Paul17.1
I think he’s getting worse. Can barely listen to him now.
Keeps on inviting ACT supporters and other Ayn Rand devotees – they get less than 1% of the vote, but Jim and his director give them far more air time.Morrissey17.1.1
I think the people ultimately responsible for the selection of these extremely biased, right wing guests—or the “talent” as he likes to call them—are his producers.But I don’t think his producers told Mora to guffaw every time he said “Hugo Chávez”; he indulged in that epic display of puerile contempt because he was nervous of the glowering Nevil “Breivik” Gibson. The giggles indicate not so much that Mora is anti-Chávez, but that he has a quite pathetic desire to win the approval of the likes of Breivik-Gibson.- Why do you think Mora is so in awe of these people? I note he also fawns over Bernard Hickey and is deseperate to get advice on mortgage rates, and other personal financial advice.
- For all his faults, at least Bernard Hickey has an obvious deep knowledge of his subject. The same cannot be said for Nevil “Breivik” Gibson, who on Monday demonstrated that he knew next to nothing about either Venezuela or Hugo Chávez.I don’t think Mora is in awe of most of his guests. I think he would (justly) rate his own intelligence above that of most of them. I think Mora’s behaviour, which I find to be increasingly frivolous and determinedly trivial-minded, is the result of both a pathological desire to please, which explains the nervous giggling, and a certain perversity: Mora doesn’t actually believe that Chávez has a “dubious legacy” (as he claimed on Monday) but he was quite prepared to say that if he figured it would win him favour, even with such a crazed and unpleasant ideologue as Nevil “Breivik” Gibson.
McFlock17.1.1.1.1.1
Did you just equate a tory editor and commentator with a psycho mass-murderer?
Classy.- The Breivik moniker comes not from me, but from another appalled reader of one of Gibson’s hare-brained NBR editorials, where he made the Breivik-style assertion that all terrorism in the world was carried out by Muslims.And anyone who has read or listened to his ranting for a reasonable amount of time will be aware that Nevil Gibson is far, far to the right of what any reasonable person would mean by “tory”.
- So he pulled a Prosser. Big gap between that and killing almost a hundred people.And don’t blame other people for the imagery you use.
Bill…
Birds of a feather and all of that (whether higher or lower or simply near by). Thought you of all people would understand such pigeon holing McFlock.- “near by” is the bit I’m not sure is at all valid, in this case. From an astronomical perspective, may it might be.There are light years between merely being a third-rate tory propagandist, and looking dozens of people in the eye before shooting them.
D-D-D-Damn!…
Jim Mora’s emphasis on Papal concern for the poor in Latin America:Let’s remember that, as head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the 80s and 90s, the last Pope (Ratso Ratzinger) launched a fundamental attack on those South and Central American bishops and priests pursuing Liberation Theology. The poor were to put up with murderous Far Right dictators and concentrate instead on having a good afterlife.- Ah, Joe the Rat. Popes don’t resign unless there is a internal political reason for it.
You reverently praised Pope Francis, but snickered at the mere mention of Hugo Chávez. What gives?
“The Panel”, Radio New Zealand National, Thursday 14 March 2013
Northcote Point