The Dim-Post

January 30, 2011

Deep thought

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 8:48 am

I don’t think you need to be a feminist to feel there’s something naff about the Prime Minister going on a radio show hosted by Tony Veitch and talking about which Hollywood celebrities he wants to fuck.

About these ads

36 Comments »

  1. God I hate it when I find myself agreeing with Sue Kedgely

    Comment by Scott — January 30, 2011 @ 9:35 am

  2. And, as importantly, who won the said straw poll? was it Travolta? I bet it was, wasn’t it?

    Comment by Monkey Boy — January 30, 2011 @ 9:42 am

  3. The absence of a credible opposition grants impunity. As Scott says, if Sue Kedgley is the only person they can get to criticise this, it’s a home run.

    L

    Comment by Lew — January 30, 2011 @ 9:46 am

  4. I dunno about you, but I don’t want to hear about our politicians’ sexual fantasies. Ewwww…

    Comment by Mark Dittmer — January 30, 2011 @ 9:58 am

  5. But at least he doesn’t hate women like Len Brown and Sandra Coney. http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2011/01/auckland-council-wants-to-ban.html

    Comment by Richard — January 30, 2011 @ 10:09 am

  6. Put me off my breakfast.

    Comment by MeToo — January 30, 2011 @ 10:11 am

  7. But, this makes him like an ordinary bloke and MANLY at the same time!!!1! Phil Goff uses HAIR DYE, so is not manly..

    Whats wrong with wanting to be like a serial adulterer tiger Woods, because he is RICH (and other perks are involved)..

    John Key, 11 on a scale of 1 to 10 of manliness.

    This is bad for Phil Goff.

    Comment by andy (the other one) — January 30, 2011 @ 10:12 am

  8. This is the creepiest comment he has yet made and no woman can feel safe as a citizen when such demeaning, objectifiable comments are given legitimacy.

    Comment by Hilary — January 30, 2011 @ 10:16 am

  9. So Paula Bennett and Judith Collins are safe then.

    Comment by MeThree — January 30, 2011 @ 10:37 am

  10. I guess that the clever strategists at HQ must have worked out that the support from the masses outweighed the prissy cardy-wearing PC minority who might object. Gawnnn! Yum! (NOT!)

    Comment by ianmac — January 30, 2011 @ 10:49 am

  11. Key goes on a show to be interviewed by a prominent wife beater and the best he can come up with is “pretty hot”? In Veitch’s and Lonergan’s circle the least they would say in polite company is “I’d do that” and more usually ” I’d root that”. What I find the most disappointing about Key is he has no personal opinion on anything that I could believe. His answers are normally wishy-washy, go where the wind blows, and usually clipped and adjusted to be voter favourable (in his eyes) and yet he comes across as the most vanilla middle of the road spineless wimp to ever run in politics.

    Of course his radio show answer could be an elaborate diversion to why he spends so much time with Paula Bennett…

    Comment by Tel — January 30, 2011 @ 11:24 am

  12. I presume that as long as none of the Hollywood celebrities he wants to fuck are male, it’ll go down a treat with National voters.

    As well as that, Key’s approaching the age where his peer group will be expecting him to trade Bronagh in on a woman young enough to be his daughter, so he has to start thinking about what the requisite youthful, compliant gold-digger should look like in order to best arouse the envy of his friends.

    Comment by Psycho Milt — January 30, 2011 @ 11:30 am

  13. The Prime Minister trotting out a list of celebs provided by his PR people – adolescent drivel, but not a big deal.

    The Prime Minister getting matey with a man who assaulted his wife – absolutely fucking horrible.

    For overseas readers, I’ll repeat that: our Prime Minister. Yes, really.

    Comment by sammy — January 30, 2011 @ 11:39 am

  14. The Prime Minister getting matey with a man who assaulted his wife

    I don’t believe that has ever been alleged.

    Comment by Graeme Edgeler — January 30, 2011 @ 11:44 am

  15. Graeme, there’s being legally accurate, and there’s being a dick.

    You’re right, my bad, she was his partner, not his wife. That changes everything.

    Comment by sammy — January 30, 2011 @ 11:56 am

  16. “As well as that, Key’s approaching the age where his peer group will be expecting him to trade Bronagh in on a woman young enough to be his daughter, so he has to start thinking about what the requisite youthful, compliant gold-digger should look like in order to best arouse the envy of his friends.”

    That would explain the reference to Liz Hurley being “older”, when she is in fact younger than JohnKey – she’s older than the usual lust object for a man of 49.

    Comment by MeFour — January 30, 2011 @ 12:54 pm

  17. Graeme, there’s being legally accurate, and there’s being a dick.

    You’re right, my bad, she was his partner, not his wife. That changes everything.

    Well it does. If he’d assaulted his wife as well then any arguments about redemption would be a lot harder to sustain.

    Comment by Graeme Edgeler — January 30, 2011 @ 12:58 pm

  18. Well, he is new at this – he probably doesn’t realise Liz Hurley isn’t anywhere near young enough to be an appropriate replacement for Bronagh. The new wife will need to be 20 years younger than him at minimum. So, you could say Vietchy’s doing him a favour by getting him to start thinking about this important stuff now. There’s no point in trading the current wife in on a trophy model if your peers are going to be sniggering behind your back instead of burning with envy.

    Comment by Psycho Milt — January 30, 2011 @ 1:17 pm

  19. “The new wife will need to be 20 years younger than him at minimum.”

    At 33ish Nicky Watson’s a bit old then.

    Comment by MeFive — January 30, 2011 @ 1:30 pm

  20. @ Richard – pathetic!
    “But at least he doesn’t hate women like Len Brown and Sandra Coney.”

    So anyone concerned about indecent exposure (people screwing in public mainstreets, not that late at night), used condoms, urine and faeces outside their shops and houses is now a ‘woman-hater’? Just so we’re clear…

    Good on the Auckland Councilors who had the guts to say street prostitution is not okay. Feminism is not about exploiting and objectifying women, which is all prostitution really is.

    Now if Liz Hurley were one of the street gals, we’ld know why Key supported it… ;(

    Comment by bob — January 30, 2011 @ 2:33 pm

  21. no woman can feel safe as a citizen when such demeaning, objectifiable comments are given legitimacy

    Going a bit overboard there, aren’t you? Sounding like he’s had a few Tuis while rating women with the lads at a BBQ is a poor move (we expect a bit more decorum from a PM), but he’s hardly given the rallying call for males throughout NZ to go caveman on the nearest bit of skirt.

    Comment by Ataahua — January 30, 2011 @ 2:46 pm

  22. I have to congratulate you Danyl on the depth of your thought. Your self-deprecation cleverly obscured the pitch of the dog-whistle and gave the ‘right-on’ Key-haters just the right amount of encouragement to get a jolly good spittle-fest going, and really put the boot into Key’s ‘family man’ credentials. Still it’s a long weekend . .

    Comment by Monkey Boy — January 30, 2011 @ 3:26 pm

  23. Veitch should have really moved on to discussing whether Key wishes he was the PM on Italy which seems to come with more Tiger Woodsian perks.

    Comment by Jonathan Hunt — January 30, 2011 @ 4:20 pm

  24. “and really put the boot into Key’s ‘family man’ credentials. Still it’s a long weekend”

    yes, that’s right it’s us commenting that’s doing the damage to Key’s ‘credentials’. nothing to do with him sharing his dirty little secrets with a live radio audience…

    Comment by nommopilot — January 30, 2011 @ 5:37 pm

  25. Slow day in Wellington eh guys. A puff piece on morning TV (really, who watches that shit?) and Key is a serial rooter (as opposed to feral condemnation of any sexuality slight against Helen and Peter).

    Comment by leon — January 30, 2011 @ 5:51 pm

  26. Oops morning Radio. But the message remains the same.

    Comment by leon — January 30, 2011 @ 5:53 pm

  27. I think that Sue Kedgley (usual) has gone a little too far. But it is telling that for the mandatory alternative view (which as Kedgeley’s view clearly was a step too far for most ‘ordinary’ kiwis, must be correct) they went to Dean Lonergan:

    “On the other side of the airwaves, Veitch’s rival breakfast host, former Kiwis league great Dean Lonergan said Key’s comment had made him respect the PM even more. ‘John Key is a strong leader and a very good family man,” the LiveSport host said.

    “‘Those women who might be upset at his comments are obviously just disappointed they never made John Key’s list and never will.’”

    I would rather that Key had brought a bit more dignity to the office of Prime Minister of New Zealand, but he could have been so much worse. Raise eyebrows and move on. What does bother me though, is that doing this kind of thing will undoubtedly be seen as making him ‘more kiwi’. Sometimes New Zealanders can be a bit embarrassing.

    Comment by DT — January 30, 2011 @ 6:14 pm

  28. “yes, that’s right it’s us commenting that’s doing the damage to Key’s ‘credentials’. nothing to do with him sharing his dirty little secrets with a live radio audience…” nommopilot – now you put it like that, I can see how right you all are. I guess I was just being a little hypersensitive, and got a little sidetracked from the real issue.

    Thanks for the reality check.

    I apologise and retract.

    FFS.

    Comment by Monkey Boy — January 30, 2011 @ 7:31 pm

  29. “Those women who might be upset at his comments are obviously just disappointed they never made John Key’s list and never will.”

    And just imagine how John Roughan feels? His pillow will be covered with tears tonight, that’s for sure. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10702735

    Comment by LucyJH — January 30, 2011 @ 7:53 pm

  30. @bob You’re not very good at spotting pisstaking are you?

    Comment by Richard — January 30, 2011 @ 7:57 pm

  31. If this were a prominent female politician talking about which male celebrities she thought were hot, nobody would suggest she was being was sexist. It would just be really, really naff.

    Comment by kahikatea — January 31, 2011 @ 9:10 am

  32. @ Richard – normally, yes, I am. But you posted a link to a deadly serious rant that labeled councilors as ‘woman and civil liberty haters’ if they opposed street prostitution (at the request of the local communities who are sick of it). And your comment was decidedly ambiguous as to whether you were taking the mick or seriously supporting said rant.

    If you wish to partake of pisstakes, may I suggest you let your dog do them? Their aim at lampposts and absurd spin is renowned.

    Comment by bob — February 1, 2011 @ 2:04 am

  33. Quite frankly bob, if a women wishes to charge a man to fuck her (yes, I am pushing the boundary of acceptable langauge here – feel free to edit, Mr Maclaughlin), then it is the between her and her client only. The state has no business in dicatating who a man has sex with (or whether a woman requests something in return for providing aforementioned sexual favours). Clearly, the likes of Brown, Coney, Wood et al, dont seem to get it.

    Comment by millsy — February 1, 2011 @ 11:17 pm

  34. As for Mr Key, he is perfectly entitled to talk about what celebrity he wishes to bed, but its a little bit unprofessional when you say it in the public doman when he is supposed to be our PM.

    Comment by millsy — February 1, 2011 @ 11:19 pm

  35. Hey danyl stop being so bloody precious and check out the etymological roots of naff”.
    It could queer your pitch.

    I am not a fan of any politician. Key was engaging with Veitch on a “blokey” radio show.

    Stop wanking danyl.

    I would have thought that being a science teacher you would have understood logic and context.l

    Comment by peterlepaysan — February 2, 2011 @ 7:59 pm

  36. Danyl:

    Take a deep breath, darling. I think you’re pretty hot, but my interest in fucking you is a couple of degrees above absolute zero.

    Comment by Craig Ranapia — February 3, 2011 @ 4:06 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 336 other followers

%d bloggers like this: