With all the charm of Slough

62 comments on “With all the charm of Slough ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Camryn 1

   15 January 2008 at 11:13 am

   Well, sorry John, but there goes my vote! I’ll be damned if I’ll tolerate a Prime Minister who has a different taste in architecture from even one architect!
2. Sam Dixon 2

   15 January 2008 at 11:37 am

   Camryn – is a humour-ectomy painful? It’s a bit of humour taking down a peg or two a man who places himself very highly, nothing offensive or bigoted (in contrast to the ‘humour’ we see so often at other blogs).

   captcha: ‘Unheralded’ – just like a lot of Auckland households I know of since that paper became a National mouthpiece
3. Sam Dixon 3

   15 January 2008 at 11:39 am

   I love this from later in the post

   “Fortunately, one can see little of the interior through the tinted glass. One suspects that it would contain a white leather lounge suite, on which Mr Key would relax with half a glass of Chablis while listening to Air Supply’s Greatest Hits on the Bang and Olufson”

   Although, I suspect Mr Key would be listening to his favourite band, Coldplay. A pirated copy, no doubt.
4. Santi 4

   15 January 2008 at 11:45 am

   Sam Dixon from sunny Napier, you write with the charm of an envious and jealous socialist.

   Appalling taste in architecture is no excuse, but your diatribe is uncalled for.
5. Kimble 5

   15 January 2008 at 12:07 pm

   I thought it was the rich pricks who were supposed to be the snobs.
6. Sam Dixon 6

   15 January 2008 at 12:08 pm

   what diatribe?

   I’m impressed that you know I’m from Napier, as has been published with my name in letters to the Herald; impressed because I didn’t realise you got beyond the cartoons.
7. James Kearney 7

   15 January 2008 at 12:15 pm

   Kimble- John Key’s house is a form of snobbery. It’s that Botany Downs breed of snobbery that makes the people who live in those tacky, tasteless houses feel superior while the rest of us have a good laugh at their expense. Seriously, what was he thinking?
8. Phil 8

   15 January 2008 at 12:56 pm

   In comparison to Trelise Coopers pseudo-fortress (it looks like the ruins of a Spanish amoury from Mexico) and that bizzare temple looking structure of the Richwhite’s, I’d say Jonkeys isn’t at all bad.

   And what’s wrong with floor to ceiling windows? I would have thought their benefits in terms of natural light and warmth (and lower electricity consumption) would have been a big hit with you guys.
9. rjs131 9

   15 January 2008 at 1:12 pm

   I wonder if he paid market rates for the tiling, or whether Taito Philip Field managed to source him a good deal?
10. James Kearney 10

    15 January 2008 at 1:18 pm

    Na he rehired some of those 500 workers he laid off as head of Merryl Lynch, then campaigned against their minimum wage rise.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df111uej2KI
11. outofbed 11

    15 January 2008 at 1:55 pm

    And pray whats wrong with Slough?
    Don’t listen to Ricky Gevais and Sir John, It is a lovely place nestling as it does in the shadow of Windsor castle its also very handy for the Airport and it has lots of roundabouts which can’t be bad
12. Minister of Kulture 12

    15 January 2008 at 2:27 pm

    John Key’s tastes, all on the record:

    Favourite film: Johnny English
    Favourite music: Easy Listening
    Favourite book: Green Eggs and Ham (although a few months ago he said that he “hadn’t read a book all year”).
13. Kimble 13

    15 January 2008 at 2:31 pm

    “John Key’s house is a form of snobbery.”

    No. He owns a house he likes. He is not being condescending or disdainful of others. He is not saying he is better than anyone else.

    Whereas what you are doing is a bare faced snobbery.

    Snob: One who affects an offensive air of self-satisfied superiority in matters of taste or intellect.

    Lets see. Who is being a snob? John Key by buying a house he likes, or you lot for calling his type of house tacky and tasteless?

    Whats next?

    “omighod, i cant believe he is wearing THOSE shoes!”

    “Did he buy that shirt at the warehouse, or what?!?”

    Like it or not, but YOU are being the snob.
14. Insolent Prick 14

    15 January 2008 at 2:33 pm

    How classy. Yet more envy from the pinkos.

    “Rather than its present location at Omaha Beach, its design suits it to a business park on the outskirts of the city, conveniently near major transport hubs.”

    In one sentence, the “reviewer” shows that he’s never actually visited Omaha. Key’s home is unexceptional at Success Court.

    The piers must be hollow, since the wooden deck which apparently supports and surrounds them could not bear the weight of so much masonry.

    And here the writer shows nil understanding of architecture, building, or engineering. The wooden deck does not “apparently” support and surround the masonry. Nobody looking at that structure would assume that it is built on top of a wooden deck.

    Finally we have Tane asserting Paul’s credentials as a PhD candidate on the “influence of architectural historians on architectural culture”. That isn’t an architecture degree. It’s a history degree. That’s like calling Michael Cullen an “economist”.

    The Standard would appear to be happy only if John Key spent $2.95 million on a property 17 years ago, to see it drop to $200k today. Apparently making smart property investments is a reason not to elect him.
15. James Kearney 15

    15 January 2008 at 2:34 pm

    Snobbery implies looking down on people of a lower class who either through lack of money or education are not able to afford or appreciate more sophisticated things.

    Laughing at a rich guy with appalling bad taste isn’t snobbering, it’s hilarious and a great deal of fun.

    Have a laugh Kimble, you’re letting everyone know that it’s getting to you.
16. James Kearney 16

    15 January 2008 at 2:35 pm

    * Should say ‘snobbery’
17. James Kearney 17

    15 January 2008 at 2:37 pm

    Apparently making smart property investments is a reason not to elect him.

    Of course that’s not a reason to elect him.
18. Phil 18

    15 January 2008 at 2:39 pm

    “Did he buy that shirt at the warehouse, or what?!?”

    You’re right on that one Kimble – it’s a crap shirt.
19. Sam Dixon 19

    15 January 2008 at 2:42 pm

    Perhaps if Mr Key would release some policy, rather than trying to get elected on his political persona, he would be critiqued on his policies, rather than his political persona.
20. Camryn 20

    15 January 2008 at 2:44 pm

    Sam – I have no sense of humour? I think not. Perhaps we just have a different sense of humour? I think so, because every time this site tries to write something ‘funny’ about John Key, it smacks of some kind of creepy venting of inner frustrations. I think that good humour is when you make fun of someone you DO like, rather than when you grasp at straws to ridicule someone you DON’T like.
21. Matthew Pilott 21

    15 January 2008 at 2:52 pm

    And they say ‘pinkos’ don’t have a sense of humour… Sigh…

    Welcome back IP, O harbinger of Great Hilarity and Merriment 😉
22. James Kearney 22

    15 January 2008 at 2:55 pm

    The right sure are touchy about any criticism of John Key’s image. It’s almost like you guys know that’s all he has going for him.
23. Matthew Pilott 23

    15 January 2008 at 3:05 pm

    And at least it’s a bit more tasteful than “Luke – I am your Lesbian Father”, even though that sh*t was cool with the Natz until the media made a stink about it…
24. Jum 24

    15 January 2008 at 3:07 pm

    Kimble wrote

    “Snob: One who affects an offensive air of self-satisfied superiority in matters of taste or intellect.”

    Thank you Kimble – you have just described your good friend Michele Cabiling. That must be the humour that Camryn was talking about.
25. Santi 25

    15 January 2008 at 3:18 pm

    This heard of lefties, which at times resemble a pack of hyenas, take pleasure lashing out at John Key with the envy of their wonderful socialist creed.

    Get a life, earn your own money and then cast an opinion.
26. Kimble 26

    15 January 2008 at 3:25 pm

    “Snobbery implies looking down on people of a lower class ”

    Snobbery has nothing to do with money. It has everything to do with an assumption of superiority, which is on fine display here.

    And Sam, that is a pretty pathetic excuse for being shallow. Still, I dont suppose you can expect shallow people to come up with deep excuses.
27. Jum 27

    15 January 2008 at 3:34 pm

    Santi – don’t be silly

    How can you earn money that’s already yours?

    If I remember correctly, weren’t you the hyena who told me that I was ‘vanquished’ and should leave the site, after you wrongly thought that Michele had chewed me up and spat me out, with her quotes and her insults?

    A – vanquished – a word that conjures up a picture of chivalry – that cannot be used in the same sentence as Michele, but chivalry can be used in the case of some knights who live in Michele’s academic world and took her to task for her immature and ill thought out posts. Whether they were doing it for lil ol me doesn’t matter.
28. Robinsod 28

    15 January 2008 at 3:34 pm

    John can’t help the fact he has no taste as he has no mind of his own. He’ll have been told by someone (probably someone he hired) that that’s what multi-millionaire currency speculator’s house should look like. Just as he’s told what to say and do by his image advisers and the backers of the party. I often see John in my travels and I have never seen him without someone minding him, nor have I ever seen him strike up a conversation or substantial social interaction without prompting – he relies on carefully orchestrated set pieces and on others coming to him.
29. Matthew Pilott 29

    15 January 2008 at 3:38 pm

    Santi, assumes that we are all jobless and penniless, living off the state.

    Get a life, earn your own money and then cast an opinion.

    This is a common lament from bigots who are unable to imagine that people could like a leftist government even if they had a decent income, because they thought society as a whole would be better off.
30. Brownie 30

    15 January 2008 at 3:44 pm

    This has to be the funniest thread on the Standard so far. Repartee abounds.
31. Kimble 31

    15 January 2008 at 4:09 pm

    “I have never seen him without someone minding him, nor have I ever seen him strike up a conversation or substantial social interaction without prompting ”

    So what you are saying is that you are stalking him.

    Seriously though, you guys are so full of hate for Key, for no other reason than he is the leader of the party opposed to yours. You are INVENTING reasons to dislike him.

    It is like you are obsessed!

    For fucks sake! This is a post about the appearance of his holiday house. How pathetic is that?
32. Minister of Kulture 32

    15 January 2008 at 4:17 pm

    What’s to hate? The guy’s hilarious!

    The emptiest politician in the Western world. Bar none. If you disagree, suggest an alternative contender for this coveted title. I’m racking my brains here, can’t think of one. Rudd the lightweight is Abe Lincoln by comparison. Cameron has wit, at least.

    Key? There. Is. Nothing. There.
33. James Kearney 33

    15 January 2008 at 4:18 pm

    Kimble it’s a joke and a very well written piece of work at that. Just relax a little mate.
34. Matthew Pilott 34

    15 January 2008 at 4:24 pm

    Minister of Kulture, I object!!!

    John Kerry was pretty gosh darn bad. What is it with these JK’s??

    Kimble, do you write four posts (and counting) on every post you consider pathetic?

    I’d hate to see you on a non-political blog, such as one on quilt work. “Quiltwork? QUILTWORK? For Fucks sake! There’s a Labour government out there destroying the social fabric of society and you’re talking about goddamn CROSSSTICH! What the hell is wrong with you people????!!!!” 8)
35. Ruth 35

    15 January 2008 at 4:31 pm

    I suppose on some intellectual level an argument about John Key’s holiday house could be considered interesting. And I suppose there is some sort of forum where discussion and debate on the issue would be considered appealing. But my immediate response is simple:

    I don’t give a shit.

    What you are offering has nothing to do with analysis – either political or historical – of John Key or the National Party.

    You just want to brand Key, and by extension, all Natianl supporters, as people with no taste, elitists etc.

    Note to you: it’s way down on NZers list of things to care about. My daily worries revolve around far more fundamental issues. And what I really need out of someone – and I don’t give a shit which of the two Medias gives it to me – is clear, complete, intelligent and unbiased analysis of the issues and the policy alternatives for dealing with those issues.

    Of course, it could just be that my expectations aren’t realistic. Spending lots of time and energy on grappling with complex real-world issues can be an unrewarding business, as many bloggers have discovered.
36. Robinsod 36

    15 January 2008 at 4:59 pm

    Ruth, if you don’t give a shit ignore this thread and post on one you do give a shit about. Neither the standard or it’s commenters exist to satisfy your every intellectual need.
37. Santi 37

    15 January 2008 at 6:01 pm

    “What you are offering has nothing to do with analysis – either political or historical…”

    Ruth, please don’t be naive enough to expect analysis from the likes of Michael Porton and minions. They are here to belittle, disseminate innuendo, and make fun of their political enemies. It’s their duty as houndogs of the Left.

    Porton (aka robinsond) is well known around the blogs for having the intellectual stature of a pygmy (with apologies to the pygmies)
38. burt 38

    15 January 2008 at 6:08 pm

    Ruth

    What you are offering has nothing to do with analysis – either political or historical…

    They are not allowed to because of the EFB, so instead they post ridiculous crap like this. To think they support the party that had ended their right to post political commentary and not all they have is denigration and waffle like this thread.

    Suckers….
39. Robinsod 39

    15 January 2008 at 6:13 pm

    Jeez santi, an here’s me thinkin I was smarter than you. No hold on, I am smarter than you – shit I bet that burns.

    Burt you dumbarse, the last two threads were all about political commentary. I knew you were obtuse but to actually come out and make such a statement in the face of clear fact is truly impressive even for you my little drunkard.
40. burt 40

    15 January 2008 at 6:22 pm

    Robinsod

    Nice, dumbarse and little drunkard… Hey you are improving – no fuck-off this time and no mention of Ritalin.

    re your comment to Santi – I think the only person you are smarter than is Tane, I don’t think even you would post a thread like this one, but still you defend it.

    Guess it’s all part of being a Labour supporter, you spend your life defending the indefensible and it becomes a habit.
41. burt 41

    15 January 2008 at 6:32 pm

    Robinsod

    The last two threads:

    An attack on Shadbolt, little more than the Herald reworded with a few denigrations thrown in… I don’t call that political commentary.

    A new left wing blog, a little bit of advertising for fellow comrades who also like self serving govt that have no respect for the laws they impose on others.

    Help me out oh great smart one… where is the commentary in that?

    Oh going back three threads… Blantant horse shit about billboards – denigration and nonsense completely skirting the underlying issues.

    I’m still missing the analysis bit… Help me oh smart one!
42. burt 42

    15 January 2008 at 6:36 pm

    Tane

    You could have made this thread much more concise by posting as follows;

    –START

    John Key is a rich prick, he has a holiday home I couldn’t afford so I’ll denigrate it. All rick pricks are bastards and have zero taste in architecture – why do I say this – because I can’t afford a house like than and I’m compelled by the policies of envy to denigrate him.

    –END
43. Phil 43

    15 January 2008 at 6:45 pm

    Ruth,

    If anyone is approaching “elitist” around here, surely it must be those of a Labour persuasion… after all, they are in popularity free-fall while National becomes the party of choice to the great unwashed masses!
44. Robinsod 44

    15 January 2008 at 6:50 pm

    Jeez Burt you really are struggling to make sense of the big ol’ world aren’t you? I should’ve said the last two Irish Bill threads but as you’ve addressed them I obviously don’t need to. If you seriously consider an analysis of the National Party’s strategy for the coming election year and piece questioning the funding for an overtly political campaign by a prominent local body politician as not being political commentary then you’ve got nothing to worry about vis-a-vis the EFB ‘cos by your definitions nothing falls under that nomenclature.

    I would suggest Burt that you probably need to re-read those articles and think again. But before you do so I would also suggest you take your ritalin so you maintain the attention-span to do so properly.
45. burt 45

    15 January 2008 at 6:59 pm

    Robinsod

    Making sense of the big ol’ world presents little challenge to me – the standard is another matter entirely. I’m not sure if it’s the way the denigration is framed or the denigration itself – it just seems so pointless, so myopically Labour good – National Bad. There appears to be no purpose other than expose how partisan some people can be and how much some people like govt that tramples all over constitutional issues in a partisan manner for their own political gain.

    Since you were to scared to say what you do and made up shit about being a practicing psychiatrist when asked what you did that made you much smarter than me – perhaps you could explain it a bit more to me.
46. Robinsod 46

    15 January 2008 at 7:14 pm

    Burt – That’s a nice shot at misdirection, By what “I do” I was making reference to my commenting on blogs and the fact that I own your arse every time we do this (speaking of pointless) – you gave me the chance to make an easy joke at your expense. So I did.

    But back on topic, you say: There appears to be no purpose other than expose how partisan some people can be and how much some people like govt that tramples all over constitutional issues in a partisan manner for their own political gain.

    By partisan I assume you mean the fact that the standard continually uncovers the spin behind so called neutral commentators and by trample etc I assume you mean “Labour bad, labour bad, labour bad…” ‘cos bro, we’re living under your dreaded EFB and I don’t see much has changed. I can only assume you’re sore you’ve been taken for a ride by the fear-mongering right and you’re still in the denial stage – come to terms with the fact you’ve been suckered by Farrar and his cronies Burt, it’s only once you admit you have a problem that you can start solving it.

    Come to think of it that’s probably what they told you about the drinking too…
47. burt 47

    15 January 2008 at 7:27 pm

    Robinsod

    and the fact that I own your arse every time we do this

    Last time we did this one of us was congratulated for exposing how feeble the other was. How did being called feeble make you own my ass Robinsod?

    I’ll give you a clue Robinsod, that picture of a crazy guy in your bathroom. It isn’t a picture – it’s a mirror.
48. Kimble 48

    15 January 2008 at 8:08 pm

    “Kimble it’s a joke…” JK

    “John can’t help the fact he has no taste as he has no mind of his own.”

    “The emptiest politician in the Western world.”

    Laughing at someones taste in homes is just plain snobbery.

    You guys think because you aren’t one of the ‘rich pricks’ that you can’t be arrogant, snobbish wankers? That holds as much water as the argument that black people cant be racist.
49. burt 49

    15 January 2008 at 10:15 pm

    Tane

    That rather humorous review of John Key’s holiday home thread seems to have been deleted from fundypost , any idea why?
50. Tane 50

    15 January 2008 at 10:26 pm

    No, it’s still there. Have another look.
51. Paul Litterick 51

    15 January 2008 at 11:22 pm

    I am honoured. My posts never get this sort of response on my blog.
52. andy 52

    16 January 2008 at 8:51 am

    John key is anti business:

    ‘National leader John Key has called for limits on commercial crab pots at popular beaches over the summer, saying they act as “human berley” by attracting sharks to swimming areas.’

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10487090

    we live in strange times when Jim Anderton is more business friendly than the leader of the National party.
53. Jum 53

    16 January 2008 at 8:57 am

    Paul Litterick

    What I want to know seriously, is, since Key seems to have several houses in New Zealand, according to an article about him, who cleans them all. Does Bronagh?

    Please strike me down with a duster if she cleans them all, but I’m of the opinion that someone else does that for her. Maybe it’s the kids.

    But with a lot of houses, with (a)cleaner/s that would cost a lot, if I was Key I would want the labour a lot cheaper than it is now, so I would probably want to change the employment contracts act to make it a bit easier on my bank balance.

    I don’t know what Clark does with her (is it?) 5 houses, rent or have cleaners, but I would rather have her employment contracts act fairness than his. It also seems to prove that a reasonable salary can buy houses with the right savings schemes and Kiwi Saver seems to fit the bill.
54. Michele Cabiling 54

    16 January 2008 at 11:13 am

    Matthew Pillock wrote:

    “This [earn your own money] is a common lament from bigots who are unable to imagine that people could like a leftist government even if they had a decent income, because they thought society as a whole would be better off.”

    So anyone who agrees with you is “open-minded.” Anyone who doesn’t is “judgemental” or a “bigot.” A standard leftard reductionist argument.

    In a free society, you are at liberty to spend as much of your own money as you like and in the manner of your choosing to make society “better off.”

    Just don’t presume to spend mine.
55. Michele Cabiling 55

    16 January 2008 at 11:19 am

    More personal abuse from Jum above.

    To respond on the same level, she’s just jealous I’m cute and smart, and she’s … well … the opposite of those things.
56. Kimble 56

    16 January 2008 at 11:37 am

    “John key is anti business”

    BAHAHAHAHHAHA! So you decide that he is all about business, and when he shows he isnt you decide he is being hypocritical?!?
57. Robinsod 57

    16 January 2008 at 11:57 am

    Michele – you are certainly not cute, no-one is goodlooking enough to make up for the ugliness of your personality. And your so-called “smarts” are just the dogged repetition of poorly thought through arguments. I’ve asked twice now how you manage to spend so much time constructing your inconsistent diatribes when you are so busy and successful and yet you haven’t answered. Why is that, Michele?
58. Matthew Pilott 58

    16 January 2008 at 11:59 am

    “So anyone who agrees with you is “open-minded.” Anyone who doesn’t is “judgemental” or a “bigot.” A standard leftard reductionist argument.”

    Michele, you’re slipping, even by your standards. Where did these “open-minded” and “judgemental” comments (in speech marks, giving them the apperance of a quote) come from, save your fertile imagination?

    It’s not a reductionist argument, you’re just unable to see my point, either through lack of intelligence or objectivity – which is it?

    Kimble, where did andy say that Key “is all about business”? Perhaps you need to stop thinking of the Standard as a single monolithic entity.
59. Ruth 59

    16 January 2008 at 7:45 pm

    This thread reminds me of the words of a blogger I used to read. He called himself an ‘ex architect’. His words were

    “You have never heard bullshit until you have heard an architect talk about his work. He thinks he is doing God’s work”.

    John Key or Helen Clark could live in a cave for all I care.

    Middle class nonsense, the lot of it.
60. Phil 60

    17 January 2008 at 4:13 pm

    Yes Jum, I would certainly agree that the the ‘reasonable’ salary of PM and/or leader of the opposition are indeed enough to buy a house. (five of them, even).

Links to post

1. Key and crabs at thestandard.org.nz: posted on 16 January 2008 at 9:46 am
2. A modest proposal at thestandard.org.nz: posted on 16 March 2008 at 3:35 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS