Right Thinking: Fight The Facts

Hard-hitting conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen returns after a long break

People have been jumping all over Garth McVicar, head of the Sensible Sentencing Trust, after he claimed in a select committee submission that gay marriage would lead to more crime.

It's shocking the way a good man like McVicar can't even make an argument entirely devoid of evidence, without the usual suspects trying to shut him down.

But the Sensible Sentencing Trust has a valid point about crime increasing if homosexuals are permitted to marry.

Blog Cheating Episode The Fourth

(I'm still in "can't be bothered" territory with blogging, so here's another post from earlier in the year.)

People With Arsehole Syndrome Need To Be Understood, Not Judged

13 March 2011

If you read Michael Laws' latest column in the Sunday Star Times today you may have concluded that Laws is a revolting human being. Brian Edwards has described Laws' comments in that column as being "worthy of Joseph Mengele."

I confess that I have expressed a lot of ill-will towards Mr Laws in a few of my own posts. And for that I wish to apologise.

In my defence, however, I didn't realise until today that Michael Laws has a disorder that affects his brain, and makes him behave in a manner that "normal" people generally find uncomfortable.

Michael Laws has Arsehole Syndrome.

The most important thing to understand about people who have Arsehole Syndrome is that they do not experience the world as the rest of us do. Arseholes (as people with the syndrome are commonly called) can find it stressful and difficult to function in environments that most of us take for granted. The urge to abuse, demean and vilify can quickly become overwhelming for an Arsehole when they are put in an unfamiliar situation, especially if the people around them are not exactly like them and don't subscribe to their narrow range of beliefs.

It is true that an Arsehole will usually understand the difference between right and wrong. But the wiring of an Arsehole's brain isn't like your own. Arseholes are compelled to repeat behaviours that the rest of us find bizarre or even disgusting.

That is why Arseholes come across as socially stunted and unlikeable.

It is notoriously difficult to diagnose the syndrome. I suspect this is why Laws' compulsion to put the boot into anyone who can't defend themselves was misdiagnosed for so long. Most people who read or hear a Laws diatribe aimed at Maori, solo mothers or the disabled will just assume they are dealing with a gutless coward.

Arseholes almost always have terrible trouble when they try to enter the workforce. To those unaware of the syndrome, the behaviour of an Arsehole can seem loathsome and offensive. Arseholes have particular difficulties with understanding the nuances of social intercourse. The reaction of an Arsehole when put into any environment they are unfamiliar with can be difficult for their co-workers to make sense of. When confronted with uncertainty, an Arsehole will spew obscene hatred at anyone and anything. An Arsehole will continue with a rant long after the other person has lost interest in the topic.

That is why most Arseholes try to avoid social interaction, preferring instead to write columns for Sunday newspapers.

But there is a place where Arseholes can feel safe, and where people with the disorder can communicate and have their opinions validated. The medium of talkback radio is enormously important for many Arseholes, because it allows them to feel as if their lives have some meaning. Denouncing people of other ethnicities and the disabled, and people who are different, is an well-recognised therapy for Arseholes.

That is why we need to cut Michael Laws some slack. He can't help the way he is. You may be sick of reading or hearing what he thinks about people who dare to be different to him, but he's an Arsehole. What else can you expect?

Yuk

If there was ever any question as to whether Michael Laws had any redeeming features, this will answer it.

People With Arsehole Syndrome Need To Be Understood, Not Judged

If you read Michael Laws' latest column in the Sunday Star Times today you may have concluded that Laws is a revolting human being. Brian Edwards has described Laws' comments in that column as being "worthy of Joseph Mengele."

I confess that I have expressed a lot of ill-will towards Mr Laws in a few of my own posts. And for that I wish to apologise.

In my defence, however, I didn't realise until today that Michael Laws has a disorder that affects his brain, and makes him behave in a manner that "normal" people generally find uncomfortable.

Michael Laws has Arsehole Syndrome.

The most important thing to understand about people who have Arsehole Syndrome is that they do not experience the world as the rest of us do. Arseholes (as people with the syndrome are commonly called) can find it stressful and difficult to function in environments that most of us take for granted. The urge to abuse, demean and vilify can quickly become overwhelming for an Arsehole when they are put in an unfamiliar situation, especially if the people around them are not exactly like them and don't subscribe to their narrow range of beliefs.

It is true that an Arsehole will usually understand the difference between right and wrong. But the wiring of an Arsehole's brain isn't like your own. Arseholes are compelled to repeat behaviours that the rest of us find bizarre or even disgusting.

That is why Arseholes come across as socially stunted and unlikeable.

It is notoriously difficult to diagnose the syndrome. I suspect this is why Laws' compulsion to put the boot into anyone who can't defend themselves was misdiagnosed for so long. Most people who read or hear a Laws diatribe aimed at Maori, solo mothers or the disabled will just assume they are dealing with a gutless coward.

Arseholes almost always have terrible trouble when they try to enter the workforce. To those unaware of the syndrome, the behaviour of an Arsehole can seem loathsome and offensive. Arseholes have particular difficulties with understanding the nuances of social intercourse. The reaction of an Arsehole when put into any environment they are unfamiliar with can be difficult for their co-workers to make sense of. When confronted with uncertainty, an Arsehole will spew obscene hatred at anyone and anything. An Arsehole will continue with a rant long after the other person has lost interest in the topic.

That is why most Arseholes try to avoid social interaction, preferring instead to write columns for Sunday newspapers.

But there is a place where Arseholes can feel safe, and where people with the disorder can communicate and have their opinions validated. The medium of talkback radio is enormously important for many Arseholes, because it allows them to feel as if their lives have some meaning. Denouncing people of other ethnicities and the disabled, and people who are different, is an well-recognised therapy for Arseholes.

That is why we need to cut Michael Laws some slack. He can't help the way he is. You may be sick of reading or hearing what he thinks about people who dare to be different to him, but he's an Arsehole. What else can you expect?

New Morning Report Appointment Signals Change In Direction

Radio New Zealand has announced the appointment of a replacement on Morning Report for Sean Plunket.

Michael Laws was announced as the new co-presenter of the show, effective from early January.

Mr Laws will be based in Radio New Zealand’s Whanganui studio.

The move is being regarded as a change in direction for the public broadcasting organisation. Mr Laws has been widely criticised by many people for expressing outrageous opinions on his current Radio Live show, and in his weekly newspaper column.

Radio New Zealand CEO Peter Cavanagh said that Laws would bring a new perspective to the show.

“We felt that after a number of years of doing the same thing it was time to introduce a bit of edginess,” said Mr Cavanagh.

“If there’s one thing Michael Laws brings it’s edginess. We’re hoping he will help to engage our listeners a bit more. By that I mean infuriate and outrage. People love a bit of controversy over their breakfast cereal.”

Mr Cavanagh refused to confirm widespread speculation that Paul Henry had been offered the job before Mr Laws.

Laws is no stranger to radio. He has a weekday talkshow with Radio Live that has several dozen regular listeners.

Laws said he was excited by the change.

“It’s about time someone stepped in and smacked a few heads together,” said Mr Laws. “What a sad tired institution Radio NZ is. A more pompous and irrelevant collection of tiresome liberals and onanists I’ve never met.

“And that sad sack Geoff Robinson’s been there for a million years. For God’s sake, man, are you even still alive?”

Radio New Zealand CEO Peter Cavanagh said some other changes would be introduced to the show from the start of next year.

“We want to engage more with our listeners, and we believe that turning Morning Report into an interactive talkback show will allow us to do that.“

Current host Geoff Robinson is said to be unhappy with the appointment, and furious that he was not consulted. But insiders have said the move to introduce Laws is a deliberate attempt by Radio New Zealand management to get rid of Robinson.

Insiders say that Robinson is considered a liability by Radio New Zealand management. He has had a long and fractious relationship with the show's producers, and his on-air temper tantrums have become more and more bizarre and frequent.

Last week Robinson interrupted an interview with the CTU’s Helen Kelly to launch a scathing verbal assault on the entire union movement. In an expletive-laden speech Robinson urged listeners to “round up your local unionist and bludgeon him to death. Kill him! Smash him until his brains drip slowly from his ears and eyes!”

In 2009 the Broadcasting Standards Authority found that Robinson breached broadcasting standards when he told listeners that Prime Minister John Key was “a walking talking demon who must be exorcised from the body politic by any means necessary, including by violent bloody revolution.”

If Robinson is forced out, Newstalk ZB’s Leighton Smith is tipped to take over as co-presenter.

Media commentator, internet entrepreneur and convicted murderer Bertrand Sackey said that a Laws-Smith Morning Report would be a “dream ticket.”

“It’s just the combination of controversy and unimaginative conservatism the airwaves are crying out for,” said Mr Sackey.

“People have had enough of analysis and debate. Nuance is for effete liberals who don’t like to get their hands dirty. Laws and Smith would really shake things up.”

A Freedom Issue

A number of right-wing newspaper columnists have been attempting to frame the Paul Henry resignation as a freedom of speech issue. Well it is a freedom issue, but not for the reasons they have given.

It started on Friday with a bizarre column by Deborah Hill Cone, who worries that we are becoming just like children who aren't allowed to say what we think.

When kids grow up in a family where they feel they can't express their true feelings it is called an invalidating environment. It makes them go quite wonky. That is us, writ large. We already self-censor what we say because everyone is in great fear of being jumped on if they say the wrong thing. It is not fun getting shunned in a country of four million people. Trust me, I know.

And all of this of course means that we're going to hell in a handcart.

Citizens in socialist Cuba lose their own judgment of right or wrong because they have grown up in a society where they have been taught to spout lies. A lot of them try to leave. Same here. One million New Zealand passport holders don't live in this country; presumably quite a few of them have beetled off to somewhere where mediocrity does not rule. Freedom of speech is not really freedom if it means you can only say things which are tasteful and respectful and don't offend anyone. I think New Zealand just became a much more oppressive country after the Henry incident.

What Henry said might have been ill-considered, but it was a lesser evil than every citizen having to calibrate what they say to fit in with the prevailing ethos.

So the million or so folk who don't live here any more have found paradise elsewhere, where cloying censorship does not prevail. But where are these places? The UK? Hardly. If Paul Henry had been a BBC presenter I'm pretty sure the boot would have been applied to his arse months ago. Australia? I doubt his idiocy would have been any more tolerated than here. The US? Well certainly not on any of the mainstream networks.

Then in the Sunday Star Times Michael Laws conducts a boilerplate attack on liberalism. 

Freedom of speech. Freedom of thought. The fundamental building blocks of a functioning democracy – freedoms that have evolved over centuries of western thought and civilisation. And they are now under significant and serious threat from the prevailing orthodoxy of political correctness in this country.

Laws would like to be able to say whatever he likes about anyone or anything he likes. This merely proves that this week's public apology by Laws for remarks made about the Governor General was entirely insincere.

Laws says:

The Henry affair has just made New Zealand democracy weaker. It presumes that only one thought pattern must prevail. And that is not democracy – that is the descent into a new fascism.

On the contrary, the fact that widespread public resentment towards a public figure's bigotry has an effect shows that democracy is working pretty well. Fascism would be more like a situation where someone was able to go on air and spew hate towards other groups without any sort of consequences. I'm pretty sure that is what the Fascists and Nazis actually did.

The attack by Laws is particularly ironic. He earns his bread by attacking others, expressing disgust for people he doesn't approve of. How odd then that when a large group of people do exactly the same thing he objects and cries foul.

In the Herald on Sunday, Deborah Coddington bemoans our supposed delight for witch hunts. While Henry isn't the prime focus of her piece, she lists him as another victim of this supposed tendency to put the boot in.

Some of the "victims" she cites, however, deserve probably a great deal more than they have received by way of opprobrium. Like Dr Herb Green of The Unfortunate Experiment fame. Yes, the one who was found by the Cartwright Enquiry to have experimented on women without their consent. Or Tony Veitch, who viciously assaulted his partner. How is it that vilifying and holding these people to account should be regarded as a witch-hunt?

Coddington then wonders why we don't express our disgust for other villains in such terms.

Finally, one thing puzzles me. This week there was virtually no adverse comment when Chris Kahui calmly told the coroner that yes, he would have called a vet if his puppy wasn't breathing but didn't do the same for his babies.

That the tiny boys weren't fed for 24 hours but he lied to police to look like a good father. And when he admitted, under oath, that he gave one story at his trial and another at the inquest.

Why no frothing, moral outrage here, do you think?

Well perhaps Coddington was in another country for the last four years. As far as frothing, moral outrage goes, the Kahui case pretty much tops everything. I have a theory that people are so weary with disgust for the entire Kahui clan that nothing they hear would really surprise or alarm them.

I have never bought this freedom of speech argument. All civilised societies impose restrictions or consequences on what people say in public. Most countries have defamation and hate speech laws.

But it is a sign of a free society that we are able to take action if we don't like what someone says. We can complain loudly and let our voices be heard. We can boycott TV or radio shows that allow offensive hosts to spew their hate. Advertisers can choose which shows they choose to associate their brands with. Aren't all of those freedoms just as important as the freedom to say what you like?

So I don't agree that Paul Henry's fate is an indication that our liberties are under threat. What it tells us is that if you're going to be a dick on air and say hateful things, some people are going to get pissed off. If people could say what they wanted on air without any ability to be challenged, would that mean we lived in a freer society? Free for whom?

A Forced Apology?

Michael Laws has apologised for insulting the Governor General.

And yet on Saturday Laws said he stood by everything he said. What changed?

It's difficult to imagining Laws volunteering to apologise. He has said some awful, odious things in the past, with barely an apology for any of the hurtful things said.

The only possible conclusion is that RadioWorks laid down the law and demanded an apology. Laws doesn't have the mayoralty to fall back on any more, so will be relying on the income his radio show brings. He can't afford to defy his bosses.

Laws was clearly reined in. Finally.

When Nobody Else Will Stand Up For You...

It is entirely predictable that a man as vile as Michael Laws should take to the defence of David Garrett. Laws revels in supporting the targets of public opprobrium, so Garrett was an obvious choice. Next week it will probably be the Pope's turn.

And it was fitting, too, that a man with his own history of false-identity shenanigans should jump to Garrett's defence.

The astonishing thing is that Laws doesn't appear to accept that Garrett's theft of a dead child's identity was all that major, or was even a proper crime (note the speech marks below):

Garrett's "crimes" were committed long before he entered politics or Parliament

And stealing the identity of a dead child isn't as bad as watching porn at the expense of the taxpayer.

It was hardly booking up parliamentary porn on the contemporary taxpayer. And if Shane Jones isn't resigning from Parliament, why must Garrett?

Even if Jones had committed fraud, the only victim was the taxpayer to the tune of a few dollars. Garrett's offence caused geuine pain to the family of a dead child (yes, even 48 years later, I think it is possible to grieve over a dead child).

I stopped reading after that. Didn't want to vomit.

Pity Whanganui

What is it about being a mayoral candidate for Whanganui? Is it obligatory to be a nasty piece of work?

In the aftermath of the various accusations being thrown about between Michael Laws and mayoral candidate Jevan Goulter, it turns out that Goulter leaked to the media emails between Laws and a former P-addict.

If that is not enough, a quick Google search will give Whanganui voters all the reasons they need not to vote for him. 

Goulter is absurdly young (21), and clearly lacks both sense and maturity. He is a child trying to play an adult's game, and is making a fool of himself. His muck-throwing makes him no better than the man he has targeted.

There is a saying that people get the politicians they deserve. But I can't believe any town really deserves a clown like Goulter, even as a mayoral candidate.

Imperator Fish News 15 August 2010

God, Just Do Your Job, Goddammit!

Please, God, don't let this happen.

Speculation is rife that NZ First leader Winston Peters and his former adviser Michael Laws are to team up again as part of a "relaunch" of the party this year. 

Neither Mr Laws, who is to stand down as Whanganui mayor this year, nor Mr Peters would confirm the rumours. But MPs from both sides of the House and sources close to NZ First said they were aware of plans.

You need to sort this out, and quickly. Please don't forsake us in our hour of need.

I know you are a busy God, what with all that smiting and turning people into pillars of salt, so you probably don't appreciate what a truly awful piece of humanity this Laws fellow is. Let me assure you that he is not fit to hold public office. Please, take my word for it. When have I ever let you down?

Oh, you mean apart from all the times I made fun of your followers? So I'm not perfect.

And I know I am generally dismissive of anyone who frames their life around a belief in the Great Sky Fairy. But come on, you have to admit The God Delusion is a cracking read.

Anyway, let's move on, as Tony Blair would say. Forget the past, because I need you now. You can't let this happen. You need to do something. ,

The Lord shall smite thee with a consumption, and with a fever, and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, and with the sword, and with blasting, and with mildew; and they shall pursue thee until thou perish.

Your words, not mine. I'm not saying that's what you should do, because, man, that's just some crazy shit.

But you need to do something.

God, it's time to step up to the plate. You've not been keeping up with business. Have you seen the mess in the Middle East? You're lucky we don't vote for you because you'd be toast come election time.

Dude, sort it out!

Containment Cap May Fix Toxic Laws Leak

I reported last month on efforts to clean up a toxic spill by Michael Laws. This post is an update on those efforts.

MediaWorks executives announced today that they are a step closer to capping the toxic spill that has been overwhelming the airwaves.

The company’s engineers have inserted a containment cap into the mouth of the blowhole, and are cautiously optimistic that the cap will hold.

The toxic spill erupted in February, though it has since been revealed that a number of earlier incidents had occurred.

The capping of Laws’ mouth has been a difficult exercise, with engineers reporting high levels of fatigue and stress. The operation has also been highly dangerous, as the person they are dealing with is highly volatile and explosive, and is liable to chew up anyone who gets too close.

It is not known what will happen if the cap over the orifice from which the vitriol spews holds. Some experts have speculated that the enormous pressure from pent-up hot gases could cause an enormous and odiferous eruption from an even less pleasant orifice.

Engineers are closely monitoring pressure levels, and are watching to ensure Mr Laws does not go red in the face, start sweating, and begin bouncing up and down while shaking his fists. They are all tell-tale signs of an explosion.

Executives at MediaWorks will be relieved if the cap holds and there are no further incidents. They have been under fire for giving Mr Laws a daily platform with which to assail and pollute the airwaves.

The company has been badly affected by Laws’ spill. It has also allocated a share of its profits to help those adversely affected by the spill.

MediaWorks says that they should know by the end of next week whether Laws has been successfully plugged.

Football: The Beautiful White Liberal Game

You really have to hand it to Michael Laws. It takes a special skill to do what he's done in his latest column. He's taken the most popular sport in the world and used it to launch a tirade against leftwingers and liberals.

A sport especially made for white, middle-class liberals because it does not involve real violence, usually ends in a draw, and isn't rugby. Especially, that it is not rugby. And it excites pedants because it's not soccer, but something called "football". 

And there I was thinking football was played all around the world, most often by poor non-white people. Silly me. That's why I don't parody this guy. How could I ever match his own efforts?

This is the reason that Wellington has embraced the round-ball game like no other centre or region in New Zealand. Because Wellington is the capital of PC and it is their form of revenge to adore a sport that the rest of the country just doesn't get. Which is why the media went ape when New Zealand – the 78th-ranked country in the world – drew 1-1 with Slovakia, the 34th-ranked country in the world. Put in rugby parlance, it is the equivalent of the Solomon Islands defeating Hong Kong.

Sorry, Mr Laws, but the rest of the country does get football. It may not have the popularity of rugby (yet), but it is much more widely played by kids than rugby, and has thousands of supporters all across the country - not just in Wellington.

It does no good to compare rugby and football, because in rugby it is almost unthinkable that any top-ten team would be beaten by a non-top-ten outfit. In football, however, anyone in the top 40 could (on their day) defeat another. Consider also that in rugby only five of the top ten ranked teams have ever beaten New Zealand. One of those top ten teams hasn't beaten us since the 1950s.

Except they didn't. They drew. Which is the fatal flaw of the so-called "beautiful game". It just doesn't have enough climaxes over 90 minutes to justify its global status. There aren't enough scores.

Objections like the one Laws puts forward are idiotic, because if hundreds of millions of people follow football passionately, then there must be something to it. Laws may not like the game, but that's his issue. Why is this the content of a column in a national newspaper? I've watched many high-scoring rugby games that were rubbish. Frequency of point-scoring is not an indication of quality.

Laws states that the Polynesian kids play league and rugby, and that white parents won't let their kids play those sports any more. How that makes football a game for "liberals" is anyone's guess. Perhaps it is a mere reflex, writing the word "liberal" after "white". He can't help himself.

The column then descends into an attack on the World Cup and international football. But what does it matter how terribly the sport might be run? (and what sport is well-run at an international level? Arguably not rugby) Football's vastly more popular than rugby is or will ever be. If we did go over the top in our praise over a draw with Slovakia, then so what? It was a worthy achievement, even if it wasn't comparable to the truly great New Zealand sporting moments.

Laws is just venting. Brown people took his rugby away, and now the white people are following another sport. How dare they! Has the world gone mad?

Laws is becoming an increasingly marginalised minority. Perhaps he should start a support group.

MediaWorks Promises Compensation After Toxic On-Air Spill

MediaWorks, the company that owns Radio Live, has suspended all dividend payments for this financial year.

The company has been under intense scrutiny, after an on-air explosion by Radio Live talkback host Michael Laws sent noxious pollution into the airwaves.

MediaWorks has been accused of not doing enough to prevent the explosion, and of failing to take action to prevent the spread of toxic waste into the political environment.

Last night MediaWorks Chairman Brent Harman promised to place all profits for the financial year into an escrow account. He said the money would be used to compensate people whose way of life and mental wellbeing had been damaged by the toxic Laws spill.

The spill occurred in February this year, when Laws exploded on air, sending large volumes of toxic bile spewing out into the airwaves. The explosion injured the family of a boy who had died in a farm-bike accident.  Laws accused the boy’s parents of being no better than child abusers.

MediaWorks says it will do whatever it takes to clean up the mess caused by Laws.

“My company is committed to protecting the environment we live in from toxic speech. We have committed to paying $35,000 to the Fowlie family, who were the initial victims of the disaster,” said Mr Harman.

“We will make further compensation available as and when legitimate claims are made. Let me reassure the people of New Zealand that we will fix this mess.”

But critics say the package does not go far enough, and that Laws has been leaking noxious emissions into the airwaves since long before February. They say that the residue of Laws’ filth has been washing up in sports clubs, blogs and letters to newspapers for a number of years.

So far all attempts by MediaWorks to find a solution to the outpouring have failed. Radio Live staff have been trying desperately to stem the flow of filth escaping from the blowhole that is Laws’ big mouth. However, polluting muck continues to spill from his mouth at the rate of three hours a day.

MediaWorks’ latest plan involves covering Laws with a blanket of taxi drivers and right wing bloggers. The company hopes these people will absorb the hate and intolerance spilling from the problematic orifice and release them out into the political environment in a much less harmful way.

But engineers working on the cleanup say the method is untried.

“The extreme depths of hatred we’re having to work with present unique technical challenges”, said head engineer Darius Desderillo.

“And we’re working with extremely difficult material. This stuff sticks to anything and is hard to get rid of. I can tell you from firsthand experience that it gets into your head and is hard to shift. It just sits there. A bit like all those bludging Maoris.”

Coming Soon To A Supercity Near You?

Obnoxious attention-seekers: are you worried you may be about to lose one of your idols?

Outspoken Wanganui mayor Michael Laws has confirmed he will not run for mayor again in elections in October.

Well don't worry, because you'll still be able to read his reactionary hate-mongering column every week in the Sunday Star Times.

And he'll still be the same bullying clown on the radio waves, tendering a wide range of odious opinions on the state of the world, as if he is the beneficiary of some greater wisdom than the rest of us. And what wisdom! Let us not forget how Laws performed when he was in Parliament and had a chance to change the country forever. How did that work out for him? The words "miserable failure" spring to mind.

Laws says he wants to spend more time with his family. Fair enough. I suppose even the worst type of person can still be a loving parent. Nobody is born entirely evil or without compassion.

But here's an intriguing promise. Laws says he's not done with local politics. Perhaps that ego just needs a bigger stage to strut on. The whole "time with family" thing may be a ruse.

He added that he had accomplished what he set out to do as mayor, but would not step back from local politics altogether.

Are you thinking what I'm thinking? Dear God, no, NOT SUPERCITY MAYOR!

If he wins I'm moving to W(h)anganui.*

* Please consider this promise to be in the same category as John Key's "we won't raise GST" pledge.

About An Airbag

Yet another bully becomes a wimp when someone dishes it back.

Outspoken talkshow host Michael Laws has been dealt a dose of his own medicine, taking heat from his radio colleagues for driving with an unrestrained child.

Fellow Radio Live presenters John Tamihere and Willie Jackson spoke to the Wanganui mayor on-air yesterday after publicity about an $150 instant fine. 

He was pulled over on the Hobson St on-ramp to the Southern Motorway on Sunday with an unbuckled child on the lap of his estranged partner, Leonie Brookhammer.

In February, Mr Laws spoke out against the parents of 10-year-old Blake Fowlie, who was killed on a trail bike near Paeroa, and Federated Farmers.

And Laws clearly knows nothing abut car safety. Only an idiot would put an unrestrained child in the front seat of a car with airbags.

Mr Tamihere asked why he was defending the lack of restraint for the child.

"Well I'm sorry but it wasn't floating around on the seat all by itself," Mr Laws said.

The mother had been holding the child "dear to her", comforting her. 

Mr Tamihere said the unrestrained child would be a missile in an accident, but Mr Laws said the mother had hold of it and airbags would "go up straight away".

"Okay so baby gets squashed to death," said Mr Tamihere.

Michael Laws should know better than to play the victim. If you're going to spend your working life attacking other people, you can't complain when someone throws something back.

And one of his own too.

Et tu, Brute?

Not News

I suspect a strong dose of schadenfreude may be behind the Herald’s coverage of Michael Laws’ domestic woes. And it is difficult to feel any sympathy for a man who spends most of his time savaging others on air or in print. Laws also invites scrutiny of his personal life, because his own website is plastered with pictures of his kids.

That said, I have no interest in the man’s personal life, because it is not newsworthy. Perhaps the Herald could try harder to not be a tabloid, and instead report actual news.

Time For A Change?

An assortment of random Sunday bits- because I can't be arsed writing something more thoughtful.

My last post dealt with the odious Pat Robertson and his comments on Haiti.

His "pact with the devil" claim is cut to pieces here. Worth a read.

******

Does anyone care that Prince William is in town?

No, me neither. Just checking.

******

It appears Deborah Coddington doesn't like snitches. Fair enough - who does?

She labels as a snitch the guy who taped MPs talking at a National Party function during the last election campaign.

That secret recording always struck me as a shabby trick, and although the guy was not (as far as I recall) affiliated to Labour, it certainly didn't do the Clark government any favours. Many on the left who think National has a secret agenda believe this kind of deceit is justifiable - if it gets the truth out. Though that would suggest Key has an agenda. A plan? Any plan would be better than sleepwalking through these perilous economic times.

She appears uncertain whether Cameron Slater is a whistleblower or something else. But she proves that Slater's not the darling of everyone on the right.

How ironic, though, that this man, now so opposed to name suppression, for a long time made personally cruel and hurtful remarks about many with whom he disagreed, while hiding behind his pseudonym of Whale Oil.

******

Michael Laws doesn't like bloggers:

PREJUDICE #235: "Bloggers" are opinionated losers who spend way too much time in darkened rooms. They have porn addictions, staple microwave pizza to their bibs, are blubbery and smell.

This peculiar purview has been harboured ever since blogging became the online onanism. Which was the first day some idiot decided to anonymously opine and imagined that people gave a continental.
 
I'm probably still right. If I was to take a cross-section of bloggers I'd wager that most don't have a partner or a wardrobe, are in desperate need of a stomach staple and regard deodorant as the devil's snare. They would also be exceedingly jealous of each other: like literary fiction writers. Too many only children, I suspect.

 And the only thing that has shaken him from this conceit is... meeting Cameron Slater...

Apparently we're all against Slater because we're envious - nothing to do with his toxic personality or alleged breaches of the law then.

******

So a UK blogger thinks we dress badly.

I've written before about what I think of those who express strong views on how Kiwi men dress. Perhaps I'm one of those badly dressed men, since I clearly don't spend enough time in the mirror preening. Nor do I particularly care what some overseas fashionista thinks. I'm not even sure why we have a fashion industry. I mean, what is it for?

On the other hand, our famous cultural cringe is never far away when it comes to being commented on by foreign types. Heaven forbid that someone might not like something about us. Does this call for general panic?

******

There may be a softer, kinder face to US power nowadays. but many on the left are still defiantly anti-American. Much of the comment on the left surrounding the now-postponed visit by Hilary Clinton has been hostile. And commentators like Matt McCarten still dream about those heady days in the '80s when we told the US to shove it. And didn't we do well? Even if the US policy of outspending the USSR on nuclear weapons eventually helped to destroy that superpower.

Anti-Americans argue we shouldn't be in Afghanistan. Sure the place is a hellhole, but, really, what choice do we have but to stay? It remains the frontline in the War on Terror. And if we want American support and protection (militarily and economically) we need to do our bit.

There's no shortage of anti-US feeling in the blogosphere. For example this comments thread on Public Address. It seems a good number of people really think Communist China would be a better master than the US.

The last US President was a notorious fool, and squandered most of the goodwill towards the US that existed post 9/11. That has fed much of the anti-Americanism that exists today. But a new man's in charge. He's not perfect, but he's no Bush. He is slowly changing the way the US looks at the world. Perhaps it's time we changed too.

Sunday Twits

If anyone ought to stay quiet over the tedious Harawira affair, it would be Paul Holmes. But the legendary short man can't resist a jab. His accusation of double standards is particularly surprising considering the reaction to his appalling "Cheeky Darky" comments was not remotely as savage as that directed towards Harawira. Double standards indeed.

******

That other sunday paper twit is no stranger to racism. His hatred of Maori is visceral and infests almost everything he writes. This week is no exception.

I got only a few lines in before almost throwing up in disgust. I have no idea what the rest of his article says.

******

It was good to see little New Zealand shaking up the football world this weekend

Although I thought the All Blacks didn't make the most of their historic appearance at the San Siro football stadium in Milan.

"Historic" is probably the most overused word in sport. Of course, the real shake-up was the marvelous effort of the All Whites to reach the World Cup finals. But historic? Why? We've been there before - in 1982 of course. How many times do you get to go before it stops becoming "historic"?

Who Is The Real Racist?

The Hone show rolls on and on.

The Harawira apology that wasn't really an apology didn't help to calm the anxieties of the public. It was probably a time best used for reflection, rather for than launching a tirade aimed at Phil Goff.

But all that aside, why do we care about this man and what he has said and done? He bunked off when he was supposed to be working. So give him a telling-off. Big deal. He used some "colourful" language in an email to a former supporter (a private email, might I add). So we have established that he's an idiot. But is he really a racist villain?

I smell a double standard.  If we want to castigate our politicians for using racist language, let's start with Michael Laws, mayor of Wanganui. The things he has said, both in print and on radio, are far more inciting than anything Harawira said in his (again, private) email.

And the newspapers and media networks that continue to whip this story up include Fairfax, for whom Laws writes a weekly column, and Mediaworks, the owner of RadioLive (which employs Laws to spew hate and racism across the airwaves) and TV3. So those media outlets are clearly quite happy for a racist to go about his work. But when it's someone else's racist, it's a different story.

Here's another double standard. When Paul Holmes made his "cheeky darky" comments on live radio in 2003 there were a large number of complaints to the Race Relations Commissioner. The number of complaints re3ceived by the Race Relations Commissioner about Harawira is well in excess of that number, and complaints are still being received.

Why? I'm not convinced Harawira's comments were any worse than Holmes'. Both were offensive, perhaps even grossly offensive. And remember (and I'm sorry to keep labouring this) Harawira's words were contained in a private email. Holmes was live on air and intended to be heard. So why the record number of complaints about Harawira? To quote Ali G:

Is it cos I is black?

That is not to excuse the comments, but the reaction indicates that when a brown person makes a racist comment we take it more seriously. And that it's not as bad when the racist is a white man.

Isn't that racism?