Open mike 15/12/2013

Written By: - Date published: 7:53 am, December 15th, 2013 - 96 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step right up to the mike …

96 comments on “Open mike 15/12/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tracey 1
    15 December 2013 at 8:07 am

    Colin craig thinks of a catfight as rankin goes up against bennett. Stuff puts it in their headline. Craig could have stopped and strong and determined. What would be the equivalent male comment and when did we last see it in print?

    [I think you meant cat fight Tracey. Corrected – MS]

    • Lanthanide 1.1
      15 December 2013 at 8:21 am

      Yeah, I thought it was a bit sexist from him. I guess it displays his true-blue “women exist to serve men” sort of viewpoint.

    • millsy 1.2
      15 December 2013 at 8:37 am

      2 single mothers who used to be on the DPB, who struggled to get by financially, who then turned around and now support political parties that want to take money off people who are in the EXACT SAME position as they were, and replace it with intangible abstract concepts like “aspiration” and “oppurtunity”. Well, I hate to break it to you ladies, but you cannot buy food or pay for your rent and power with “aspiration” and “oppurtunity”. The “dream” of working in a high paid job 5-10 years down the track isnt going to help a woman having to choose between paying the power bill or buying formula for her baby.

      Its pretty simple really

      “And another thing”: You cannot train people for jobs that dont exist. All this talk of “education” being the only way out of poverty is crap.

      • Tim 1.2.1
        15 December 2013 at 10:00 am

        It’s worse than that @ millsy – these two ‘ladies’ seem to think they can force such aspirational outcomes by making people have to struggle even harder than they had to. (Pulling up the ladder as DC puts it). A good way for them to ease their nasty little consciences whilst allowing themselves the luxury of their holier than thou, control freak behaviour.

        • Paul 1.2.1.1
          15 December 2013 at 10:08 am

          Dreadful memories come back of Rankin and that Destiny Church parasite, Hannah Tamaki saying poverty was the fault of the parents.
          Is there an adjective stronger than repulsive to describe these views?

      • Paul 1.2.2
        15 December 2013 at 10:03 am

        “Bennett and Rankin have similar back stories; both grew up in households without much money, had children at a young age and raised them alone on the domestic purposes benefit.”
        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9519067/Catfight-looms-in-hot-seat

        What Stuff did not add was..
        Both don’t want people with their back story to have the support they got now.”

        Funny that; failure to do any journalism by the corporate media.

      • Murray Olsen 1.2.3
        15 December 2013 at 9:12 pm

        It is not at all obvious that Paula Bennett ever struggled to get by financially at all. In fact, with the support she had from her parents and the government money she was able to access, she would have been better off materially than many working people are today. Of course, she has obviously always suffered from great poverty of the spirit.
        As for Christine Rankin, I don’t know.

    • vto 1.3
      15 December 2013 at 9:51 am

      all gender should be deleted from the planet. drones, we should all be…..

      I’m going to france, at least they have a maturity about life

      • Anne 1.3.1
        15 December 2013 at 10:07 am

        Last night I posted this link on Open Mike. I’m re-posting it because it’s an important issue:

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/2579871

        Twenty odd years ago I went through a similar experience as the two long serving Foreign Affairs officers in MFAT only my case wasn’t played out in the media. As a much less important employee in another Public Service area, my superiors saw fit to have a caveat placed on me preventing me from publicly revealing anything, or even being able to clear my name of wrong doing. The above link shows that the psychopathic, bully boy/girl modus operandi inside the Public Service has returned with a vengeance under this Nat. govt.

        • Tim 1.3.1.1
          15 December 2013 at 10:33 am

          I have a similar experience Anne – VERY similar. My ‘bottom line’ however is/was that under NO circumstances was I going to STFU should the need arise.
          For me, what’s changed in the PS is down to its corporatisation which allows the administration to run as little ‘fiefdoms’ (as I’ve mentioned elsewhere) – easily manipulated by the political class by way of various rewards.
          Its a system whereby the vast majority of diligent and committed public servants are subjugated (some even in an environment of fear) by their politically-appointed, generally incompetent, master of the Universe overlord. So much for all that efficiency and effectveness, accountability and transparency we were all promised when the doddering old Douglas had an ideologically-driven brain fart.

          • Anne 1.3.1.1.1
            15 December 2013 at 10:47 am

            Its a system whereby the vast majority of diligent and committed public servants are subjugated (some even in an environment of fear) by their politically-appointed, generally incompetent, master of the Universe overlord.

            Spot on Tim. The climate of fear was so palpable in my PS office that at one point my colleagues didn’t dare speak with me.

            If I had my way the Rebstock bitch (sorry, but it’s true) would be sent back to America from whence she came, and Iain Rennie develop a sudden desire to “spend more time with his family” and resign.

            • Arfamo 1.3.1.1.1.1
              15 December 2013 at 10:55 am

              +1. Yep. Similar experience in the PS for me. The corporate style of “professional manager – don’t need to know what the staff do, just set the vision and the targets” management has led to incredible wastage of effort and money as well. Most of the good talent in the PS has left IMO.

              • Colonial Viper …
                15 December 2013 at 10:58 am

                The neoliberal cult of (un)professional managerialism – which both Labour and National subscribe to – has gutted this nation.

            • Colonial Viper 1.3.1.1.1.2
              15 December 2013 at 10:56 am

              Have you read Václav Havel’s essay “The Power of the Powerless”?

              I think everyone on the Left needs to know about the ideas he wrote about from the deep dark days of Soviet domination of Czeckoslovakia.

      • alwyn 1.3.2
        15 December 2013 at 2:53 pm

        With the record of so many of their Presidents as an example I think that Len Brown should go there. He would fit in beautifully wouldn’t he?

      • greywarbler 1.3.3
        15 December 2013 at 5:56 pm

        What’s up vto
        Can I go to France with you? Richard Wolff was talking about how they still run their country, people still have time to be people there. It sounds like heaven compared to us.

    • Mary 1.4
      15 December 2013 at 12:01 pm

      I thought it might’ve just been the headline but Craig said it. Says a lot about the man. Not a great start for his political relationship with Rankin. He invites her to stand then says that – charming. While I’ve got no time for Rankin publicly she’ll shrug it off but privately she won’t be pleased. The good thing is that Craig’s hard wired to say such silly things so they’ll just keep coming. The right-wing deserve him.

    • Tracey 1.5
      15 December 2013 at 6:08 pm

      thanks MS

    • Murray Olsen 1.6
      15 December 2013 at 9:04 pm

      Colon Craig is seriously creepy and weird. Every time he opens his mouth it becomes more apparent.

    • newsense 2.1
      15 December 2013 at 2:07 pm

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11172656

      still this was a bit of a laugh from Kerre McIvor.

      Cunliffe needs to up his good bloke chops. Laughed it up- the headline Labour up to 40% (which seems largely a re-distribution of the left vote) and the picture? Key drinking with prince Wills….go figure…

    • felix 2.2
      15 December 2013 at 6:51 pm

      Hmmm. I think Rodney is actually being quite honest there. His position, unlike John Key’s, is entirely believable in the circumstances as described. In fact it’s almost the opposite of what Key expects us to swallow.

      1. Hide wasn’t engaged with NZ socially or politically at the time because he was off around the world no doubt seeking his fortune and having adventures. Fair enough. Not every young person’s life is highly politicised.

      But compare and contrast that position with the facts as stated by John Key.

      Key was living in NZ.
      He was at University.
      He had wanted to be Prime Minister since he was ten years old.
      He had strong political views and debated them vigourously around the dinner table.
      The man he describes as his political role model, Muldoon, was PM.

      He expects us to believe all of that and simultaneously believe that the events around the 1981 tour didn’t really register with him at the time. Hilarious.

      That position of Hide’s is not available to Key unless he withdraws and reverses all that stuff in his official back-story, and he can’t do that because it would make a liar of him.

      2. Hide doesn’t know whether sporting and trade boycotts are better or worse than engagement. Fair enough, who does? Hide has a strong belief in free trade and the supremacy of markets for making important decisions. I think he’s a dogmatic extremist in this regard but nevertheless it’s a debatable question and one that merits more serious discussion than a budget herald column can be expected to offer.

      Key also has a strong belief in free trade and the supremacy of markets. But unlike Hide, he won’t say it in so many words because it would frighten many of those who vote for the sanitised, inoffensive, non-threatening Brand Key™ . The gulf between the publicly and privately held views is demonstrated by the fact that behind our backs, when he thinks no-one is listening, he describes NZers as having a “socialist streak” that would prevent him from acting as he wishes.

      So this position of Hide’s is also unavailable to Key unless he wants to place himself far further to the right than Brand Key™ can be seen to be.

      3. Hide couldn’t give a damn about rugby, so he wasn’t interested on the selfish level of thinking he had a right to see the all blacks play SA. Fair enough, I couldn’t give a damn who the all blacks play either.

      And maybe neither does Key. But he has invested a lot of time, money, and energy in portraying himself as a guy who BBQs with the blokes and drinks piss with the All Blacks and grandstands at the RWC. The whole narrative falls down if he reveals that he couldn’t give enough of a crap about rugby to want to see the All Blacks play SA, rugby at the highest level in 1981.

      So that position of Rodney’s is also unavailable to Key unless he blows his carefully constructed bought and paid for good kiwi bloke image.

      Hide’s column really does highlight the utter impossibility of what Key expects people to believe about him. It might be crediting Rodney too much to suggest that it is deliberately nuanced to do so, but it does so regardless.

      • Rogue Trooper 2.2.1
        15 December 2013 at 6:57 pm

        Beautifully comprehensive review imo.

      • Colonial Viper 2.2.2
        15 December 2013 at 7:05 pm

        Also, Hide worked on North Sea oil rigs for a good deal of his time out of NZ.

        His background is more working class than most of Parliament.

        • felix 2.2.2.1
          15 December 2013 at 7:33 pm

          Yep.

          I don’t have much time for a lot of his views. I think he’s naive to believe much of what he believes, but I’ve never really doubted that he believes it.

          The above being no exception.

          • Rogue Trooper 2.2.2.1.1
            15 December 2013 at 7:41 pm

            Been a lot of worthwhile and informative reading on TS these past few days. Very stimulating.

            • logie97 2.2.2.1.1.1
              16 December 2013 at 1:08 am

              … why wouldn’t Hide make this admission until Mandela had gone though? Bit cowardly in my opinion.

      • Tracey 2.2.3
        16 December 2013 at 8:28 am

        top drawer

        Do you know how he ended up under Alan Gibbs wing, given his background?

  3. phillip ure 3
    15 December 2013 at 10:22 am

    “..If you were going to predict which country would jumpstart the counter-culture movement of the 1960s, it wouldn’t be Switzerland.

    In Switzerland nothing seems out of place.

    Sitting in the Lindenhof overlooking the river Limmat – the capital of Zurich looks like the perfect Mittel-European small city.

    It is the essence of picturesqueness –

    – that is of course – if you ignore the heroin addicts strewn all over the Spitzplatz behind the Hauptbahnhof..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.salon.com/2013/12/14/timothy_learys_liberation_and_the_cias_experiments_lsds_amazing_psychedelic_history/

    phillip ure..

  4. Te Reo Putake 4
    15 December 2013 at 10:41 am

    Nice to see the first couple of candidates being confirmed by Labour yesterday. Given the likelihood of a snap election after Banks is jailed, its important both Labour and the Greens are ready to go as early as possible.

    So congrats to Deborah Russell, Rangitikei and Rob McCann, Otaki. The first of many!

    • Colonial Viper 4.1
      15 December 2013 at 10:43 am

      Also Glenda Alexander for Waitaki, and today, the Clutha Southland candidate will be confirmed. Congrats to them!

    • Tim 4.2
      15 December 2013 at 10:49 am

      I agree totally TRP that Labour and the Greens need to be ‘ready to go’ at any time!
      “What I would say” (to use a Nickey Kaye-ism) is that DC needs to knock a few of the old guard’s heads together and remind them he wants to win – whereas they’re quite comfortable in either gubbamint OR opposition. I would say it – but I decided to give up on Labour until 2017 where we’ll all be able to see if they’ve actually decided to return to founding principles.

      • Paul 4.2.1
        15 December 2013 at 10:52 am

        Yup vote Green to ensure no backsliding by the Labour caucus.

      • Te Reo Putake 4.2.2
        15 December 2013 at 11:36 am

        Fair enough, Tim, but I’d suggest that if you want a return to ‘founding principles’ you could actually play a part by joining Labour. The party needs to more than a caucus mindset upgrade for a real change in direction, it needs more activists in every branch, LEC and the affiliates. Perhaps it’s time the next conference put term limits on our MP’s? Say 3 terms unless a majority of members approve a fourth? As a member, you can help make that happen.

        • weka 4.2.2.1
          15 December 2013 at 11:49 am

          Why can’t/don’t existing members do that?

        • Tim 4.2.2.2
          15 December 2013 at 12:15 pm

          @TRP
          I’ll consider REjoining when I see signs that the Party (all MP’s) show they’re more responsive to their membership – i.e. not weighed down by an old guard who only want to pay lip service and with all that “I paid my dues and I’m therefore entitled” attitude) AND when they unambiguously state their opposition to neoliberalism
          They’re getting there admittedly and hopefully there’s a DC knocking a few heads together in the background.
          The thing is that there are NOW alternatives that are more responsive to their membership.
          …. as I said – maybe around 2017.
          I think a record of having voted for them even when they chose to have a little lay down and do SFA (a least worst option) shows that I was committed to what Labour supposedly (and once) stood for.
          I no longer have a blind faith that only serves to advance certain politician’s careers and preserve a comfy little status quo. The best evidence of all that is to just look at the National Party.

    • Rosie 4.3
      15 December 2013 at 11:50 am

      Well, I’m still keen to hear what Labour candidate will go into Ohariu. I’ve asked several times here, but no replies so far – maybe it’s an unknown or maybe it’s a secret?!……..

      Also, is it really likely that we would go to a snap election if Bank’s is found guilty? If so, that would be truly awesome!

      • Anne 4.3.1
        15 December 2013 at 12:20 pm

        I don’t think the candidate has been selected yet Rosie. Probably sometime in the New Year. Actually, Labour is leaving it a bit late for the selection process. Especially if there is an early election.

        Despite Key’s denials (which mean nothing coming from him) speculation is rife he’ll go early if he can get away with it. The polls show he’s still on a high with the voting public but he knows they’re slowly waking up to him. It makes sense to get the election out of the way before the rot really sets in.

        • Rosie 4.3.1.1
          15 December 2013 at 12:34 pm

          Thanks for your thoughts on both queries Anne.

          It is getting a little late for the selection for Ohariu isn’t it. Charles Chauvel, in the 2011 election, got more votes than the previous election and decreased the gulf between himself and Dunne, with Shanks (resigning from parliament in Jan) straggling along behind in the electorate vote.

          I’m wondering if Labour worked at it, whether they could win the Ohariu seat next year, on Dunnes 30th anniversary of holding it! Encouraging to see a 65% NO vote coming this electorate with a 49% turnout. Maybe, just maybe Dunne may have had his day.

          It would excellent to see BOTH Banks and Dunne gone

      • rod 4.3.2
        15 December 2013 at 5:30 pm

        @ rosie “if banks is found guilty’ you must be joking, he will probably finish up with a knighthood for services to John Key.

        • Rosie 4.3.2.1
          15 December 2013 at 5:53 pm

          we can only hope rod………………be interesting to see how the bets are going closer to the time.

  5. Herodotus 5
    15 December 2013 at 11:06 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11172720
    Wonder what the reverse is – the benefit to coys of employees being expected to work when sick and the burden that places on the employee to struggle on.
    IMO somewhat blinkered vision on the topic.

    • Paul 5.1
      15 December 2013 at 11:09 am

      A classic Herald article softening up the public for further draconian labour laws and creating a public perception that all our problems stem from lazy workers, not corrupt, incompetent and greedy corporations.

      • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1
        15 December 2013 at 1:02 pm

        +1

        It was all about what the bosses and corporations wanted and nothing about what the workers actually need.

        • Paul 5.1.1.1
          15 December 2013 at 5:56 pm

          They do this all the time.
          For example, education.
          Article after article on teachers to create a public perception that they are bad people.
          Hardly ever a positive story..always reports to prepare the population for charter schools and an attack on teachers’ unions.

          Also, judges are increasingly being targeted for their lack of support for the government’s draconian and undemocratic laws.

          • KJT 5.1.1.1.1
            16 December 2013 at 11:12 am

            Nothing about;
            The employers who expect employees to turn up 15 minutes early every day, without extra pay.
            The employers who steal employees breaks and lunch hours.
            Employers who want part time employees available at 12 to 6 hours notice, so they cannot take another part time job, but do not want to pay extra for it.
            Employers who routinely take a little from each pay packet, knowing employees have little redress, even if they notice.
            Employers who take all of an employees first months pay, to pay for their work gear.
            Employers who pay so little that other tax payers, and employers, have to subsidise their business.

            Etc Etc Etc.

  6. Tracey 6
    15 December 2013 at 11:23 am

    Au revoir vto.

  7. Morrissey 7
    15 December 2013 at 11:29 am

    Mediocrity Watch
    No. 10: JORDAN WILLIAMS

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    “The Wellington City Council’s living wage is the worst possible decision. …. Third world countries are a hand-brake on the efforts of the rich industrialized capitalist countries to protect the environment….” [drones on in wandery fashion for several minutes]…

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    —Jordan Williams, speaking as one of three “Young Activists” on Radio NZ National’s “Ideas” segment, Sunday 15 December 2013. It is worth noting that stand-in host Finlay Macdonald was clearly appalled by Williams’ comments and that another guest (Heleyni Pratley) openly snickered in derision as Williams vapoured on.

    Mediocrity Watch aims to keep you informed of—or, to quote the epically mediocre Simon Dallow, to be “right across”—the shoddiest, least professional, most insulting journalism and taxpayer-subsidised-sensitive-singer-songwriting from all over the world, but especially New Zealand. It is produced by DeakerWatch®, a division of Daisycutter Sports Inc.

    More mediocrities….
    No. 9 Andrew Clay: ““After a comedy show, one is often mobbed by the ladies.”
    
No. 8 Ed Sheeran: “I See Dire”
 http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-071113/#comment-723312

    No. 7 Paul Little: [Russell Brand] is “petulant, ungracious and unfunny” and a “cut-rate Chomsky”.
    

No. 6 David Farrar: “Things were generally very relaxed in this area.”
    


No. 5 Jordan Williams: “Capping rents seems like a recipe for disaster.”



    No. 4 Prof. Robert Patman: “Hezbollah is totally a creature of the Iranian regime.”
    

No. 3 Jeremy Wells: “What evidence is there that secondhand smoking does any harm? Where is the evidence? WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?”



    No. 2 Gavin Gray: “…never been any problems associated with the name King George.”



    No. 1 Susie Ferguson: “If, as you say, this has all been done before, why do it all again?”

    • Paul 7.1
      15 December 2013 at 11:55 am

      Goodness those libertarians get a lot of publicity on RNZ considering their share of the vote is so small. Wonder how the bosses at the station can justify that?

      • Morrissey 7.1.1
        15 December 2013 at 12:28 pm

        Here’s a little thread from earlier this year about that hapless loon Jordan Williams. Note also that an even more hapless Standardista jumps in and flounders embarrassingly as he tries to defend Williams…..
        http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-17042013/#comment-620413

        • felix 7.1.1.1
          15 December 2013 at 7:54 pm

          Yeah.

          Posting the audio of what was actually said, which shows the difference between your version of events and the one that actually happened, is haplessly defending Williams.

          🙄

          Our foes are the same foes, Mozz, but we won’t beat them with lies. We’ll beat them with the truth.

          • Morrissey 7.1.1.1.1
            16 December 2013 at 8:36 am

            Posting the audio of what was actually said, which shows the difference between your version of events and the one that actually happened, is haplessly defending Williams.

            Thanks for posting it; what it actually shows—as you know perfectly well—is how accurate my post is in tone and substance, if not in every detail. I don’t make stuff up; the only problem is that my transcription speed is not good enough to get me a job as a secretary for a Fortune 500 company—-not yet anyway. If you had chided me for the errors, and the odd exaggeration—yes, I do add the odd bit of gratuitous laughter or an extra “ummm” or “errr” to underline the vacuity of certain guests—that would be a fair and reasonable critique.

            But you have not done that: what you have done here, and done on several other occasions, is to allege that I deliberately distorted and even falsified the cruel and irresponsible words of Mora and his guests. I have not, and you know it. Your inept pursuit of me started after I came out in support of the dissenting journalist Julian Assange; you unwisely chose, like several others on this forum, to side with his state-backed tormentors.

            Our foes are the same foes, Mozz, but we won’t beat them with lies. We’ll beat them with the truth.

            There you go again, saying I tell lies. Others on this forum, who do not share your agenda of character assassination and dissenter-bashing, but who do listen to those shockingly depraved radio shows, have attested to the accuracy and integrity of my transcripts. Hell, someone even called me “the Diana Wichtel of the Standard.” Maybe you could launch a campaign against her next; after all, she makes the odd slip-up as well.

            • felix 7.1.1.1.1.1
              16 December 2013 at 1:17 pm

              No Mozz, when you say someone said something that they didn’t say, that’s a lie.

              And when someone points this out to you, and you insist, in the face of the audio evidence, that your report is accurate (word perfect is the term you used) that’s a lie.

              And when you turn on that person and accuse them of all sorts of nefarious motivations for insisting on honesty (Assange? Seriously you stupid fuck, find me a quote to back that up) that’s a lie.

              But I don’t need to argue with the ghosts in your mind. For all I know when someone says something once, you hear them screaming it several times. But the audio tells the true story and your reports stand in stark contrast, and the ultimate dishonesty is that you refuse to listen to the audio and make an honest side by side comparison

              • Morrissey …
                16 December 2013 at 2:36 pm

                1.) No Mozz, when you say someone said something that they didn’t say, that’s a lie.
                I reported, accurately and without exaggeration, that Jordan Williams had been provoked into a furious ranting denial of the fact that Lord Monckton is regarded as a loon by all serious thinkers. You, as you often do, launched into a nutty defence of Williams, pretending that he had not ranted and shouted. He had, and the recording matches my transcript/rendition of the cringe-inducing episode.

                2.) And when someone points this out to you, and you insist, in the face of the audio evidence, that your report is accurate (word perfect is the term you used) that’s a lie.
                Now you are distorting—and I fear it stems from malice, not simply bewilderment as I originally thought—what I have written on several occasions. I have always conceded that my transcriptions, which are always done without the use of a tape recorder, are not always perfect but they ARE true to the nature and tone of the people I pin down for posterity. Often, the most important bits of my transcripts are indeed word perfect; you are quibbling, trivially and dishonestly, over a few misplaced/transposed/added snickers or ummms and ahs, and contesting my interpretation of the often uncomfortable pauses that are a feature of these radio discussions. If you left it at that, your criticism would be valid; unfortunately you seem to lack a certain degree of proportion, or common sense—and you have accused me not of the odd inaccuracy or error (which is fair) but of lying (which is not fair).

                3.) And when you turn on that person and accuse them of all sorts of nefarious motivations for insisting on honesty (Assange? Seriously you stupid fuck, find me a quote to back that up) that’s a lie.
                I’ve just conducted an archive search of your postings and it’s clear that you have not been one of the denigrators of Assange. I apologise to you, and acknowledge my speculation was wrong and unfair. Now, if I was a liar, I would simply keep repeating my original allegation, but I will not. Your allegations about my occasional slip-ups constitute a calculated insult, an extreme attack on my integrity, and a deliberate distortion—and I have repeatedly refuted them. It is time you did the decent thing and acknowledged that your attacks on me have far exceeded robust criticism and long ago degenerated into nothing more than foul personal abuse, and all the worse for being untrue.

                4.)But I don’t need to argue with the ghosts in your mind.
                That’s a nasty but rather limp effort at trying to marginalise me as some kind of deluded crackpot. Keep trying, then after that try walking through a brick wall; you’ll have about as much chance of success.

                5.) For all I know when someone says something once, you hear them screaming it several times. But the audio tells the true story and your reports stand in stark contrast, and the ultimate dishonesty is that you refuse to listen to the audio and make an honest side by side comparison.
                The audio shows a young Wellington lawyer out of his intellectual depth, falling back on the oldest trick in the lexicon to cope with being shown up as a fraud: he shouts, stutters and stammers, and denies that the person he has been defending is a fool and a charlatan.

                Kind of reminds me of some of the people around here.

                • McFlock …
                  16 December 2013 at 2:50 pm

                  and so Morrissey’s brain has completely scabbed over the yawning chasm between what he wrote that people said, and what they actually said.

                  • Morrissey …
                    16 December 2013 at 3:06 pm

                    Now THAT is a classically lazy and content-free post. If you’re going to tell lies, my friend, your rhetoric would need to be much better than that. And you’d need major support by a criminal organisation to protect you. I don’t think you’re quite that powerful yet, and you’re way too emotional to engender anything but contempt, but in case you grease your way right up that academic ladder, here’s the level of cold-hearted indifference to morality you need to aim at….

                    You’re only part way there. Empty abuse is fine, if you have some institutional muscle to back it up. You haven’t, unfortunately.

                    By the way, that government functionary had the integrity (too late, but that’s another story) to admit that he had lied…..

                    At the moment, you’re way below that bloke on the integrity scale. Which should be very embarrassing for you.

                    Should.

                    • McFlock …
                      16 December 2013 at 3:15 pm

                      whatever, Don Quixote.

                    • Morrissey …
                      16 December 2013 at 3:18 pm

                      whatever, Don Quixote.

                      Again, a substandard and lazy response. You really are not up to this—at all.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      16 December 2013 at 3:22 pm

                      Moz has OD’d on the wanker pills. Somebody call the whambulance.

                    • McFlock …
                      16 December 2013 at 3:23 pm

                      Up to what – persuading a deluded individual that his massive ego blinds him to his lamentable terminological inexactitudes? Nah mate, you need a shrink for that, and I’m not qualified.

                    • Morrissey …
                      16 December 2013 at 4:33 pm

                      I’m not qualified.

                      No you’re not. As I said, you lack the credentials, if not the inclination, to keep telling lies like you are doing.

                    • Rogue Trooper …
                      16 December 2013 at 4:37 pm

                      “and coming up round the outside is………..Beeeeetalllbomb!”

                    • McFlock …
                      16 December 2013 at 4:59 pm

                      telling lies? What lie? That you repeatedly claim accuracy in your transcripts when the words you attribute to speakers seem to be missing from the audio recordings available online?

                      I’m being charitable and just assuming that you’re clinically delusional, rather than suggesting that you’re even more incompetent as a liar than John Banks.

    • phillip ure 7.2
      15 December 2013 at 12:07 pm

      i thought the total jaw-dropper from willams was his claim that young people now have none of the worries of their parents/grandparents generations..

      ..yes..we had nukes being rattled/waved at will..

      ..but..um..!..climate-change/global-warming/mass youth unemployment/huge debts from/for education..

      ..being at the bottom of the wage-pyramid..(university students forced into working for $11 per hr/youth-rates..how fucked/fucken oppressive/unfair is that..?)

      ..how’s that all for starters/getting on with..?

      ..and williams then used that one-legged stool to stand on to say this is why the young are not engaged in the political system..

      ..and he does have a point about low engagement..

      ..but i wd put that low engagement in part down to a sense of powerlessness..

      ..of not wanting to get their legs/trousers drenched..

      ..from what can easily be seen as pissing into the wind..

      ..and i wd argue that desire for engagement is out there..

      ..but the forum/means has not yet been established..

      ..the internet has opened many doors..

      ..but those energies are yet to coalesce in a meaningful manner..

      ..so.basically..williams was just lowest-orifice-plucking..

      ..with his farcical ‘nothing to worry about’ claims..

      ..phillip ure..

      • Paul 7.2.1
        15 December 2013 at 12:09 pm

        Says so much about this vile young man.

        • Morrissey 7.2.1.1
          15 December 2013 at 12:17 pm

          Williams doesn’t get on to these programmes because he has anything interesting or intelligent to say. He gets on because he’s not only very pushy but (more importantly) also well connected: he is an office junior for S.S. lawyer Stephen Franks. He imitates Franks perfectly: the slow pretentious delivery as well as the banality of his statements.

          • Paul 7.2.1.1.1
            15 December 2013 at 12:46 pm

            So how does Franks have so much influence?

            • Tim 7.2.1.1.1.1
              15 December 2013 at 3:17 pm

              I wonder that too (How does Franks ….etc.)
              Mora likes his ‘eloquence’ I think, and the fact that he comes from the ‘cultured’ department of the right wing (kind of like the 1% of the 1%) – which of course is very esprayshnul – especially if you’re the nicest man on Earth.
              It always amuses me when I see RNZ accused of being a bunch of lefties.
              There’s a dinky little band of 1%ers all comfy and cosy, nicely ‘work-life balanced’ and ‘fair and balanced’, with credentials they think we all should die for pulling the strings.
              We should really be grateful they exist I suppose – otherwise under the current junta it’d be “Afternoons with the Nicest Man on Earth – brought to you by Watties Baked Beans”, and “Nine to Noon with the World’s Most Regalr Gal – brought to you by Sanitarium Allbran”.

              There’s always RNZ weekends and weekday evenings that (so far) don’t seem to have been infected.

              Btw … Franks should patent himself. We sometimes watch in awe as he manages to defy gravity and slip up an uphill Hawker Street. I’m trying to discover how his gentrification engine works – it sure as Hell doesn’t have spark plugs but its causing havoc in the Mt Vic neighbourhood.

              • North …
                15 December 2013 at 6:53 pm

                Hah, as a student nearly 40 years ago lived in Hawker Street four doors from the top. Magnificent view. Fell over uphill numerous times in various levels of sobriety on that steep street. Thing is I never had the nasty blow to the head as clearly has friend Stephen. Must’ve been a hoot to watch Tim . “Key”stoned Cops.

      • Morrissey 7.2.2
        15 December 2013 at 12:20 pm

        …the total jaw-dropper from willams was his claim that young people now have none of the worries of their parents/grandparents generations…

        Yes I heard that, Phillip. It comes under the rubric of “drones on in wandery fashion for several minutes.”

  9. Morrissey 9
    15 December 2013 at 12:38 pm

    LOON WATCH
    No. 2: Illegal “settlers” in the Occupied West Bank

    As you watch these clips, bear in mind that Barack Obama, who hijacked the Mandela memorial service for a great anti-apartheid leader, is a piously defiant advocate for these people….

    Another really frightening loon….
    No. 1 Philippe Karsenty: http://thestandard.org.nz/26052011/#comment-334310

  10. phillip ure 10
    15 December 2013 at 5:41 pm

    prime news is having their biggest clusterfuck/meltdown ever..

    ..they started with no sound..seemingly blissfully unaware for some time..then they flicked to ads/promos..

    ..it is now ten minutes into the bulletin..and still the ads/promos..

    ..heh..!..back on..but with a new/different (australian) announcer to the one who started the bulletin..

    phillip ure..

  11. Rogue Trooper 11
    15 December 2013 at 6:19 pm

    “and Jade Rabbit is in third place, coming up round the outside…”

  12. Rogue Trooper 12
    15 December 2013 at 6:22 pm

    Must be Christmas the preceding from Paula and the MSD

  13. Rogue Trooper 13
    15 December 2013 at 6:25 pm

    not much else in The Herald today.

  14. Rogue Trooper 14
    15 December 2013 at 6:30 pm

    ‘cept for the potential of loss of more jobs in even Agriculture arisng from technology ; saw the potential when there was a documentary on a similar product developed for pasture inspection by a New Zealand school-boy recently. (somebody no longer needs to travel and open and close 30 gates a day).

    • Arfamo 15.1
      15 December 2013 at 6:49 pm

      The man is now dead and buried ( or soon will be). So is much that he hoped for. All there is left is nostalgia.

  16. Philj 16
    15 December 2013 at 6:52 pm

    XOX
    RNZ is slipping. Nine to Noon, and Afternoons sliding in relevance and quality. Needs a serious refurbishment.
    Weekends are better quality but right wing ‘market’ forces are increasingly apparent. Hoping Finlay MacDonald gets the nod to replace Chris Laidlaw.

  17. Rogue Trooper 17
    15 December 2013 at 9:21 pm

    It is Sunday… John 5:25 . Good Night. Let tomorrow be good. gonna watch this interesting film about the Emperor Barbarossa now.

  18. greywarbler 18
    15 December 2013 at 9:57 pm

    Prof Richard Wolff is talking about how the Democrats tried to get Bill through in USA setting 0.7% tax on incomes over US$1 million to raise extra tax to employ the unemployed. There are 350,000 tazpayers who average US$2.9 million would have been $13,500 each extra. This was an outrage and the Republicans prevented that Bill going through that was to raise money for creating employment!! I have put up links earlier but just google Wolff.

    They did pass some law that was going to put a lot of money into repairing highways!@!

    • Rogue Trooper 18.1
      15 December 2013 at 10:06 pm

      that piece you applied on cosmetics was worth reading imo and valued.

      • greywarbler 18.1.1
        16 December 2013 at 10:59 am

        Thanks RT have been pondering about it for a while. Cosmetics for women are hegemonic and pervasive and constant use undermines the move towards women’s real self-acceptance.

  19. Paul 19
    15 December 2013 at 11:03 pm

    Good article by Espiner about white collar crime and how our society is structured to deal with it leniently.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/columnists/9519424/Espiner-Lessons-of-Pike-River

    Some highlights…

    “For a nation with the dubious distinction of having one of the highest rates of imprisonment in the western world, we’re remarkably reluctant to lock up anyone from the big end of town”

    “This may have something to do with the fact that those whose collar is more white than blue are more likely to be able to afford lawyers with the letters QC after their name. It’s also partly because criminal cases involving corporate types tend to be complicated, drawn-out and expensive.”

    “But it’s also due to the fact that our laws – particularly the 1961 Crimes Act – are not just inadequate but biased in favour of those who either swindle investors out of their life savings or bring about the injury or death of their employees through negligence.”

  20. captain hook 20
    16 December 2013 at 1:25 pm

    I see in the rag this a.m. the sensible sentencing trust claiming that they dont care how much it costs to imprison as many as people as possible.
    Do they have shares in the private prison companies.

    • Colonial Viper 20.1
      16 December 2013 at 5:22 pm

      Putting resources into helping kids out at the start seem to have escaped their small narrow brains.