Every time McCarten or fellow leftie Chris Trotter take a swipe at Labour (which is most weeks), David Farrar and others in the blogosphere on the right will quote them with approval.
Like this week. But Farrar chose to edit out the bits that basically said "Labour's bad, but still not as bad as National."
If you're not going to open yourself up to accusations of political hackery, you have to take both the good and the bad.
The HOS also has a piece written by Judith Tizard. A number of right-wing blogs have targetted her over the last few years, and they have been so successful in setting the narrative that even Labour's come to regard her as a liability.
Tizard's been much maligned, and it's hard to understand why she's been the subject of such vitriol. Was it because she was a woman? A friend to Helen Clark? Was she really as incompetent as some people have suggested? True, she lost a traditionally strong Labour seat, but does that make her useless?
In case we were tempted to think there was some substance to the criticism of Tizard, Whaleoil pops up and has a crack at her article*.
Forty uses of the word “I“To answer the question, it was pretty obvious to anyone who read the article that Tizard was writing about herself. It's pretty hard to do that without throwing in quite a few "I"s and "me"s. And what exactly is wrong with that? She's been the subject of so much gossip, speculation and intrigue that it was actually refreshing to read her own words.
Ten uses of the word “I’d“
Fourteen uses of the word “my”
So then, what’s the article really about?
So yet another post attacking Tizard because... well, why? Can anyone actually tell me why Tizard is so useless? This is not a rhetorical question, as I'd genuinely like to know what aspects of her political performances over the years have appalled so many people.
Or is this all just a myth being perpetuated by cowardly internet bullies?
* I have a policy of not linking to that site, so you'll have to believe me, or find it yourself.