Gareth Morgan's lipstick on a pig comment: Labour policies need more substance?

Forums › Politics › Gareth Morgan's lipstick on a pig comment: Labour policies need more substance?

frednz

823 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 125

Topic # 222625 21-Aug-2017 10:07

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/95973348/gareth-morgan-compares-jacinda-ardern-as-lipstick-on-a-pig

"It's pathetic isn't it? All that matters is policy. Jacinda should be required to show she's more than lipstick on a pig. Will she be?" Morgan tweeted.

Do you agree with Gareth's comment? Is this type of comment acceptable, even during an election campaign?

1 | 2

564 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 484

Reply # 1849700 21-Aug-2017 10:28

4 people support this post

Completely unacceptable!

Morgan ought to have been accurate when he spoke and called it "an updated shade of lipstick on a pig"

His point is valid however... it's the same Labour Party as it was pre-Ardern. Same lack of policy detail & costing. Same lack of key talent. Same factional infighting. Same Union overlords. Same pig... just with the sixth shade of lipstick (I mean party leader) in the past decade.

But Morgan was very politically naïve - he could have said "re-arranging deckchairs on the titanic" to make the same point without risking triggering those determined to be offended by pale, stale, males.

Wiggum

1104 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 433

Reply # 1849702 21-Aug-2017 10:30

He is right.

PC nonsense aside, IMO we all (including politicians) should all be able to say/ask whatever we like when it comes to elections (hate speech aside). Ministers/MP's who are easily offended, should probably rather seek a career change.

Rikkitic

7348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3447

Subscriber

Reply # 1849705 21-Aug-2017 10:35

I don't think comparing her to a pig is going to win him any votes. I think the point he was making is valid, though he didn't express it very elegantly. I am certain he was using the phrase as a figure of speech, not as an insult. In that sense, it is acceptable.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

6FIEND

564 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 484

Reply # 1849710 21-Aug-2017 10:45

3 people support this post

Rikkitic:

I don't think comparing her to a pig is going to win him any votes. I think the point he was making is valid, though he didn't express it very elegantly. I am certain he was using the phrase as a figure of speech, not as an insult. In that sense, it is acceptable.

It's also worth noting that he was effectively calling Ardern the "Lipstick" and the Labour Party the "Pig"

Not that it makes a jot of difference to the aggrieved.

Varkk

129 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 60

Reply # 1849718 21-Aug-2017 10:57

It shows him as being a bit out of touch. He isn't the first politician to use that phrase in recent memory, and every single time they have been called out for doing so. Also Labour have a fair amount of substantial policy, and have for the last couple of elections. It was also policy which was popular when polled in isolation, but voters didn't respond to it until Ardern was the leader of a party promoting it.

Wiggum

1104 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 433

Reply # 1849720 21-Aug-2017 11:00

One person supports this post

Labours true tax agenda is starting to appear. I think they need to start being upfront on all of their tax plans, they owe it to their voters.

They need to be upfront on where they stand with

- Taxing small businesses of their capital gains

- Taxing farmers on their capital gains.

- A new regional fuel tax (but not much details)

- A water tax (also with limited details)

- National 2018 1 April tax cut (limited details as to their plans around this, rumor has it that its gone)

Maybe they could just clear up all uncertainty and just start calling themselves the taxparty. I don't really have an issue with capital gains tax, I do however have an issue with it if its going to hurt our small businesses.

MikeB4

12436 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5832

Trusted

Reply # 1849748 21-Aug-2017 11:52

4 people support this post

Wiggum:

He is right.

PC nonsense aside, IMO we all (including politicians) should all be able to say/ask whatever we like when it comes to elections (hate speech aside). Ministers/MP's who are easily offended, should probably rather seek a career change.

I do not believe that politics means that good manners, decency and professionalism need to be tossed aside.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

Wiggum

1104 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 433

Reply # 1849754 21-Aug-2017 11:59

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

He is right.

PC nonsense aside, IMO we all (including politicians) should all be able to say/ask whatever we like when it comes to elections (hate speech aside). Ministers/MP's who are easily offended, should probably rather seek a career change.

I do not believe that politics means that good manners, decency and professionalism need to be tossed aside.

Does that include the same level of professionalism towards US politics, and leaders? My view is that its pretty much OK to say whatever we like about US politicians/leaders, but we need to treat our own politicians with a different level of respect. It seems very odd to me.

MikeB4

12436 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5832

Trusted

Reply # 1849758 21-Aug-2017 12:05

One person supports this post

This is New Zealand not the US.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

Fred99

6414 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3230

Reply # 1849771 21-Aug-2017 12:36

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

He is right.

PC nonsense aside, IMO we all (including politicians) should all be able to say/ask whatever we like when it comes to elections (hate speech aside). Ministers/MP's who are easily offended, should probably rather seek a career change.

I do not believe that politics means that good manners, decency and professionalism need to be tossed aside.

Does that include the same level of professionalism towards US politics, and leaders? My view is that its pretty much OK to say whatever we like about US politicians/leaders, but we need to treat our own politicians with a different level of respect. It seems very odd to me.

I don't see too many political leaders or representatives of NZ political parties slamming Trump - if that's what you mean.

Morgan's "lipstick on a pig" comment may be an entirely okay comment in a forum, but very unwise for a public statement from a political leader.

It's not "PC nonsense" to suggest that a political leader should bite their lip when tempted. Morgan seems to have a problem getting a story across - without becoming the story.

frednz

823 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 125

Reply # 1849859 21-Aug-2017 15:05

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

He is right.

PC nonsense aside, IMO we all (including politicians) should all be able to say/ask whatever we like when it comes to elections (hate speech aside). Ministers/MP's who are easily offended, should probably rather seek a career change.

I do not believe that politics means that good manners, decency and professionalism need to be tossed aside.

I agree, and so does Prime Minister Bill English as reported in this NZ Herald article:

Prime Minister Bill English says he will rule out forming a coalition with the fledgling Opportunities Party if its leader continues to hold an attitude "outside acceptable boundaries".

This morning English said he would not be able to work with Morgan if he held that type of attitude.

An unrepentant Morgan attempted to clarify his "lipstick on a pig" comment saying it was not a personal attack on Ardern.

But, if the voting gets really tight for National, perhaps it's unwise for Bill English to rule out a coalition with the Opportunities Party just because Gareth speaks it as he sees it! After all, I'm not sure that National really wants a coalition with Winston's NZ First lot!

Fred99

6414 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3230

Reply # 1849865 21-Aug-2017 15:22

Some people have taken my “lipstick on a pig” comment as a personal attack on the Labour leader Jacinda Ardern. I can assure everyone that is not the case.

“Putting lipstick on a pig” is a euphemism for a meaningless face-lift or makeover. And until such a time that we see real change from the Labour Party we think that the euphemism is appropriate.

Obama used the same phrase back in 2008 when John McCain and Sarah Palin were talking about change.

I’m sick of establishment parties talking about change and doing nothing. Most of New Zealand’s problems have been caused by both major parties.

House prices have risen (and affordability fallen) under both Labour and National.
The quality of our rivers has declined under both Labour and National.
Our prison population has risen under both Labour and National.
Tell me why I should have my faith restored in either party just because their leadership has changed?

As far as I am concerned both establishment parties have to earn their1 redemption. They need to show they are committed to real policy change. At the moment all they do is talk about change and then simply fiddle about the edges.

I would use that phrase to describe either party’s recent leadership makeovers. The only reason I haven’t used that phrase to describe National’s situation is that Bill English is not pretending he is any change on the previous leader.

tdgeek

12291 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2146

Trusted

Reply # 1849909 21-Aug-2017 16:40

frednz:

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

He is right.

PC nonsense aside, IMO we all (including politicians) should all be able to say/ask whatever we like when it comes to elections (hate speech aside). Ministers/MP's who are easily offended, should probably rather seek a career change.

I do not believe that politics means that good manners, decency and professionalism need to be tossed aside.

I agree, and so does Prime Minister Bill English as reported in this NZ Herald article:

Prime Minister Bill English says he will rule out forming a coalition with the fledgling Opportunities Party if its leader continues to hold an attitude "outside acceptable boundaries".

This morning English said he would not be able to work with Morgan if he held that type of attitude.

An unrepentant Morgan attempted to clarify his "lipstick on a pig" comment saying it was not a personal attack on Ardern.

But, if the voting gets really tight for National, perhaps it's unwise for Bill English to rule out a coalition with the Opportunities Party just because Gareth speaks it as he sees it! After all, I'm not sure that National really wants a coalition with Winston's NZ First lot!

I think Nats and NZF are a real possibility. The article below spells out his policies, and they arent all bad, and he wont expect them all to go through or be accepted.

Its a month old, and with recent goings on, its WAY out of date, but an interesting read. The change in Labour/Greens also helps that option.

Will he do either? I think so, its his last throw of the dice.

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/07/17/38980/what-a-national-nz-first-govt-might-actually-do

sen8or

684 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 189

Reply # 1849913 21-Aug-2017 16:59

You'll note the rider that Bill put on his statement "if the leader continues....."

That way if they somehow defy all logic and actually get to 5% and are needed for a coalition partner, he can say that he didn't specifically exclude it

DaveB

1062 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 438

Reply # 1850006 21-Aug-2017 20:31

MikeB4:

I do not believe that politics means that good manners, decency and professionalism need to be tossed aside.

Maybe, but I can't help but shudder and wonder what Morgan looks like with a splashing of Mary Quant lipstick around his chops.

1 | 2