Open mike 19/09/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, September 19th, 2011 - 179 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

179 comments on “Open mike 19/09/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    19 September 2011 at 7:54 am

    The Government’s gradual evisceration of the ETS continues.

    Not happy with a watered down pale comparison of the previous ETS, which of itself was rather timid, the Government is engaging in death by a thousand cuts to ensure that it is totally ineffective.  We are going from world leader, to fast follower, to slow follower to parasite.

    As part of the evisceration process Nick Smith commissioned an “independent review“.  The review came back with the recommendation that implementation for the Energy, Industrial and Transport sectors be slowed down.  It also recommended that agriculture’s entry be slowed down and last Thursday Smith thought that this proposal was “also well considered”.

    The report was referred to the Agricultural ETS Advisory Committee, presumably stacked with farmers, and Smith said that the committee’s advice would be considered prior to decisions being made. 
    Well it did not take long.  Today it was announced that agriculture will be introduced only if “practical technologies are available to enable farmers to reduce their emissions and more progress is made by our trading partners to reduce their emissions”.

    This will never happen.  The farming sector will now not even need to think about acquiring credits.

    Presuming the Agricultural ETS Advisory Committee has reported to Smith this represents an extraordinary quick turn around time.  It is true that his condition has always been part of the mix but over a period of four days he has gone from saying inclusion to exclusion of the Farming Sector.

    Shame on them, shame on them, shame on them, 

  2. higherstandard 2
    19 September 2011 at 7:57 am

    Good on them, good on them, good on them.

    An ETS won’t make a jot of difference to the climate, it will likely hurt our economy and all costs will as usual be passed on to Joe Public.

    • mickysavage 2.1
      19 September 2011 at 8:00 am

      HS is up early and off on his morning troll.

      • vto 2.1.1
        19 September 2011 at 8:10 am

        I have some sympathy for the idea of being slow followers, or some type of follower. We NZers in our naive rose-tinted spectacle view of the world seem always keen to lead everything. Such as deregulation and opening up of the economy. And that proved to be an unwise move as the haste led to unintended consequences.

        Similarly with climate change and an ETS. It could easily lead to the same type of consequences thta rushing into deregulation and opening up the economy did. Likewise with free trade agreements. Risky.

        Meantime move to higher ground.

        • mickysavage 2.1.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 8:15 am

          Understood VTO but the process is so frustrating.  Everyone around the world is looking at everyone else and waiting for them to move first.  The third world wants to industrialise, the first world, apart from some Scandinavian countries, is paying pass the buck.

          Someone needs to stand up and present a brave goal and the rest of the world has to follow.  Otherwise the inevitable production of CO2 will increase and the world will become dramatically different in the not too distant future. 

          • In Vino Veritas 2.1.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 1:36 pm

            And unfortunately Micky, you seem to want to sacrifice the NZ public on your environmental altar. It may have escaped your attention, but no one gives a rats arse whether NZ adopt ETS. And to believe that anyone will “follow” just because we have done it, is just not rational. But then, I guess that says it all.

    • Dv 2.2
      19 September 2011 at 8:07 am

      Ok what is your solution?
      No action is NOT a solution.
      How much is it going to cost Joe for incrased insurance for extreme weather?
      What is the cost of inaction going to be?

      • Bored 2.2.1
        19 September 2011 at 8:17 am

        Thanks DV, economic arguments against doing something about climate change are the equivalent of saying “lets not pay the executioner to sharpen the axe” which can only result in a more painful death. We would be better paying the executioner to stay well away from work.

        It never ceases to amaze me that climate change denying fuckwits (not harsh enough a term for these misanthropes) want their new luxury cars and all the trimmings today when they know that having that will kill their grandchildren. Selfish morons.

    • Draco T Bastard 2.3
      19 September 2011 at 12:40 pm

      it will likely hurt our economy…

      Ah, no, contrary to the belief of the banksters and economists the economy is not made of money but of the environment. Not having the ETS and other regulations on polluting is what will damage the economy.

  3. travellerev 3
    19 September 2011 at 8:17 am

    Here is a link to a pdf from AmpedStatus. The PDF is titled: Analysis of Financial Terrorism in America. A very interesting read!!!

    Here is another link to a video from Architects and Engineers. Listen to many architects, Engineers, Metallurgists, Physicists, Chemists, Demolition experts explain why WTC 7 and the Twin towers could not have collapsed the way they did and why the official conspiracy theory is a fraud.

    • Bored 3.1
      19 September 2011 at 8:37 am

      Trav, I have not given conspiracy theories a thought. To me who beside Bin Laden was involved in the Twin Towers is irrelevant. So I wont get involved in that argument except to say that I would put nothing corrupt beyond the madness that is todays crypto Fascist corporate America.

      What is undeniable is that the same people who brought us the “War on Terror” are actively involved in the corporate kleptocracy that is the occupation of Iran, the Wall St bail outs and the ongoing looting of the public purse world wide. It seems that within its birth the City on the Hill contained the seeds of its demise. What we are watching is the end of Empire, and the grasping for illusions of what is left by the Neros inside the palace.

      The Barbarians at the gates are the same that Rome faced, those who got tired of paying the cost of empire, the taxes now taken as derivative trades against the public purse. Its not a new story, it ends the same way, and its not fast.

      • travellerev 3.1.1
        19 September 2011 at 11:40 am

        Bored I hear you.
        The problem is that the families of those 3000 people want to know what really happened to their loved ones and they want to see those who did punished. For them 911 never stopped. Add to those the 70.000 first responders who are all getting sick and many of them dying and they want to know what happened and for them 911 never stopped. So it is important that we do get a real investigation not one which was rigged from day one.
        We need to for our own sake as much as for the countries they attacked and will attack in the future. The people they will kill in their sociopathic wars of aggression need for us to stand up and be counted.

        • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 11:55 am

          More pompous horseshit. The families of the 3000 dead already know what happened and only a handful of the deluded or desperate relatives have been hoodwinked into going along with the ‘enquiry needed’ charade.
           
          Still, I’m looking forward to the comprehensive results of the Toronto hearings which is going to expose the conspiracy once and for all. Or not.

          • travellerev 3.1.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 12:31 pm

            VOR you are a callous little man.

            For those of you who want to know why first responders and their families as well as the families of those who perished in the towers need to know here are some links to scientific studies done in order to understand why so many of these first responders are dying of lung related diseases.

            It turns out that nano thermite dust is found in the lung tissue of first responders who died in the aftermath of 911.

            These first responders who ran into those dust clouds on the day of 911 were this year not invited to attend the commemoration of the events because there would be no space for them to attend. 

            All these first responders are very aware they have been lied to and dumped on the scrapheap without so much as a cent towards hospital costs or help they desperately need. And yes they want a new and independent investigation too.
             
             

          • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1.1.2
            19 September 2011 at 12:36 pm

            Not callous at all and able to argue without starting my comments without abuse, thanks, Ev. Looking forward to you joining me on the moral high ground sometime, but in the meantime, please continue with your 6 hour a day fantasy fixation, it sure must beat working.

    • KJT 3.2
      19 September 2011 at 8:46 am

      Travellerev.

      I am afraid that you lost any credibility when you stated the ignition point of kerosene was the temperature it burns at in air.

      Just put a spectroscope on any plane burning in the open air. The temperature is much higher than 300 degrees C. And well over the heat stress limit of mild steel.

      The collapse of the buildings when the planes hit was well explained from an engineering standpoint.

      I would not put it past the CIA to organise a false flag operation. It has been done before,.
      But it was the planes that bought the building down. Helped by some under engineering in the construction. Some engineers think that they would have still fallen, after the plane impact load they were designed for!

      • travellerev 3.2.1
        19 September 2011 at 9:26 am

        Could you find were I said anything about Kerosene and at what temperature it burns?

        Most of the Kerosene burned off outside the buildings when the planes impacted. Here is a link to a video of a woman standing in the hole made by one of the planes. Someone here made the remark that this was possible because all the heat would rise up negating the argument that kerosene could melt steel below the impact points. Added to that kerosene heaters are not given to melting when lit. And my steel, aluminium and cast iron pans are just fine when I cook in them for as long as I want. No softening there.

        The buildings were over engineered and had huge redundancy built in. The responsible engineer asserted that the building could be hit by multiple planes without risk of collapse.

        • McFlock 3.2.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 10:50 am

          China Airlines flight 120.  Note that a plane, with only its own fuel and fittings, managed to melt part of its own roof off – and the photo is actually a reasonable size if you view it seperately.

          • travellerev 3.2.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 11:25 am

            Interesting since it was an explosion which ripped the roof of and not a fire melting it. So there goes that little theory. Kerosene does not melt steel. The aluminium skin of a 767 is from 0.5 mm onwards which is incredibly thin compared to the steel beams used in the buildings. Here is one analysis of the impacts.

            Kerosene does not melt steel beams or even soften them because they serve as giant heat sink and the kerosene burned of mostly outside the buildings anyway.

            • The Voice of Reason 3.2.1.1.1.1
              19 September 2011 at 11:51 am

              Er, no, there was no explosion in the body of the aircraft that ‘ripped the roof off’. From the wikipedia report of the inquiry findings:
               
              “Immediately after the evacuation of the last person (the Taiwanese captain), the number 1 engine and right wing fuel tanks exploded and burst violently into flames, igniting a blaze that destroyed the aircraft.”
               
               

            • McFlock 3.2.1.1.1.2
              19 September 2011 at 11:54 am

              Nope. Look at the curvature of the skin – it goes down and into the cabin, rather than up and out. And if you look at the video, at around 4m:18s the tail section collapses to the ground, even though there’s no explosion at the time, just fire. Given that an aircraft fire doesn’t weaken structural components, it must have been a controlled demolition. 

              • travellerev …
                19 September 2011 at 12:06 pm

                Airliner caught fire and exploded after landing at Naha Airport, Okinawa, Japan on August 20, 2007.

                Added to that: no amount of Kerosene could weaken all the steel sufficiently to make the twin towers come down in almost freefall speed.

                • McFlock …
                  19 September 2011 at 12:29 pm

                  There was an explosion quite early on. It left the sructure still self-supported, with the tail still in a straight line from the cockpit. A couple of minutes later, with no explosion just a fecking large fire, the tail collapsed onto the ground at near free-fall speeds. eeeep!

              • higherstandard …
                19 September 2011 at 12:13 pm

                Why bother trying to change the mind of someone who is happy in their beliefs and not doing any harm to others ?

                Eve has an unshakeable belief in her version of events and you’ll find replying to her posts a waste of bandwidth.

                • McFlock …
                  19 September 2011 at 12:46 pm

                  true. I just want to see how far the depth of belief goes – and near constant footage of an aircraft fire, self contained on the tarmac, is an interesting pointer that some video footage is irrefutable proof, and other footage is simply irrelevant propoganda. Much better to focus on the word “exploded” rather than look critically at the photos or video.
                    
                  And “no harm to others” is a debatable point. I certainly wouldn’t put it past any intelligence agency to fake a large-scale terrorist attack (indeed, the US military has definitely planned similar events such as false-flag assassinations of us citizens in the 1960s, and there’s a definite possibility that the FSB was connected with the apartment-building bombings that served as an excuse for the latest Chechnya occupation), but in this case I think it’s much more likely that a number of parties simply used the attacks as an excuse to obliterate civil liberties and invade a few countries. And ironically enough, I think that a number of intelligence professionals were the “good guys” pointing out that WMD and yellowcake purchase theories were essentially bunk. They were fired and covers were blown because of it. By only going for the worst-case scenario, Eve and her colleagues tar everyone who disagrees with the Fox News version of events with the same nutbar brush, and actually enables a cover-up to persist.

          • Ianupnorth 3.2.1.1.2
            19 September 2011 at 1:37 pm

            Em, its roof would be made of Aluminium…..

            • McFlock 3.2.1.1.2.1
              19 September 2011 at 3:34 pm

              yeah, but if the fires could have melted the aluminium then the falling molten metal in the WTC videos might have been something other than structural steel (i.e. several tonnes of aircraft aluminium), which means that the conclusion of multiple nano-thermite charges looks a little bit, well, nuts.

              • travellerev …
                19 September 2011 at 5:44 pm

                Here is the analysis of NISTs rapport on WTC7. The man talking is David Chandler who is a physicist and high school teacher who forced NIST to admit that at least eight floors of the building fell at free fall speed.
                Here is an article of Kevin Ryan in which he discusses the fact that Nano thermite has been found in the lung tissue of the first responders who died as a result of the diseases they developed as a result of the dust they breathed in on 911 and the days and weeks after.
                Here is a presentation of Niels Harrit a tenured Danish professor in chemistry specialised in Nano technology presenting the evidence concerning the WTC dust. All samples of dust from different sources but with impeccable chain of evidence history were found to contain Nano thermite. A material which can only be made in one or two special US military laboratories.

                • higherstandard …
                  19 September 2011 at 5:52 pm

                  wow that’s really interesting Eve – how much of this nano thermite would’ve been needed to bring down the twin towers ?

                  • travellerev …
                    20 September 2011 at 8:07 am

                    We don’t know Higher standard. A criminal investigation should be able to figure that one out.

                    What we do know is that there were power downs in the days leading up to 911.
                    Massive renovations in the areas that were hit by the planes and access to the buildings by unidentified individuals.
                    The elevator shafts were accessible and largely a realm of their own where people could work without being seen by (and in the case of painting Nano thermite on walls unheard) the normal inhabitants of the skyscrapers.

                    WTC7 had been under constant reconstruction in the three years leading up to the events of 911 when the bunker of Giuliani was build giving ample access to the building to other than the normal crowd.

                • McFlock …
                  19 September 2011 at 6:32 pm

                  Wow.
                    
                  Silicon compound and aluminium/Aluminium oxide in an area where two fecking great buildings were hit by large aircraft and subsequently collapsed. Hugely persuasive.
                  And several diseases of unknown cause have a higher incidence in the same site – it’s not related to burning buildins or pulverised concrete, it must be thermite.
                    
                  Or I could go back to the real world and say “hmmm, interesting – but based on the linked article, it’s not worth 3 hours of youtube watching, given the likelihood of a completely unpersuasive argument”.

                  • travellerev …
                    20 September 2011 at 7:50 am

                    Nano thermite doesn’t just happen. Here is Kevin Ryan’s (Chemist) analysis and professional opinion at the Toronto hearings and here is Nils Harrit (40 tenure at Copenhagen university as chemist and Nano technology specialist) giving his professional witness statement.

                    • McFlock …
                      20 September 2011 at 12:34 pm

                      Connecting to three hours of video when all that is relevant is the 30s bit where either of them produce evidence that the particles they found could only have been caused by the combustion of nanothermite (rather than a plane crash/fire/subsequent building collapse) would appear to be more an attempt to smother people with bullshit, rather than actually demonstrating a point.

                        
                       I know work lets me away with a lot, but even they might balk at me spending half a day watching 9/11 conspiracy videos.

                    • joe90 …
                      20 September 2011 at 12:38 pm

                      Set start time on youtube videos.

                      http://youtubetime.com/

                    • travellerev …
                      20 September 2011 at 3:47 pm

                      It doesn’t seem like too much to ask to listen for an hour per witness in one of the most notorious crimes in human history. But there you have it. If it doesn’t come in 30 second sound bites you can’t be bothered. Thank God the official Conspiracy theory came in 30 second sound bites you wouldn’t have known what to believe. Sad state of affairs really!

                    • McFlock …
                      20 September 2011 at 4:07 pm

                      Given that the article you linked to was not overly impressive, and neither was its source article, this is not a case of trying to persuade the blipvert generation. It’s just a case of expecting a concise answer to a concise question: why exactly should I assume that the aluminium particles found at WTC could only come from nanothermite, as opposed to other mechanisms that were present in the complex system that was the attack?
                        
                      That should not take two fucking hours to answer. It would probably involve particle size distribution or complex and rare structures (such as carbon nanofibres). But rather than knowing what you’re talking about, you seem to be under the assumption that if someone speaks for long enough, they must have addressed every point a sceptic could raise.

  4. Bored 4
    19 September 2011 at 8:40 am

    Thought for the day: why was there not an official Cycleway from Party Central to Eden Park?

    The answer is obvious: it would take too long to construct…lets face it the JK Memorial Cycleway is progressing at a rate of about 1 km per annum.

  5. thejackal 5
    19 September 2011 at 11:30 am

    John Key’s War on Terror

    Last Tuesday the Prime Minister of New Zealand announced that New Zealand has designated a further three international terrorist groups under the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002. However in April 2008, a EU Court of law ordered that the DHKP/C, not be included on terrorism lists…

  6. prism 6
    19 September 2011 at 12:36 pm

    It seems that there has been a cosy little back-scratching system by the Manawatu councils which has ensured that they excused their pollution spills of the Manawatu River with impunity. Very unsatisfactory.

    Perhaps the Government will take action against these complaisant polluters by appointing a Commissioner to get the right action carried out in a timely fashion, or in other words, to bloody do their job to stop dirtying the river when there are adverse circumstances, breakdowns of equipment, heavy rain overwhelming systems etc. I wonder how many neighbouring Councils are on the same matey wavelength – it seemed to me that the Canterbury Mayors seemed to be in cahoots.

  7. The Voice of Reason 7
    19 September 2011 at 1:00 pm

    Looks like the world is ready for a Palestinian State:
     
    Nearly half of those polled were in favour and only a fifth opposed. The vote from within Europe was even more emphatic. This can only be good news for both Palestine and Israel.
     
     

  8. prism 8
    19 September 2011 at 1:05 pm

    Sunday 18 September news about tourists risking injuries to save a couple imprisoned in their crashed car down a South Island gorge was inspiring. See Stuff http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/5645190/Tourists-to-the-rescue

    Newmans bus driver Tamati Maere said he was driving the West Coast to Queenstown route when several passengers yelled out they had seen a crashed car down a gorge….The two trees were stopping the car from plunging 60m into a chasm, Maere said….Maere, of Queenstown, asked for volunteers to help rescue the distressed Indian couple in the car, and South African and Australian World Cup rugby supporters stepped forward to help him, he said. They formed a human chain down a steep bank to the car, with Maere and one of the South African men jumping on to the car and pulling the couple out.

    These tourists were willing to step forward and help people in a foreign country. What a contrast to what happened at Pike River and Christchurch. There the authorities took over and froze out those who would have volunteered to act (while taking all precautions possible).

  9. thejackal 9
    19 September 2011 at 1:46 pm

    Breaking news:

    Greenpeace and te Whānau-ā-Apanui today filed a judicial review challenging the Government’s decision to issue Brazilian oil giant Petrobras a permit for deep sea oil exploration off the East Cape.

  10. Jum 10
    19 September 2011 at 2:23 pm

    ‘Finance Minister Bill English leaves tomorrow for New York and Washington DC, where he will visit the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, and meet Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke’

    Crikey – what else is he selling off that belongs to us, apart from our sovereignty, our strategic and valuable assets and dividends, that we already know about? More importantly, what secret neoconservative deals will be made there behind our backs and signed off?

    And will it be by lunchtime?

    Will the TPPA have a place on their secret agenda? Is he asking for more money to give in huge tax cuts mainly to those that don’t need them.

    He’s back on 27 September. What about a flashmob protest gathering at the airport to tell him what New Zealanders think of his family silver sell off? Labour could take some STOP ASSET SALES signs with them just to remind bilious bill that those assets belong to all of us; they are only in his government’s care. If he sells them even partly, then he is a thief and so is the rest of his government.

    We also know he is a liar, just like the prime minister. Whatever he reports back will not be the real reason he was there.

  11. Pete George 11
    19 September 2011 at 4:06 pm

    I simply asked “shouldn’t you be including an authorisation statement with electioneering posts?” It wasn’t an attack, I was asking the question in what I think was (and intended) in a reasonable way. I’ve heard differing opinions. The electoral law is struggling on dealing with internet use, and I think it does on this.

    If it’s effectively anything goes on the Internet what’s the point of authorisation statements at all?

    [lprent: If you wanted to find out the legal position, then talk to the election commission. But writing a comment about it is just silly. The legislation was pretty clear last time and it is essentially the same this time.

    Like me, Anthony isn’t paid by anyone for political work – he is a volunteer both here and in a political party. He is doing it on a blog and/or news site. And he is clearly separating his own opinion from the NZLP press statement.

    It is about as unambiguous as it gets with this legislation because all of those are explicitly covered in the legislation as exemptions.

    It is an attack in my terms because going for the author of a post in their post rather than the content of a post is something that has never been allowed here. I regard it as being a self-martyrdom offense because it discourages authors from writing and is a standard technique to try to stifle authors. It is also one of the standard methods used for diversion trolling in a post to avoid discussion of the content of the post.

    If you wanted to raise it as topic, then you should have done so in OpenMike with Anthony as an example. We could have discussed your comments and their lack of a disclaimer. How much money DPF earns directly or indirectly from the National party. How a sickness benificary is able to run a web server that sometimes gets significiant traffic (and does WINZ know about the sites advertising?), etc etc.

    I’d have been more lenient for it to be a topic there than here. ]

  12. mickysavage 12
    19 September 2011 at 4:32 pm

    The Government is responding to the Supreme Court decision which excluded evidence obtained in the Urewera case by appointing an expert panel which will consider whether there needs to be an increase in Police powers or whether existing powers are sufficient.
     
    The Panel will comprise of legal and community members and a representative nominated by Tuhoe as an interested party will be included.  The panel will be expected to travel throughout New Zealand and an extended consultation period is allowed for.  The Government is concerned that there should be a proper balance between state power and individual rights and expections of privacy and full involvement of New Zealand’s citizens is expected.
     
    Nah just joking, the Government is going to ram legislation through Parliament next week.

    • gobsmacked 12.1
      19 September 2011 at 4:59 pm

      The government will ram it through. It’s a disgrace.

      Also disgraceful would be Labour supporting this. On past performance, I’m betting they’ll speak against and vote for. Hope I’m wrong.

        • big bruv 12.1.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 7:34 pm

          Lol…Micky getting all bent out of shape about retrospective legislation.

          What a short and selective memory you have Micky.

          • Campbell Larsen 12.1.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 8:00 pm

            The police must have known that they were acting outside of the law – they took a risk knowing that it would be tested in court – it was, and their actions were found to unlawful.
            For the government to then ignore due process and change the law retrospectively and without adequate consultation makes a mockery of our laws and court system.
            The police are not allowed to do whatever they want or to interpret the law however they please and the government should be insisting that they follow the law as it stands at the time rather than legitimizing this ‘organized criminal behaviour’ from those charged with upholding the law.

            • crustykev 12.1.1.1.1.1
              29 September 2011 at 5:52 pm

              I dont know anyone who didnt believe that the Police had the right to covertly video suspects on private property.
              I dont see why the Police would have believed any different.
              And they did have that right until a smart lawyer found a weakness in the law to defend his client.

    • McFlock 12.2
      19 September 2011 at 5:03 pm

      Sigh. In an effort to look at the bright side of the shiney rock someone’s hitting us in the head with, if they say “next week” would that be cutting a couple of hours out of the members’ day, thus narrowing the window for the VSM bill?
        
      Jeez, there are so many anti-democratic actions going on, they’re getting in each other’s way.

      • big bruv 12.2.1
        19 September 2011 at 7:55 pm

        VSM is anti democratic?

        Only a lefty could come up with that.

        • McFlock 12.2.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 10:44 pm

          given that it overrules the outcome of democratic votes by students – the only people affected by student association membership – yeah, it is antidemocratic

    • Campbell Larsen 12.3
      19 September 2011 at 7:04 pm

      The law applies to everyone except the police it seems. No other gang has the ability to have legislation enacted to make their offending legal.
      If we cannot trust the police to act lawfully now then how can we trust them with greater powers?

      • Draco T Bastard 12.3.1
        19 September 2011 at 10:08 pm

        The police have never been trustworthy – that’s why governments originally limited their powers.

    • felix 12.4
      19 September 2011 at 8:45 pm

      http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1109/S00275/unlawful-police-conduct-no-surprise.htm

      The police in this country act as if the law does not apply to them. The fact that they now have 40 cases and 50 operations which may be thrown out because of illegal surveillance should be cause for the government to seriously look at police culture and actions, not change the law to allow them to break it. It is an outrage that John Key is talking about interfering with the Supreme Court. The chief justice makes it clear in her ruling that the government has known for years that the police do not have this power and have been advised to do something about it. They never have. Now that the police have been caught out breaking the law, they government says it will retrospectively change the law. This is exactly what a police state looks and acts like.’

      Bang on.

  13. Penny Bright 13
    19 September 2011 at 5:12 pm

    Where’s the NZ Government version of this USA ‘Project On Government Oversight (POGO)’?

    Given the amount of private sector contracting at central and local government in NZ – isn’t it high time to check the ‘cost-effectiveness’ of this expenditure of public monies?

    What if the demand to ‘cut out the contractors’ and return public services back to ‘in-house’ provision starts to get some real traction before this 2011 election?

    Wouldn’t a massive cutback on this ‘corporate welfare’ free up a lot more public money for social welfare – and look help to look after the ‘needy’ rather than the ‘greedy’?

    In case you missed this first-ever USA comparison of the FACTS against the MANTRA – that ‘public is bad – private is good’?

    A first-ever USA comparison of the cost-effectiveness of the private ‘contractocracy’ vs the public ‘bureaucracy’?

    http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/reports/contract-oversight/bad-business/co-gp-20110913.html

    “Executive Summary

    Based on the current public debate regarding the salary comparisons of federal and private sector employees, the Project On Government Oversight (POGO)[1] decided to take on the task of doing what others have not—comparing total annual compensation for federal and private sector employees with federal contractor billing rates in order to determine whether the current costs of federal service contracting serves the public interest.

    The current debate over pay differentials largely relies on the theory that the government pays private sector compensation rates when it outsources services. This report proves otherwise: in fact, it shows that the government actually pays service contractors at rates far exceeding the cost of employing federal employees to perform comparable functions.

    POGO’s study analyzed the total compensation paid to federal and private sector employees, and annual billing rates for contractor employees across 35 occupational classifications covering over 550 service activities. Our findings were shocking—POGO estimates the government pays billions more annually in taxpayer dollars to hire contractors than it would to hire federal employees to perform comparable services.

    Specifically, POGO’s study shows that the federal government approves service contract billing rates—deemed fair and reasonable—that pay contractors 1.83 times more than the government pays federal employees in total compensation, and more than 2 times the total compensation paid in the private sector for comparable services.

    Additional key findings include:

    Federal government employees were less expensive than contractors in 33 of the 35 occupational classifications POGO reviewed.

    In one instance, contractor billing rates were nearly 5 times more than the full compensation paid to federal employees performing comparable services.

    Private sector compensation was lower than contractor billing rates in all 35 occupational classifications we reviewed.

    The federal government has failed to determine how much money it saves or wastes by outsourcing, insourcing, or retaining services, and has no system for doing so.”

    Penny Bright. Independent ‘Public Watchdog’ Candidate for Epsom.

  14. thejackal 14
    19 September 2011 at 5:36 pm

    Prime Minister’s Office Fail

    You have to wonder why the Prime Minister’s office felt so hard done by the TVNZ story into New Zealand’s biggest BMW dealership donating $50,000 to the National Party soon after a contract was signed for the manufacturer to provide a new fleet of cars for Government ministers…

  15. happynz 15
    19 September 2011 at 5:43 pm

    Bugger…another lusty jolt from beneath the dirt. Ain’t living in Christchurch grand? 🙂

  16. thejackal 16
    19 September 2011 at 6:34 pm

    Defaming David Farrar

    David Farrar must have a very low sense of self worth if he values his integrity so poorly… He defines the reason for not taking defamation cases against his many detractors because he perceives them to be without credibility. It’s a weak argument at best. Farrar doesn’t take defamation cases because he knows he would loose…

  17. Campbell Larsen 17
    19 September 2011 at 7:19 pm

    I wish the mad butcher would hurry up and die.
    Fuck Close Up for giving this National party cheerleader a free slot in primetime.

    • big bruv 17.1
      19 September 2011 at 7:46 pm

      Are you going to allow this type of thing Iprent?

      If I said the same thing about a Labour supporter you would ban me in a heartbeat.

      Or it this another example of the standards hypocrisy?

      [lprent: Actually no.

      When I land on this type of anger/trolling style (on whatever side) it is usually either a newbie (who is doing it mostly out of ignorance of consequences and needs to learn them) or it is someone who is making a habit of it (gets tiresome rapidly) or it is someone who keeps repeating slogans rather than arguing.

      Campbell isn’t a newbie, doesn’t make a habit of it, and it has no repetitive slogans. We let everyone get away with getting a bit wound up if they don’t have a record of doing it.

      How do you think I don’t wind up moderating you all of time? It usually only happens when you start getting repetitive and usually those events are damn near years apart. It isn’t the opinions that count for moderation it is the behavior.

      Incidentally, I think that it has been months since I last banned someone for trolling or simple bad behavior. Most of the time these days it is for making stupid comments requiring site defense… ]

    • higherstandard 17.2
      19 September 2011 at 8:03 pm

      And Peter supported Helen Clark when she was PM he is a good NZer who hardly ever has a bad word to say about anyone, and is extremely generous with his time and wealth….. you however are a piece of filth.

      • Campbell Larsen 17.2.1
        19 September 2011 at 8:19 pm

        I am offended by his blatant attempt to influence voters to vote for Shonkey via a free slot on taxpayer funded television. He is entitled to his personal opinions, as am I, however the people of NZ do not owe that man a soapbox, irrespective of any good deeds he may have done.
        Our political process is not helped by ‘celebrity endorsement’ and a complacent media which allows it to happen.
        That face that you do not like me pointing this out does not surprise me, nor concern me, I am not interested in impressing or pleasing you.

        • big bruv 17.2.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 8:53 pm

          You really are full of shit Campbell.

          I bet you had no problem when Sir Ed cheered like a trained monkey for the previous hideous thing we called a PM, I bet you did not burst into life when Sir Peter championed the previous hideous thing we called a PM.

          No, you have a problem with anybody who speaks in favour of Key, you are just another in the long line of Labour hypocrites and a shinning example of why Labour were so keen on the EFA to silence all opposition.

          • Campbell Larsen 17.2.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 9:17 pm

            You are making unwarranted assumptions and have a comprehension problem as well.

            I repeat – “our political process is not helped by celebrity endorsement and a complacent media which allows it to happen” I stand by this statement and would object to anyone cashing in their mana, playing the cancer sympathy card and telling people who to vote for – especially on taxpayer funded TV.

            The EFA as everyone with even half a brain knows was an attempt to prevent undue influence by lobby groups, foreigners and the very wealthy on our elections. One person, one vote is fundamental to any democracy.

            • big bruv 17.2.1.1.1.1
              19 September 2011 at 9:31 pm

              “The EFA as everyone with even half a brain knows was an attempt to prevent undue influence by lobby groups,”

              Unless of course that lobby group happened to be a union.

              Seriously Campbell, do you ever stop and question the rank hypocrisy of the Labour party?

              The EFA was a cynical attempt by a corrupt government to silence those who dared speak out against them.

    • Brett Dale 17.3
      19 September 2011 at 9:02 pm

      Campbell larsen:

      Just read your post about how you wish the mad butcher, would hurry up and die.

      Can you see how this might upset people, thats a pretty disgusting thing to say
      dont you think?

      Im guessing this site doesnt have mods?

      [lprent: It does. However you don’t set the moderation policy here. You live within them. ]

      • big bruv 17.3.1
        19 September 2011 at 9:07 pm

        Oh it does have mods Brett, but only if you point out the truth about the Labour party.

        Anything not approved by head office is deleted immediately.

        [lprent: You have read the policy recently haven’t you? The section on self-martyrdom offenses. Stupid offenses like attacking your hosts with accusations that you cannot substantiate? It is after all the most common reason to cop a ban these days… ]

        • higherstandard 17.3.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 9:11 pm

          I was fucking disgusted by some nut who made a similar filthy comment about Jim Anderton while I don’t agree with Jim’s politics there’s no need to stoop so low.

          [As lprent pointed out above the moderators frequently allow people to make fools of themselves as long as they don’t become too tedious about it, or attack the site and it’s authors. For instance when bb in the comment above suggests that anything ‘not approved by head office’ will get deleted …he’s making a fool of himself. But he’s still here. RL] [Blatant racism, sexism and pointless insults are on a much shorter fuse. ]

          • higherstandard 17.3.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 10:26 pm

            If the piece of filth Campbell Larsen had said the same of a perceived champion of the left he’d have been banned in a heat beat this blog is

            [lprent: Nope. I cannot recall doing that.

            Mostly I ban because people indulge in self-martyrdom. I also ban people because they are simply too damn boring for me to read. If I can’t be bothered reading it with my reading speeds then no-one else will be arsed doing it.

            For example….

            1. I have banned people for deliberate repetitive misspelling of peoples names. Boring, stupid and repetitive. It also involves me in work because I usually have to fetch their comments out of auto-moderation. I’ve usually put the name or phrase in there because it is a good signature of an idiot. That is because I’ve previously banned others that use the same daft phrase over and over and over again apparently because they are incapable of actually using their brain…

            2. I have banned for attacking the people that run this site directly or indirectly. That is just stupid because they are crapping in our house on work that we spend far more time and effort on than they do. I don’t mind people informing us of what they think is an issue or problem or suggesting a course of action. An ‘attack’ is either an insinuation, accusation, loud criticism or a demand to change our policies. I simply can’t be bothered with people who do it because invariably we have been through exactly the same discussion several times already in any given year….

            3. I have banned because I’m simply sick of reading someones 15 content free comments in one moderating session. Do you realize how tedious it is to read that type of repetitive sloganeering drivel (also why I don’t listen to commercial radio or watch very much TV).

            4. I have banned because I’m bored with reading the same basic comment across several different posts. Just because everyone else doesn’t see it doesn’t mean that I don’t as well. Stupid, repetitive and even spambots usually do it better.

            5. I have banned because someone has just written 10 or so comments that are purely attacking other commentators without providing any actual discussion. I kind of enjoy the witty put downs, but the turgid ones that look like someone rediscovered an alt.x forum from the early 90’s usenet. I was good at the flaming then until I got bored with it and it hasn’t grown any more interesting in the last 20 years. I usually try to demonstrate how it is done at a distinctly personal level. My explanation usually involves an allusion to their propensity for wanking in public.

            6. I’ve banned because someone appears to be trying to divert comments in a post away from the posts topic. Trying hijack a posts comments on someones site is simply stupid

            7. You will catch those types of bans if you write comments that are clearly just straight bigotry; typically racist, homophobic, sexist or the like. But that is simply because I don’t like people who are stupid enough to make them. But I tend to be somewhat more tolerant than some of the other moderators here.

            8. I ban when people cause me excessive amounts of boring work. This might be having to write long explanations about why and when I ban…… After all someone is demanding directly or indirectly some of my time. If I feel that it is a waste of my time then I will remove the time drain…]

            • higherstandard 17.3.1.1.1.1
              20 September 2011 at 3:31 pm

              Nah Lynn you ban on impulse when and if you feel like it.

              Campbell is a turd, a labour supporting turd, but none the less a turd and a smelly wet one at that.

              • lprent …
                20 September 2011 at 10:30 pm

                More like when and if I have time. I’m afraid that software completion dates severely cut into my time for most things…

                There is an impulse component. It generally happens when I get irritated with writing notes.

                BTW: Your comments are verging back to one and two liners with little wit or content. You realize that is dangerous don’t you? I have seen you cycle through the pattern previously so I tend to cut a lot of leeway.

          • crustykev 17.3.1.1.2
            29 September 2011 at 6:10 pm

            Sorry moderator but thats not true.
            This is my second visit to the Standard.
            On my first visit, I earnt a ban, (from moderator Trevor, (always wondered if it was Mr Mallard) for pointing out H2 was the source of approval, and thus knew all about the perceived excessive spending of Chris Carter. and the video habits of Shane Jones.
            And if H2 knew, then H1 as a matter of political expediency would be told anything useful.
            What better way to keep Shane Jones in line than remind him of his video habits.

            Now those comments can be construed as a criticism of the Labour Party but not this site.
            But since you have just admitted they are one and the same, after all this site was hosted by Labour for years, I guess I’m about to cop another ban, and once again free speech will be the loser.

            Labour knows all about the restriction of free speech and retrospective legislation.
            It used the EFA to quash free speech and to retrospectively legalise the theft of $840,000 of public money.

            However, I have to say I came here to read the anti-Peter Leitch comments, and I’m pleased to see that that comment has been treated with the disdain it deserves.
            Whether he chooses to vote for Labour or National, Peter Leitch has more generosity in his heart than all of us put together, and he deserves praise, not a cheap shot from behind the keyboard of some anonymous non-achieving nobody.

            [lprent: There has never been a moderator here who is called Trevor. I suspect that you have this site confused with Red Alert (the Labour MP’s blog site) where Trevor Mallard does indeed moderate.

            However, you were simply wrong.

            The review of spending by MP’s and ministers is done by parliamentary services and has nothing to do with the prime ministers department. If you’re dumb enough to make a basic mistake like that then many sites will tend to view you as just being another stupid troll saying nothing accurately. But merely reguigitating crap read elsewhere without checking or thinking it through. That is not of much value for any of the participants on the site (I’m afraid that even the right wing commentators here don’t like trolls much). I have a history of giving apparent troll commentators a bit of rope to find out if they can think for themselves. If they cannot, then I will thoroughly ban them.

            This site has been funded by me for the first years of its life. These days it is funded by advertising. It has either been on my systems or those that I pay for apart from 3 weeks where it was on another friendly activists server which turned to to have been donated to Labour who’d offloaded running it to the friend.

            I suggest that you read the policy to find out the general bounds of behavior. But really it comes down to not being too stupid and boring the crap out of us. Your job to see if you can achieve a basic standard.

            Trying to tell me our own history isn’t a good start. It tends to indicate that you are an idiot. And studidty is a banning offense around here. ]

      • Campbell Larsen 17.3.2
        19 September 2011 at 9:35 pm

        Brett, HS and bruv, falling over themselves to defend their parties cheerleader, the butcher, lest his saintly shine be tarnished by his blatant electioneering.

        [lprent: We also ban for the general offense of flame starting. Defending yourself is fine. Acting like you have a divine right to spatter alcohol on a heated discussion without any obvious point isn’t. ]

        • big bruv 17.3.2.1
          19 September 2011 at 9:54 pm

          Campbell

          You really are a moron.

          Sir Peter is hardly what anybody would call a cheerleader for the right, the man has spent a lifetime helping those who life has dealt a rough hand, if anything his natural politics are left of centre. However, he has no time for bludgers, he will always lend a hand to those who want to help themselves or to those who through no fault of their own have fallen on hard times.

          You should note (I imagine you did not hear this part because you were already foaming at the mouth) that Sir Peter did not endorse the National party, he endorsed John Key.

          Now, if you had half a brain cell you would realise that John Key is far from my favourite politician, I think he is weak and leans far to much to the left, however only the most closed minded idiot (of which you are one) would deny that Key is a throughly decent chap and a bloody nice bloke. Incidentally there are current Labour MP’s who I would class in the same category, my dislike of left wing politics does not preclude me from liking certain Labour MP’s, nor do I feel that I have to attack them with stupid comments such as the one you have posted here tonight.

          Oh, and those of you who are dumb enough to suggest that Sir Peter supports Key because of a tax cut only show how ignorant you really are, Sir Peter has not owned the mad butcher business for some time now, the man is basically retired.

          • felix 17.3.2.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 10:16 pm

            Hahaha I love it when you idiots inadvertently admit that caring for others less fortunate is a leftie trait.

            Even your mate John Keys did it while trying to cover his tory arse the other week, saying that by “socialist streak” he just meant caring.

            Fuckwits.

            • rosy 17.3.2.1.1.1
              19 September 2011 at 10:22 pm

              Yep. Same as consulting with the community… and that’s exactly why NAct ‘initiatives’ Canterbury and Auckland are turning to custard. Because they don’t.

            • big bruv 17.3.2.1.1.2
              19 September 2011 at 10:32 pm

              I care for those less fortunate, fate can be a right bastard at times.

              Your comment again demonstrates the lies of the left, most Kiwis want to help those who fall on hard times through no fault of their own, most Kiwis want to make sure that some poor bastard who faces the prospect of unemployment has enough money to feed his kids and pay his mortgage, these people do not get anywhere enough assistance from this government or the previous governments.
              The same can be said for the few genuine sickness and invalid beneficiaries, those people deserve much more than we already give them and I am happy to have my money go their way.

              What I don’t care about are the legions of parasites, bludgers and DPB slappers that the left continue to bribe with my money in exchange for votes, if you want to know why genuine people do not receive enough via the benefit system then you only need to look at the weak way successive governments have dealt with those who do not want to work.

              Key might not be right when he says we all have a socialist streak but he is right if he means that we care about those who fall on hard times through no fault of their own.
              Those who make no effort or waste the chances they are given in life deserve nothing from me nor do they deserve any of my money.

          • Jum 17.3.2.1.2
            19 September 2011 at 11:00 pm

            oh yes big bruv, Mike Morton now owns The Mad Butcher. Mike Morton must have been earning a huge salary to be able to buy all The Mad Butchers. Oh yes, he just happens to be partnered with Peter’s daughter, Julie. So the tax cuts stay in the family.

            But, you’ve made a very important observation, big bruv.

            Once you have no job or no business you don’t get tax cuts.

            So not only do tax cuts go mostly to the highest 10% of business or individuals but many people in New Zealand don’t get them at all.

            • rosy 17.3.2.1.2.1
              19 September 2011 at 11:35 pm

              Once you have no job or no business you don’t get tax cuts.
              Except in this case he does get all that profit from the business he sold capital gains tax-free and tucked away tidy trust.

        • higherstandard 17.3.2.2
          19 September 2011 at 10:30 pm

          You are a bit dense aren’t you – i’m hardly defending Peter because of Key i’m defending him because he’s a good chap who has done a huge amount for the community – he has always siad that the public should get behind which ever PM and party is in power, it’s the way he is.

          And I suppose you are just the way you are – a piece of dog shit that we should remove from our boot.

        • hawk 17.3.2.3
          27 September 2011 at 7:05 pm

          Larsen, you sound like a gutless little wimp.

          It must make you feel a big man to wish death upon a person from behind the screen, I really think if you have any balls at all you would front up to Leitch and say it to him in person.

          What a fuck wit……

          • Colonial Viper 17.3.2.3.1
            30 September 2011 at 12:35 am

            Love how these little Right Wing tramps pop up out of the woodwork and ride their moral high horse into The Standard town.

            Go away.

          • Jum 17.3.2.3.2
            30 September 2011 at 12:46 am

            Hawk,

            I would front up to Peter Leitch, if we’re ever in the same room together, to tell him that in an election year his political posturing is disgraceful, and if he is using his illness to earn a sympathy vote for Key, that is abhorrent.

            • Colonial Viper 17.3.2.3.2.1
              30 September 2011 at 1:17 am

              Leitch must know that the bottom 50% of NZers whom he has been trying to help in so many ways over years is getting royally shafted by Key and the NATs.

              I wonder what his game in. I think this is about securing NAT support for league in general and the Warriors in particular.

    • Jum 17.4
      19 September 2011 at 9:45 pm

      What amazes me about life and death, Campbell Larsen, is that it is always the wrong people who die. It is a shame that Peter may die. Many of us survive cancer; it’s no longer that uncommon.

      If however you are saying that Peter the butcher is deliberately using his cancer card to plump for the Key government to be voted in again, that is disgraceful and totally beneath what Peter should stand for – an apolitical stance on strengthening New Zealand, especially youth, through policies that help everyone not just the rich.

      As for those that constantly outwit the ‘final destination’:

      Look at Roger Douglas, who has destroyed so many lives over the past decades, yet was knighted for it.

      Look at Don Brash, who would like to destroy as many lives over future decades and will no doubt be knighted for it.

      But there is always a new ‘final destination’ coming to a town near you…

      • big bruv 17.4.1
        19 September 2011 at 9:59 pm

        Jum

        It’s Sir Roger Douglas, just in case you forgot.

        And he was knighted for saving this country from financial disaster, he was also the very best finance minister this nation has ever had.

        And, he was a Labour MP, something you guys should be proud of.

        • Jum 17.4.1.1
          19 September 2011 at 10:25 pm

          aye, ye’re gettin a bit short sighted big bruv. I’ve reprinted the whole sentence for you.

          ‘Look at Roger Douglas, who has destroyed so many lives over the past decades, yet was knighted for it.’

          There are so many new zealanders now with knighthoods that don’t deserve them; I thought Peter did. I had placed him alongside Sir Ed. Not now.

          Douglas was not knighted for saving our country; he was knighted for betraying it. He only ever tells people what they can get money wise; he never remembers to tell them what they will lose. It’s like dealing with the devil; if you deal with Key, big bruv, you will know that already.

          Read a bit of Jesson, big bruv. Douglas was brought in. There was nothing remotely good about his time spent selling off New Zealand and betraying New Zealanders. He formed act which is absolute proof that he never had any sort of empathy for the workers. He was a business rotundtable man, bought and sold.

          • big bruv 17.4.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 10:41 pm

            Jum

            So for supporting John Key, Sir Peter is no longer deserving of a knighthood?

            On that basis I would have to suggest that Sir Ed should have been stripped of his knighthood, a lifetime of support for the Labour party and endless photo ops for the previous PM makes him guilty of the same thing that you charge Sir Peter with.

            But no doubt you will find some hypocritical way of justifying Sir Ed’s behaviour.

            As for Sir Roger, well even you do not really believe he betrayed NZ, you know full well that he was the reason that the NZ economy was able to be so buoyant for most of the 90’s.
            The work Sir Roger and Ruth Richardson put in enabled NZ to do well, the real criminal of the 90’s was Cullen who squandered the best economic conditions in living memory.

            But..you know all that, you are just parroting the usual bullshit lines of the left.

            • Jum 17.4.1.1.1.1
              19 September 2011 at 11:55 pm

              big bruv,

              I don’t ever remember Sir Ed saying he supported or voted for Labour. They were buddies because of the mountain climbing/hiking interest.

              Now all we have is the mincing slug and big bruv and the leeches.

              ‘But..you know all that, you are just parroting the usual bullshit lines of the neoconservative rightwing.’

              • Matthew Hooton …
                29 September 2011 at 6:45 am

                Jum at 11.55 pm 19 September

                You say you don’t remember Sir Ed saying he supported or voted for Labour, and that he and Clark were buddies because of the mountain climbing/hiking interest.

                Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_for_Rowling Sir Ed was a strong, public supporter of Labour from the mid-1970s. I don’t remember anyone from the National Party holding this against him let alone saying they wish he would die. He was (and remains) a national icon. To a lesser extent, so is the Mad Butcher.

                PS, actually I think (but am not sure) that Sir Ed distanced himself from Labour when he thought it was too right wing in the 1980s and then of course was close to Helen Clark when he thought the party returned to its principles. Again, points above apply. No one ever held any of this against him or wished him dead one way or the other.

                • logie97 …
                  29 September 2011 at 7:03 am

                  Citizens for Rowling was led by a disaffected National man (David Exel).
                  They were worried about the style of Muldoon – period.

                  Exel was a particularly interesting character because he aspired to be a National MP and Muldoon blocked it. When he tried to espouse left-wing philosophy, he sounded empty, as was his campaign.

                • Jum …
                  30 September 2011 at 12:18 am

                  Speaking of leeches, Matthew Hooten, are you still acting as a lobbyist for the tobacco companies?

                  I always wondered if that serpent like whisper you use on the radio was caused by too much smoking or passive smoking at the foot of Steven Joyce’s poisonous hollow men PR.

                  As for learning that Sir Ed was a Labour supporter, I could not be more delighted. Not only is the man an icon but he had good taste in political parties as well. Thank you so much for that news.

                  And like you I didn’t wish Peter Leitch dead either. I most certainly did say, however, if he used his cancer card in any way to push a political favourite then he has earned my contempt. As for placing him in the same category as Sir Ed; I don’t think so. Leitch is certainly a worthy philanthropist and did help many organisations but let’s not pretend he is even on the same mountain range as Sir Ed.

                  I do wonder, and perhaps you can answer this for me, Matthew, have you been advising Key’s backers to pay for these so called media celebrities to make these comments praising Key when they all stand to gain, or have already gained, from his political position?

                  There is Leitch, Keven Black who was notorious for his vicious radio attacks against Helen Clark, praising Key in an interview, the billboards of Matthew Ridge attacking Labour voters – no wonder he’s smiling; he hates Labour and he’s getting his advertising free from the backers of NAct.

                  All in all, I do believe NAct is actually outdoing itself in its nasty tricks department. If voters cannot see what’s happening and the selling out of them by their own iconic figures, then greed wins the day, Matthew, and I’m sure you can make a lot of money in the future from sucking on his every word.

                  Doesn’t stop me feeling disgusted by these tactics. There is no honour among thieves, especially rightwing thieves.

            • Vicky32 17.4.1.1.1.2
              20 September 2011 at 3:22 pm

              you know full well that he was the reason that the NZ economy was able to be so buoyant for most of the 90′s.

              What planet were you living on in the 1990s? The economy was anything but buoyant.

      • felix 17.4.2
        19 September 2011 at 10:12 pm

        “What amazes me about life and death, Campbell Larsen, is that it is always the wrong people who die.”

        Aye, Lennon & Harrison both gone while McCartney still walks the fucking earth.

    • Vicky32 17.5
      20 September 2011 at 3:06 pm

      I wish the mad butcher would hurry up and die.

      His radio advert weirds me out… Sing.. “You can’t beat/the Mad Butcher’s meat” – and I ask, who on earth would want to?

    • P Schwartz 17.6
      27 September 2011 at 4:35 pm

      @ Campbell Larsen,

      Yeah, a guy who has supported the working class sport of League & the Warriors in good times & bad, who has raised millions in charity, a lot of which has gone into South Auckland health organisations, is someone you just wish would hurry up and die.

      Shame on you.

      • Colonial Viper 17.6.1
        30 September 2011 at 1:19 am

        Another dumbass Right Winger popping up out of the woodwork, riding in on his moral high horse into The Standard town.

        Go away.

        • higherstandard 17.6.1.1
          30 September 2011 at 7:37 am

          All Campbell needed to do was apologise for his electronic outburst and withdraw it – he did not and the sites mods seemed intent on defending him……. odd n’est pas ?

          • Adele 17.6.1.1.1
            30 September 2011 at 7:54 am

            Big deal that Campbell Larsen has wished that the Mad Butcher would just hurry up and die. Unlikely that the Mad Butcher will be listening to Campbell Larsen, or that the Mad Butcher will be overly sensitive to the rantings found on the internet, or that he will be distraught that not everyone loves his meat. Will Campbell Larsen’s wishes somehow bring on the early death of the Mad Butcher? I don’t think so, unless Campbell is into voodoo and has cast a spell over the Mad Butcher using a chicken flavoured sausage.

            How many of you have actually lived in South Auckland for longer than the drive to the airport? South Auckland made the Mad Butcher rich – not the other way round.

            • higherstandard 17.6.1.1.1.1
              30 September 2011 at 8:15 am

              What a bitter nasty piece of work you are Adele.

              Still I suppose when you give your support to a party led by a man who has regularly uttered silly bigoted comments and other ill tempered outbursts such as calling for Phil Goff to be put up against a wall and shot and comparing Brash to Hitler it’s not surprising that your views are a bit strange.

              • Jum …
                30 September 2011 at 9:30 am

                higherstandard,

                Don’t be ridiculous higherstandard; Adele’s post was ribald and intimately associated with what Leitch does.

                Now, if you want something really nasty, try this:

                ” higherstandard 27.1.1.1
                20 September 2011 at 8:31 pm

                “You will get no more from me on this.”

                Right then. Best you get back to your pics of Helen, jar of vaseline and Trevor Mallard shaped dildo.”

                (or this):

                ‘ higherstandard 16.3.1.1.1.1
                20 September 2011 at 3:31 pm

                Campbell is a turd, a labour supporting turd, but none the less a turd and a smelly wet one at that ‘

                ‘higher standard’? That’s a joke.

  18. logie97 18
    19 September 2011 at 7:27 pm

    Apparently the Mad Butcher is Joky Hen’s best Mate, Mate, Mate.
    For some reason, he was on Close Up and Sainsbury was able to
    get him to talk about his largesse. There didn’t seem to be any other
    reason… oh except for the erstwhile Helen Clark supporter to announce
    that his new mate is the man for the job to get us out of whatever morass
    we currently find ourselves in. No Peter, unless you know otherwise,
    this administration has given you a big tax cut and that’s about it.
    Aspirational indeed. (And Helen Clark was a genuine league supporter – and you should know that…)

    • big bruv 18.1
      19 September 2011 at 7:49 pm

      You people really are the lowest fiorm of life.

      Sir Peter has done more for the poor in NZ than the lot of you put together yet the moment he says that he is a fan of John Key’s you attack him.

      I knew that a lot of you were feral but I had no idea that your small minded hatred ran so deep.

      Oh and Campbell Larsen, you are a cunt.

      • Campbell Larsen 18.1.1
        19 September 2011 at 8:03 pm

        And you sir are a Troll.
        If he wanted respect The Butcher should have stayed out of politics.

      • Ianupnorth 18.1.2
        19 September 2011 at 8:37 pm

        BB, John Key has done more harm to the poor in this country than you will ever know. Yet again you generalise as to who has done what

        Sir Peter has done more for the poor in NZ than the lot of you put together yet the moment he says that he is a fan of John Key’s you attack him.

        How the hell would you know what any of us have done; more to the point, what exactly are you doing to improve the health, well-being, prosperity and future for other Kiwi’s? All I ever see you do is gloat, praise the greed of the current government and generally act liked a very spoilt brat.

        Whilst Campbell’s outburst is below the belt, you need to recognise that your continual trolling and bullshitting on here cannot be left unchecked.

        • big bruv 18.1.2.1
          19 September 2011 at 8:49 pm

          Ian

          I am amazed that the lengths you people will go to to justify the words of a cunt like Campbell (seems that moderation is off tonight so I might as well sink to your level)

          Nothing that Sir Peter has said or done can justify Campbell’s outburst, by all means be a small minded labour low life and wish ill on the PM, I expect nothing less from you lot but to attack a saint like Sir Peter is simply the work of a feral low life.

          You ask me what I have done to improve the lot of others, I have to say that I do very little, my passion and spare time is spent on other community projects.

          As for Key doing harm to the poor, well that is pure bullshit and well you know it, sadly Key has continued the failed policies of the corrupt Labour government, how I wish he would do something about the legions or parasites and bludgers but it seems he will not.

          I don’t know why you are surprised at how I feel about Labour, when your party is in power you attack people like me who have worked for a living, you think it is fine to tax me at a higher rate and use the money you steal from me to bribe low life with increased benefits yet you also expect those same low life to be looked after when Labour are not in power.

          If the so called poor want more then they should get off their arse.

          [lprent: Moderation is always on. However it sometimes has a justice delayed effect because we do have things other than moderating to do. But we don’t mind language provided there is a point. It is OpenMike so there is no cause to look at off topic. You haven’t attacked the site, moderators or authors. You aren’t trolling apart from having your usual level of dickhead silliness…. ]

          • higherstandard 18.1.2.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 9:09 pm

            What is ‘dickhead silliness’ about taking exception to that piece of filth Campbell Larsen’s comment above ?

          • big bruv 18.1.2.1.2
            19 September 2011 at 9:11 pm

            OK.

            Just so I have this clear, I can wish the death of any Labour party supporter or any Labour party MP or ex MP and not cop a ban?

            [lprent: Provided there is a point to the comment, and you don’t get repetitive. It is no different to your usual corruption accusations with little substance. ]

          • Brett Dale 18.1.2.1.3
            19 September 2011 at 9:12 pm

            So wishing someone would die is okay, I guess that is the standard of this site.

            [lprent: It is an opinion/rant, much the same as saying that someone is corrupt (a BB favorite). It isn’t a abnormal type of conversational comment. I would hear it a few times a night when I used to bar tend a public bar or when I was doing the bar at night clubs. It was a common expression about training NCO’s when I was in the army. When I was working as a foreman on a factory floor it was a commonly directed at me. etc etc….

            I have no idea what kind of cloistered environment that you grew up in (a nunnery perhaps?) ]

            • Brett Dale 18.1.2.1.3.1
              19 September 2011 at 10:02 pm

              saying someone is corrupt is totally different than wishing someone would die, that is along the lines of what Fred Phelps would do.

              Haha no I didn’t grow up in a nunnery, but i did grow up in the poorest area of christchurch.

  19. big bruv 19
    19 September 2011 at 7:35 pm

    So…

    You know Labour are stuffed when the mad butcher (a champion of the working bloke) openly supports John Key and the National party.

    Can things get any worse?

    • Vicky32 19.1
      20 September 2011 at 3:42 pm

      when the mad butcher (a champion of the working bloke)

      Citation needed, please. Sponsoring organised fighting (rugby) doesn’t count.

      • higherstandard 19.1.1
        20 September 2011 at 4:04 pm

        Potter out to the markets in South Auckland or to one of the many league clubs and ask them what they think of the butcher – I doubt you’d hear an unkind word.

        • Jum 19.1.1.1
          20 September 2011 at 10:39 pm

          higherstandard,

          you’ve really dropped in my estimation.

          Can’t you even ‘under’stand that when a well thought of iconic person deliberately backs a political figure then people will think with their hearts instead of their brains.

          To me that is heartless; Leitch is using his ill-health to help Key, who will stoop to that level to gain more votes. Now, that really is sick.

  20. Brett Dale 20
    19 September 2011 at 8:48 pm

    The Mad Butcher, has given back his whole life to the community, he has put his heart and soul into the community and I regard him to be one of our great New Zealanders, and just because he supports John key you guys are ripping into him.

    That is so hypocritical, you should be applauding him for what he has done over the years, but because he is a Key supporter, you rip into him?

    He’s a proud kiwi and has helped people here in Christchurch.

    Take a look at his charity work, its endless.

    [lprent: I would suggest that using the reply button would help with context? ]

    • Anne 20.1
      19 September 2011 at 9:31 pm

      Yeah… he reminds me sometimes of a local version of Owen Glenn.

    • Puddleglum 20.2
      19 September 2011 at 10:51 pm

      I don’t know much about this ‘Mad Butcher’ person (I presume, from comments, that he’s been knighted?), though I think I bought some brisket bones from one of his shops a couple of times for my dog. If he has done some charitable work then that’s good.

      Obviously, his opinion on who should be the next Prime Minister, however, is of no more value than anyone else’s. There’s no particular reason – so far as I have seen discussed here – as to why his opinion should be given any more weight than any poster here or any other person in New Zealand. Being charitable makes no-one an expert on what is best for New Zealand.

      My frustration from what I gather happened here, is that it is well known that those who don’t think too much about some issue tend to be more persuaded by peripheral features such as the perceived character (or expertise, etc.) of the person delivering a message rather than the actual arguments.

      To put it bluntly, it would clearly be a shame if anyone became more supportive of John Key by virtue of the ‘Mad Butcher’ expressing an opinion to that effect on broadcast tv.

      I think we can all agree that it is next to useless simply having someone say “I think John Key would make the best PM” without providing a pretty rigorous defence of that claim.

      The problem with ‘celebrity endorsement’, however, is that its effect is to completely side-step just such a reasonable and common sense view of what is desirable in political persuasion.

      I wish him well with his illness.

      BTW, I think there is quite reasonable evidence that John Key has harmed the poor in New Zealand. Child poverty rates have increased, for one thing: In a recession – especially in a recession – any government’s first responsibility should be to protect the most vulnerable. John Key has – in objective terms – not done that effectively. It is, at best, harm by negligence.

      Frankly, it is irrelevant to me whether Key eats babies – metaphorically speaking – or smiles dolefully at and kisses every baby he sees. His personality is entirely beside the point when it comes to what matters. (Though it does irritate me at a visceral level.).

      To be honest, I’m getting very bored with John Key. There are far more important things than his ‘appeal’ – except, of course, when it comes to how some people seem willing to be persuaded by it to cast their vote. Hard for me to fathom how people can vote on such a basis and still have self-respect, but I guess it takes all types …

       

      • Ianupnorth 20.2.1
        20 September 2011 at 12:02 am

        Eloquently put.

        Sir Peter Leitch, AKA the Mad Butcher made his money by selling low quality meat cuts in the deprived suburbs of our main towns and cities; he has done a lot of work for the likes of Kidz First at Middlemore Hospital and also has been a big benefactor for Rugby league.

        Like you I cannot fathom how anyone thinks this country is in any better shape than it was nearly three years ago and similarly why anyone would genuinely want another three years of this.

        • Puddleglum 20.2.1.1
          20 September 2011 at 12:33 pm

          Thanks Ianupnorth.

          I haven’t watched tv since 1996 (apart from bumping into it at other people’s places and in some pubs) so I miss out on a lot of this sort of stuff.

          I imagine Peter Leitch is a nice enough person and an example of the New Zealand small-medium businessman.

          I’ve nothing personal against people like him but the vote is something that, quite explicitly, involves ‘third parties’ (other citizens) so I’d like to think people backed a political party for reasons that go beyond “I think he’s a good bloke”, “He seems really friendly”, “I like how he sounds just like an ordinary person”, etc..

          I’d go further, it is every citizen’s moral duty and obligation to put what efforts they can into thinking through their voting decision. After all, the franchise is designed so that it will affect the lives of all of us. I’m not talking about everyone needing to sign up for political science courses or anything, just to do what they can to think. (Reminds me of Augustine’s advice to Greek fishermen: they asked “Will God punish us for being ignorant?”; he answered “No. He’ll just punish you for being content with your ignorance and not trying to know.” – or words to that effect)

          With every right comes some responsibility. Seriousness and effort, when it comes to participation by citizens in political processes, is not fashionable, I know. But that’s a real indictment on where we’ve got to as a society.

          Working people used to go to great efforts to educate themselves and learn about the political and social world they lived in. Today, you’d get laughed at for expecting that motivation in most people. 

  21. thejackal 21
    19 September 2011 at 9:06 pm

    Don Brash says $4.7 Million

    In a blatant attempt to whip up fear, Don Brash posted today about the Greens plan to make New Zealand prosperous again, showing us all just how senile he’s become…

  22. Jum 22
    19 September 2011 at 9:29 pm

    Let’s all meet at Peter the butcher’s place a year or so down the track, if his beloved leader Key has got another term in government. Let’s ask him then how the economy is tracking, how many sausage numbers he’s had to increase for the food parcels, how much the foreign owners are enjoying ripping off his fellow Kiwis with their power, their increased banking charges (now Kiwibank has been sold), the dividends off the Ports of Auckland land and holdings, the developments on the huge expanse of airport which will make megabucks for the new owners, the sale proceeds of which will be spent on more tax cuts for him and his chums.

    I wonder if Peter realises there is a difference between National and the Act conservatives that John Key actually represents? It’s never a good look for a country icon like Peter to be found in the pocket of a corrupt politician such as Key and co.

    Also, I well remember the occasion on tv before the 2008 election when he was asked if he supported Helen Clark/Labour and he said he had no comment and that he didn’t get involved in politics. Now I see why. It’s amazing how tax cuts can turn a person to the dark side.

    Contact him for me big bruv; tell him to give us his side of the story ‘in person’. I don’t like dealing with the rejects of the NAct party – that’s you by the way.

    IanupNorth – ignore big bruv. He is using, cynically, a name that sounds like it belongs to a miner – someone who has actually worked, really worked, for a living. His real name is probably …….. and he worked in finance or managed some trucking firm and he likes to attack workers’ rights in his spare time.

    • Brett Dale 22.1
      19 September 2011 at 10:05 pm

      In the pocket of Key, just because someone supports aparty, doesnt mean they are in the pocket of them??

      Again The Mad Butcher has done amazing work for his community and amazing work for people around NewZealand, he should be applauded by all.

      • Jum 22.1.1
        19 September 2011 at 10:36 pm

        Brett Dale,

        Hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders have done good works for New Zealand and fellow New Zealanders, with no pay and no recognition, neither of which they wanted or needed.

        Those who stand in the light to gain money or status deserve to be scrutinised for fear they may contaminate if they fall by the wayside.

  23. Ed 23
    19 September 2011 at 10:00 pm

    I don’t normally watch breakfast TV, but saw it briefly this morning. There was John Key being asked his opinion on a list of trivia, but when it was first turned on there was a written heading about retirement incomes. Have National actually announced an election policy? Anyone know what it was about?

  24. Jum 24
    19 September 2011 at 10:01 pm

    Are voters really that thick that they can’t see the game play here?

    First the rugby players joining Key on the Manukau voters front to drum up votes, pre 2008.

    Then the Owen Glenn con to destroy Winston Peters and open attack on Helen Clark, 2008, then Glenn fronts on The Nation to tell us all how wonderful Key is and that he will only pay for education if Key gets back in.

    Now Peter the butcher, just butchered any respect I have for his persona as a Kiwi who supports all Kiwis.

    Who is next? I know – Mike Moore, charging back to berate us for not embracing the death hug of the TPPA and world trade which turns all working Kiwis into serfs in their own country.

    I can hardly wait.

    It is so interesting to see all these people that once professed to support the working man, like Douglas, Prebble, Caygill, Bassett, Moore, turn on the workers now, especially the women, just as they did in 2008. Unfortunately, in 2008, not even the most cynical of us actually believed that NAct could be so vicious and so cunning in their planning. The Hollow Men was just the tip. We forgot that the NAct empire stretches worldwide and that empire wants New Zealand.

    • rosy 24.1
      19 September 2011 at 10:12 pm

      Who is next? I know – Mike Moore, charging back to berate us for not embracing the death hug of the TPPA and world trade which turns all working Kiwis into serfs in their own country.

      Perfect description, Jum. And as for the right-wingers saying Key is too far to the left, if NAct gets to implement it’s neo-lib agenda he’ll stop for a wee cup of tea halfway through the next term. Just like Lange did, once he sees what a train wreck the neo-libs are creating. Otherwise he’s not.

    • big bruv 24.2
      19 September 2011 at 10:12 pm

      The Owen Glenn ‘con’???

      Ha ha ha, the man came back here to defend himself against the lies of Winston Peters.

      Owen Glenn did not abandon Clark and Labour, all Owen Glen did was tell the truth which in the eyes of Labour and Clark is tantamount to high treason.

      Come on guys, you really must stop trying to rewrite history, even without Owen Glen we all knew that Labour were finished, the people had had enough of Clark’s lies and the stench of corruption coming from her rotting government.

      What you refuse to accept is that the people of NZ wanted to get rid of her and the main players in the Labour party, all you are doing by offering up the same tired old faces and union hacks is guaranteeing an election win for the Nat’s.

      Long may it continue.

      • felix 24.2.1
        19 September 2011 at 10:21 pm

        “all Owen Glen did was tell the truth which in the eyes of Labour and Clark is tantamount to high treason.”

        This new theme of yours (“everything Labour says means the opposite!”) is getting really boring.

      • Jum 24.2.2
        19 September 2011 at 10:40 pm

        big bruv

        owen glenn made his story up to suit because he did not get what he wanted – status in a country of his choice to swan around like a diplomat (but with the persona of a snake). He always reminds me of Matthew Hooten – slithery and slippery with a hissy voice.

        big bruv – you must surely be assuming I haven’t read Glenn’s background to imagine I would think of him as anything but yet another user of New Zealand for his own financial ends. People like Glenn never give unless there is a return. His education money will not be given to any public school, hence his request for people not to bother sending in applications for funding; his money will go to private schools if Labour gets in and if National gets in, wherever Key wants to place it. I have always wondered if Key or someone backing national is actually bankrolling him. It’s a clever way to help NAct without spending their campaign money – utterly corrupt, but that was never a problem for NAct in the past.

        • big bruv 24.2.2.1
          19 September 2011 at 10:48 pm

          Jum

          Owen Glenn told the truth (something that you are obviously not familiar with) and in doing so ended the political career of Winston Peters and Helen Clark.

          The fact that Peters was caught telling porkies is not Glenn’s problem and the fact that Helen Clark kept defending Peters (for reasons we will never know but I suspect it may well be because Peters knows what skeletons are in the closet) is also not Glenn’s problem.

          Clark had the chance to cut Peters adrift, the fact that she did not do so says a lot about how desperate she was to retain power at all costs.

          You may not like it Jum but it is the truth, deal with it and move on.

          • Jum 24.2.2.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 11:40 pm

            big bruv,

            Move on? move on! You must be joking big bruv. When I can get to listen to your misleading statements become more and more repetitive and whiny. No.

            What I am trying to understand is why when Key suddenly realises he has hundreds of thousands of shares in rail that he has a conflict of interest in, yet had been asking, just out of interest you understand what was happening with rail. Then there was the vanishing vineyard and the magical bottles of wine that Key bribed the press with.

            Corrupt little bunnies you are – all feeding at the money trough, taxpayers money that you’ve stolen by calling it road fines and not taxes. You’re the biggest bunch of tax suckups yet from the right, getting tax cuts you have not earned from people who cannot afford to eat properly.

            Then there is still the Waitemata Trust that John Key paid money into that NAct refuses to open up for public scrutiny. Yet you hydras of the right try to cover all that up with a willing press enabling you – probably hoping for some more wine from the invisible vineyard. There are indeed stories to be told about you and your leeches, however they are spelt.

            Not to mention the money you have that probably came from workers – big bruv indeed; more like big bruv douglas.

  25. R 25
    19 September 2011 at 10:03 pm

    I have a plea, for readers and bloggers and commenters alike: that we stop equating age with senility. I have friends and whanau in their 60s and 70s who aren’t senile, aren’t suffering from dementia, and actively contribute in the workplace and/or community. Every time we denounce Brash and Douglas (NB I am left-wing) as being ‘senile’ because they’re ‘too old for politics’ we also denounce our friends and families. Ageism is just as unfair as racism, sexism and discrimination towards the young.

    Please can we attack the policies and behaviours of our enemies, not their physical attributes?

    • thejackal 25.1
      20 September 2011 at 9:24 pm

      I’m attacking Brash’s senility R. The fact that his senility is part in parcel to him being old is not going to deter me from attacking his obvious bullshit arguments.

      He’s an old geriatric fool that deserves far more abuse than is allowable on blogs such as The Standard. The fact that the racist old prick is allowed anywhere near politics after what he’s done to New Zealand is intolerable!

      Don Brash is doddering around in Act and his faculties are clearly impaired, these facts should be exposed at every opportunity. I happen to think his age has something to do with it, and I’m not ageist for saying so.

    • KJT 25.2
      21 September 2011 at 8:48 am

      Brash was senile at least 35 years ago. Senility is a state of mind. His has been closed for at least that long.

      I also know many other young, in age, people who are prematurely senile because they have decided to switch their brains off. (BB is a good example).
      AND many old people who are anything but senile.

      Brash, and his policies, were well past, “the use by date” in the 80’s.

  26. big bruv 26
    19 September 2011 at 11:04 pm

    Right.

    Having educated you morons I am now off to bed, some of us have to keep working to pay for all of those who cannot be arsed getting out of bed in the morning.

    Sleep well everybody, dream about the better country we are all going to be living in simply because Phil Goff will never be the PM and because silent ‘t’ will thankfully never be the minister of finance.

    Of course what I am really looking forward to is watching the Labour party tear itself apart after the hammering you are going to take come November, the in fighting and back stabbing as your various factions rip each other to pieces will ensure a minimum of another nine years in opposition.

    It’s going to be fun.

  27. Jum 27
    19 September 2011 at 11:05 pm

    bigbruv said:

    ‘What I don’t care about are the legions of parasites, bludgers and DPB slappers that the left continue to bribe with my money in exchange for votes…’

    I’m sure I read those same words the other day. Are you getting a bit lazy big bruv or did the computer fling out a repeat phrase.

    Very tacky. But then, everything you say about people is tacky. No change there.

    • big bruv 27.1
      19 September 2011 at 11:12 pm

      Yeah, well I have to repeat myself because you lot are so dense that it is the only way I can get through.

      I find it is the only way to deal with slow learners.

      Until tomorrow then…..

    • McFlock 27.2
      19 September 2011 at 11:15 pm

      “DPB slapper” is one of BB’s leitmotifs that he uses instead of actually thinking.

      • Ianupnorth 27.2.1
        20 September 2011 at 12:03 am

        He shouldn’t refer to his mother as that – not nice. The most homophobic are, apparently, the most likely to have a gay experimentation; I suspect BB is a poor kid trying to be a rich kid, probably an accountant, bank manager or a sales rep for RD1.

  28. Sam 28
    20 September 2011 at 1:20 pm

    Wishing a speedy death upon someone whom has a terminal illness is more than poor form. Its absolutely fucking disgusting, and I really am flabbergasted that the sites Moderators have let the comment stand.

    • Blue 28.1
      20 September 2011 at 4:35 pm

      Its simple Sam, the death-wish was on a person who supports the current Government. Obviously, to the left an opposing opinion warrants a speedy death. I think even Anne would agree thats a “hysterical” reaction from Campbell Larsen who is clearly, with every passing day, becoming more desperate and unhinged.

      @ Larsen – Men don’t act like that pal, you’re another Internet coward. Try saying that at any rugby club in Auckland, if you’re brave enough. Sadly we all know, you included, that you don’t possess those characteristics. You’re a dribbling dickless indoors boy, and a Labour voter. Sorry for repeating myself.

      • Campbell Larsen 28.1.1
        20 September 2011 at 7:36 pm

        Lol – its you lot with your faux outrage and newly found sensitive sides that are desperate.
        You only make yourselves look bad with your rabid name calling.

        Obviously I don’t actually wish him an untimely death – after all it’s not like I was threatening to catapult a bus onto him – chortle –

        My point stands – he crossed a line and Mark S allowed it – the producers of close up should have cut to a commercial and spared viewers the butchers gushing shonky love.

        People need to use their brains when they vote, not just do what ever the man that used to sell them sausages on the TV, and whose every second word is maaaate, says.

        You will get no more from me on this.

        • higherstandard 28.1.1.1
          20 September 2011 at 8:31 pm

          “You will get no more from me on this.”

          Right then. Best you get back to your pics of Helen, jar of vaseline and Trevor Mallard shaped dildo.

        • Blue 28.1.1.2
          21 September 2011 at 1:47 pm

          Still think you’re a coward Pal. Men don’t act like you do. Scared little school boys do.

    • Jum 28.2
      20 September 2011 at 9:14 pm

      Sam,

      Then you can’t have visited the pondscum Whaleoil or the slug on kiwiblog. They’ve made an artform out of vicious attacks.

      Bye.

      • Blue 28.2.1
        21 September 2011 at 10:44 am

        Sure he does, he meets like with like. However, I’ve yet to see him wish an early death on someone suffering from cancer.

  29. Cloaca 29
    20 September 2011 at 1:22 pm

    See Goff wants a NZ Insurance company to insure Christchurch.
    Who sold off State Insurance to the Poms for $780million.
    It was a good profitable NZ Company.

    • Jum 29.1
      20 September 2011 at 9:19 pm

      cloaca,

      Unlike Key, Goff has learned his lesson, admits it and promises not to sell any more. The last person voters should support is someone who refuses to listen to the public’s wish to keep our SOEs intact, as Key is.

      You are quite right in that perfectly good assets were sold both in the 80s and the 90s to the detriment of New Zealanders’ future prosperity.

      The link, in case you have deliberately not noticed, is Roger Douglas, who controlled the Labour gang of four and now twirls the willing Key into selling more off.

      So who would you vote for Cloaca?

    • millsy 29.2
      21 September 2011 at 10:57 am

      Why stop at Christchurch?

  30. Credo 30
    20 September 2011 at 7:44 pm

    Wait till this gets back to the blue collars who are Leitchs people…a few more percent down in the polls….good job scum.

    • Jum 30.1
      20 September 2011 at 9:26 pm

      Credo said, ‘Wait till this gets back to the blue collars who are Leitchs people…a few more percent down in the polls….good job scum.’

      Oh yes the blue collars who are the bread and butter workers on 90day terms, the unemployed blue collars.

      I’m sure they will follow Peter off a cliff if he told them too. Wonderful chap, dying I believe? Got all his money in a trust to avoid taxes like CGT and gives charity to the blue collars that are on $13 an hour. They must be very proud blue collars, that people like Peter help them out.

      As a blue collar worker surely you would have preferred to receive at least $15 an hour for the hard work you do and then pay your own way instead of relying on charity.

      The working for families package was initiated because business was so greedy for profit they were and still are paying measly wages for hard work. Shame on them and anyone who pretends to be the friend of the worker yet plays the money game. Key’s another one of those.

      Read The Hollow Men which stated something along the lines to Key ‘First get the voters/punters to like you, then you can do anything with them’.

      Nice guy, Key… Even I think Peter Leitch is better than Key.

  31. Wayne91 31
    22 September 2011 at 2:20 pm

    Campbell Larson – your post wishing Sir Peter Leitch would hurray up and die is disgusting.

    You are a low life cowardly scumbag