I already know about almost every single piece, in far greater detail than they ever go into. The only interesting thing to me in TV news is the choice of shots to accompany the actual content, and the occasional piece where a visual actually tells you something, rather than just working directly on your unconscious prejudices.

    As for Brash’s Orewa speech itself, nothing could interest me less. I have never learned anything about National policy by listening to Brash. Quite the opposite, his speeches seem to obscure what is plainly visible in their past actions and policy documents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. gd () says:

    David You answered your own question re the media.Whatever Brash had said their comments would have been the same.In fact they probably wrote their pieces in the days before he spoke.Simiarly the Leftie commentators.Rather than a reasoned and rational debate all we got was yet another dose of verbal BS.What some of us want is see and partake in a debate as to the future makeup of our society.Of course we are all comfortable with our ethnic source.Unfortunatley it seems to me that people like me who are a 2nd generation Kiwi and who feel comfortable when they visit the land of their forefathers arent allowed to feel or express this.I have been told to F… Off back there by Lefties just for having the attachment.White Anglo Saxons especially males have been marginalised in NZ for some years now.We are not allowed to express our feelings on immigration or other matters without abusive attacks.We dont want to see the violence that occurs in other countries and so why should we be forced to accept people who will cause this violence.The superb hypocracy of the so called Liberals silence at the treated of women by Muslims is breathtaking.They defend it by saying Oh well thats their customs.What we want is people who will contribute to our society in a postive manner and whilst they can live their lives with their customs they should respect the fact that we want to live our lives to.Its a 2 way street Not the one way street that the Lefties want to impose on us

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. DavidW () says:

    gd
    We should be able to go one step further and say without fear of being shouted down as racist or xenophobic that there are some customs and practices carried on in “country of origin” that we will not tolerate here.

    Like it or lump it (accept this or stay the f**k out of our place)should be our stance and proudly so.

    I refer to issues such as polygamy, female genital mutilation, religious intolerance, the suppression of women, stoning gays, respect for civil law … need I go on. These are, or should be the “not-negotiables” in our immigration policy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Ben Wilson () says:

    DavidW, you lost me right there on polygamy. Where do you get the right to insist on monogamy?

    If I were to take your approach seriously, I should insist on your exclusion from our society because of your intolerance of alternative sexual arrangements. Mormons have every right to come to NZ.

    I agree that the other things ought to be enforced as laws here, but I don’t think that means people who come from societies where they are tolerated should be excluded from coming here.

    And they are not tolerated, you will find. Immigrants who don’t respect civil law find themselves in our jails. Women who are suppressed escape their husbands here, and religious intolerance is not something I’ve ever experienced, although I do find people insisting I become a christian at my door on a weekly basis annoying. But I respect their right to do so, so long as they respect my right to say ‘no thanks’. These ‘not-negotiables’ are indeed policy already here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. culma () says:

    Ben – you obviously are a person that takes in or has access during the course of a day to large amounts of information, now put yourself in the shoe’s of the average Jenny or John, watching channel 1 or late news on 2 (being their daily fill of current affairs)are you telling me that you have ever had a balanced non bias view from Mark Sainsbury or any of the other people charged with presenting supposed factual information in an unvarnished way, I can’t say that I have had that pleasure.

    As far as Orewa goes, the Don is obviously gaining larger crowds year to year, as Richard Prebble stated the “Tents get bigger each year”, this indicates to me that there are people out there that are interested in the content and the number continues to grow.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. err.. () says:

    OK, here’s a leftie responding to this somewhat facile “The left always ignore how bad the Muslims are!” argument.

    No. We don’t. Where did our cultural preference for equal rights for women come from? The left. You think that just because somebody is a Muslim that excuses them? That’s your assumption, not reality.

    However, we do tend to want to deal with matters inside our own culture rather than trying to force our ideals onto other countries, which seems to be the method favoured by the right. Quite simply, if a Muslim in Iran wants to make laws that I find abhorrant that doesn’t give me any more right to change it than if they were making roading policy I disagree with. It’s their own country, and it doesn’t influence mine.

    However, some number of people inside that country will be dissatisfied with life in such an environment and will want to leave. Some will be unhappy for economic rather than social reasons, some will be unhappy because they dislike the established social order. Either way, I don’t see any harm in a democracy with defined laws and rights in allowing these people in.

    If they want to behave like a bunch of idiotic bigots when they get here then they can have the same treatment that other idiotic bigots get, be they Brian Tamaki or the Exclusive Brethren. And if they break the law then they’re quite welcome to be prosecuted for it. If their actions are harmful to society and don’t break the law then I’ll happily vote in favour of laws to deal with the matter.

    But this is a civil, democratic society. We do not have the right to pre-judge people entering our country on the basis of their race or religion. I don’t, personally, like a lot of the weirder extreme forms of protestant christianity that are crawling all over the US. But that doesn’t mean that I would favour asking immigrants their religion before letting them come here, or just plain shutting out Americans.

    DavidW – don’t you se the irony in stating that religious tolerance is part of our non-negotiable bottom line in that particular post? This is exactly what I’m arguing here. We have an obligation to tolerate Muslim views – unless they break our laws – as much as we do Christian ones. That doesn’t mean we can’t oppose and debate the customs that we dislike, but we have an obligation to do it in a civil manner that doesn’t give all appearances of being racism in a not-so-subtle disguise. While your motivations may not be racist you can certainly be assured that there are many people in NZ who are quite happily bigoted fuckwits. You wouldn’t want to be mistaken for one of them, would you? It’s hardly going to further your cause.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Ben Wilson () says:

    culma, yes I’ve heard Sainsbury countless times give the information and nothing but. Other times maybe a few comments on the end analysing what has happened from both sides. He’s hardly a Labour party hack, man.

    Far more partisan are people who have their own show, talkback, or blog. And everyone knows this from watching, listening or reading it for a while. Talkback radio seems to be a bastion of the right. The blogosphere is more balanced. And TV shows? I’m even less interested in the likes of Paul Holmes than I am in the news programmes, where really banal human interest stories can take up 20 minutes at a time, and angry shouting matches pose as debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. rightkiwi () says:

    err. says “We do not have the right to pre-judge people entering our country on the basis of their race or religion.”

    Of course we have such a “right”. We have the “right” to do anything we like with respect to people wanting to enter New Zealand. We may not want to pre-judge people on these grounds but the idea we don’t have the “right” to is absurd.

    Ditto Ben Wilson who asks: “Where do you get the right to insist on monogamy?”

    New Zealand could insist in monogamy if we wanted and deny people entry if they did not subscribe to this.

    Where on earth has this idea come from that sovereign countries have no right to set boundaries on the sorts of people/attitudes they want to admit to their country?

    Entry to NZ for foreigners is always a privilege not a right. And we, like Saudi Arabia, have the right to set whatever rules we want. So we should debate what those rules should be. The left seems to argue for a knee-jerk open slather without any thought – the ultimate in mindless PCness.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. neil morrison () says:

    err.., up until recently at least, one of the principles of the Left has been international solidarity. if people are oppressed in other countries then we have a duty to help them out. Your view is quite the opposite “Quite simply, if a Muslim in Iran wants to make laws that I find abhorrant that doesn’t give me any more right to change it than if they were making roading policy I disagree with. It’s their own country, and it doesn’t influence mine.”

    It’s hardly roading that we are talking about, rather major infringements of human rights such as the persecution of gays and oppression of women.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. TomS () says:

    If Brash wants to take a big blast on his dogwhistle he isn’t going to do it just after his party lost another election. National now appears to positioning itself to carp on about the economy in the anticipation that Winston will deliver an election in the middle of a downturn, so they can sleep walk to power and we can all safely sleepwalk back to Don Brash’s formula of a socailly middle of last century New Zealand being a duitful and compliant branch office of corporatism triumphant.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Mark () says:

    Err, please name one single Christian migrant who has slit the throat of someone who criticised their religion, following which they then pinned a note to their body with a knife swearing bloody war.
    Your post merely reinforced the view of the left-leaners that they dwell on Christians whilst excusing Muslims (or at least provide the “facile” argument that all religions are as bad as each other – clearly untrue). Why do you do that? I’m utterly at a loss. It seems that no matter what appalling atrocities Muslims do in the name of their religion, the left are deathly silent and instead go on about non-entities like Tamati of the EB.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Ben Wilson () says:

    rightkiwi I will do you some justice in assuming that you have not deliberately missed the point. When I say “where do you get the right?”, I’m not asking “what military and police force will back you up?”, I’m asking “why is it moral?”.

    Why is it moral to insist on the polygamy of others? I trust you are not going to join the chorus censuring Brash for his marital relations?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. culma () says:

    Ben – maybe so but Sainsbury in particular is definitely no friend of the right, and makes this blatantly obvious in his delivery, I am not looking for a balance of left and right I am looking for delivery without bias. As far as Paul Homes goes enough said. I wouldn’t have paid the man $500.00 per week.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. neil morrison () says:

    Ben, we can insist on it because it’s against the law. But if you’re arguing that maybe it shouldn’t then that’s an intriguing question.

    The common sense view is that polygamy is illegal so as to protect women. But a less intuitive, but in my view more accurate, view is that it protects men.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. DavidW () says:

    Ben
    Are you telling me that polygamy is legal in NZ? Why did I not know this fact vital to correcting the looming gender imbalance before now.

    What I am saying and RightKiwi, I think says most of it very well, is that we should be absolutely upfront about what we expect of immigrants irrespective of where they come from.

    That means that we drop all the PC BS and get ourselves willing to stand up and say that some things will not be tolerated. Breach will find you on the first plane back (sorry Achmed Zhoui but bye bye) no ifs, buts or pleas for clemency on the grounds of culture or religion.

    Before you accuse me of Islamophobia, there are behaviours in other countries that should be equally not tolerated.

    Our society has the ability to grow and evolve over time and that is something we should expect and embrace.

    What I suspect we are concerned about is how fast and how radical change should be, and that the underlying social culture should remain that on which this country has been built. I for one am not ready to roll over and embrace a society where there is no schism between church and state, where certain groups are despised (I wouldn’t have got on very well in Ireland in the 70’s and 80’s either) and am willing to defend our way of life.

    What are you willing to die for Ben?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. err.. () says:

    Mark – you miss the point, again. If somebody breaks the law then they are entirely welcome to be escorted to the nearest prison and rot there for all eternity if I care. Nobody is claiming that “Slitting throats and pinning notes to the body” is a religious right of Muslims that we would be culturally insensitive to prevent. It’s against our laws already, we’ll deal with it using the existing instrument rather than switching to a frankly racist and discriminatory immigration system. Quite simply, if the left is focused on the EB and Tamaki while defending Muslims in NZ it’s probably because Muslims in NZ get a lot of racist shit off of redneck righties on talkback radio while actually doing little of any major offence to anybody. There’s nothing about Islam that makes it inherantly defensible to the left other than the fact that so many nutty right-wingers seem to want to revisit the policies of various nasty 20th century governments with respect to its followers.

    Quite simply, when it comes to the things that I want to protect in NZ society Muslims here are not making anything like as much ugly noise or doing as much damage as either the EB or Destiny. Or, indeed, David Lane and his bunch of self-imposed moral guardian fuckwits. So excuse me if I’d rather deal with them first, no? The day the local Muslim organisations get more vocal than the local Christian ones with respect to stomping all over (what I consider to be) our decent and respectful society then you’ll see me criticising them louder.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Ben Wilson () says:

    culma, it’s pretty tricky to deliver words without expression, I admit. I recall even an actor as accomplished as Michael Caine saying “You mean there’s a giant swarm of killer bees, and they’re coming this way??!!” with the unmistakable look on his face of “Who writes this crap?”. Even the slight raising of the newsreader’s eyebrow can be interpreted as leftist bias if you’re hypersensitive.

    I find Sainsbury to be fairly standard as a newsreader, if slightly more animated than the autocue readers serving anchorperson duty. I often disagree with his analysis, but I wouldn’t place him in the rightist basket on that front alone. Is it his red moustache that you take offence to? He does have the traditional rightist balding pate as a counterbalance :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. culma () says:

    Ben – I don’t spend that much time analyzing the man I look more at the people the man interviews or the delivery to a specific group, and yes his little sarcastic quip’s don’t help either, the fact that the man is a Gingger has nothing to do with it. I think you are being just a little generous even intimating at him being possibly right leaning.
    Now as far as those that got their own shows as repayment for being good little journo’s Kim Hill and one Willie Jackson, can we call these two left leaning also. I realise you made the statement before about front line as opposed to those with their own shows, but in this instance we are talking about publicly funded, publicly owned media outlets, agree or no.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Mark () says:

    So in other words you focus on what is happening in NZ. Fair enough. I am not so insular and actually take note of what is happening elsewhere. I personally find what some Muslims are doing in other countries, including Britain, extremely offensive. I find their actions grotesque and, I’m sorry, Tamaki and the EB are absolutely nothing and have no real influence whatsoever.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Ben Wilson () says:

    Can’t comment on Kim Hill or Willie Jackson. Kim Hill I can’t stand, never have been able to, and have never watched her show. And I’ve never even heard of Willie Jackson.

    As I say, I find TV a painful way to get news, and talkback radio insufferably biased. Why bother with these things when there’s all the news you could possibly read all day from multiple sources, at reading speed (which is considerably higher than speaking speed for me)? Any time you get sick of reading something you can flip forward, or change articles. I only watch the TV news because I eat dinner with my wife at that time and she watches the TV.

    The amount of content in the TV news is seriously about as much as the front page of the paper, which I’ve read in a few minutes. That’s it. You have to put up with each story having several trailers and a main event which scarcely elaborates on the trailers, commercial breaks, irrelevant visuals, missing things people say if there’s a background noise. The only bonus to the TV is that sometimes visuals tell a bit more, or are particularly amusing. But generally I find the visuals distract from the content of the message and impose emotional values which are difficult to filter.

    You can, for instance, show only the ugly silly shots of someone, whilst calmly discussing what they say. What message does that send? Or you could discuss the wearing of headscarfs whilst showing some muslim girl getting a beating as your visual. Or an article discussing George Bush interspered with shots of wailing bloodstained women, and aerial shots of bombs falling.

    I personally dislike this kind of emotive visual messaging and avoid it when I can. So I am the wrong person to discuss the TV news with, really. All I can say is that it’s never come across to me as leftist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. culma () says:

    ORWEA III, I think the entry by Cadmus at the opening of this post was one of the most interesting,(even if cadmus did miss the point)

    “THE COMMENT MADE BY DR CULLIN”, this was well worth watching as Cullin looked and acted in no better shape than he did while attempting to campaign through the election, this guy is looking tired and out of idea’s,(just drained), I can see him taking less and less of a role in the next 6 months, and that is how I see this next term being measured, not in terms of Budget deliveries, or years until the election, but from month to month. Looking at some of the tired old Ministers dragging their asses around parliament, I think each month will be longer for them than the rest of us. We will see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Craig Ranapia () says:

    To be honest, culma, I think the only party anyone at TVNZ belongs to is the stupid party. They keep fiddling with the presenters, the graphics etc. but the content is just not cutting it for me, and hasn’t for a long time. That’s the real problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. culma () says:

    Craig – actually the hour from 6.30 to 7.30 AM is the only time I do make sure I view, 1 – because I enjoy Telstra Business, and 2 because Paul Henry cracks me up.

    I think Kate Hawkesby has a most pleasant manor about her, and if she was reading the bulletin that the world was coming to an end, would make it a little easier to accept, that she is quite hot has absolutly nothing to do with it.

    Seriously I do agree with you in a couple of year, there won’t be anything left of TVNZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. DC () says:

    Culma – you “seriously” believe TVNZ won’t exist in two years? Shit, after all those decades making telly, and still with 70% of the free to air market (and more than half of the total TV market), it’s going to end with a bang around 2008 huh?

    Someone give this man a consultancy…

    (Disclaimer: I work at TVNZ. I’m hoping to continue doing so for a few years still…)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. nigel201065 () says:

    ERR
    I totally agree with your statement ‘Quite simply, when it comes to the things that I want to protect in NZ society Muslims here are not making anything like as much ugly noise or doing as much damage as either the EB or Destiny.’ but I will go one better and would like you to please explain why you have just picked on these 2 and are not calling for the same treatment for the unions as they were as bad if not worse in there anti-national campaign not only in the news papers with full page adds but with brochures dropped in the mail and at work places are you going to call for the banning of the unions as well or only those organizations that critisize your views

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote