A week at the beach

by Jake Quinn

I’ve been on holiday in the Coromandel for a week.  Been fishing, swimming and drinking gin and tonic.  It’s been swell.  So not that interested in news, but I did try watching the occasional 6 o’clock TV bulletin which, unfortunatley, just made me want to self-harm.

But I have been keen to keep tabs on the fallout from Phil Goff’s speech (earlier in the week the Herald twisted the knife with this rather negative editorial). What was interesting was Linda Clark’s discussion on TV3’s Sunrise (the show, which I’ve never before bothered to watch, is so bad it makes me want to watch Paul Henry).

Linda made some interesting points (just try to ignore Oliver Driver and Carly Flynn laughing like teenagers and making sideways glances at each other as they try and read the news).

She basically defends Goff’s actions, making the point that he is from the “Ken” school of Labour as opposed to the “Marian” one.  Ken is the blue collar, mostly male and often pro-union, Labour voter, while Marian is the urban, liberal, mostly female voter who “tends to wear more expensive perfume” (like her, she admits).

Also worth noting has been up-and-coming political-commentator-of-the-left Andrew Campbell’s wee tanty in reaction to the Labour caucus’s decision to “close ranks” and back Goff and his speech this week.  To be fair to the caucus, there was no alternative.  As many have noted, the mere fact that the question was being asked isn’t good news – just ask Liverpool coach Rafa Benitez what that’s like.

Also this week, Wellington “insiders” Trans Tasman released their annual review of MP’s which saw Speaker Lockwood Smith go top, trumping even our god-like prime-awesomeness-minister, Mr Key.  Colin Espiner gives his take, but I prefer Danyl Mclauchlan’s. I have nothing to add.  Living in Hamilton means I really don’t have much of a clue about such things, I only know what I read in the paper. heh.

Finally, I’m not sure what to make of (or where to start with) this NZ Herald editorial which states the obvious over the section 59 repeal (that omg the sky hasn’t fallen in, and yes, people still smack their kids, but the real nasty ones won’t, just maybe, be able to get away with it so much anymore) but fails tremendously to note the incredible hypocrisy and irony, of it being written in, wait for it, the NZ Herald.

I basically just can’t be stuffed googling “Herald” and “Anti-smacking” to link to a zillion ridiculous articles which would make this point stronger, because I know you know they’re there and have read them.  I do though look forward to reading whatever James over at Editing the Herald has to say about that one (at time of writing he hasn’t found it).

Now where is my sun lounger. Yes, I am aware that is 12:26 am.