A sign of things to come

41 comments on “A sign of things to come ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Dave 1

   10 June 2009 at 9:44 am

   Well, if Helen Clark was known as Uncle Helen, then John Key can be Aunty John 😀

   How the goon from the Herald can say that he shows decisive leadership is beyond me, I’ve seen better leadership skills from my three year old nephew!!
2. roger nome 2

   10 June 2009 at 9:45 am

   heh – of course Clark would have just point blank said “no” – Key really needs to grow a pair.
3. coolas 3

   10 June 2009 at 9:58 am

   Brilliant. It’s hard to believe Key can’t articulate his religious philosophy and one wonders whether he’s ever taken time out from counting his piggy bank to read, contemplate and decide where he stands. He’s so shallow it’s embarrassing. “I go to church a lot” but “I don’t believe in life after death.” Interesting to know what religion supports that theory or has a God called UM ER UM.
   • Anita 3.1

     10 June 2009 at 11:19 am

     Quite a few people of faith attend meetings for worship but don’t believe in life after death (including me).
4. vto 4

   10 June 2009 at 10:14 am

   Not slippery, just bloody useless at answering questions in the time-honoured-slippery-politician-non-answer manner.

   That really is pathetic as an answer. As nome says, he should grow some
   • merlin 4.1

     10 June 2009 at 10:44 am

     Other politicans answer this question, no worries. Clark said she’s agnostic. Brash said he didn’t believe in God but did believe in a higher power.
5. stinkmeaner 5

   10 June 2009 at 10:31 am

   God died the second this blog was created
6. Red Rosa 6

   10 June 2009 at 11:00 am

   Have to trot out the old one about the insomniac dyslexic atheist. He lay awake at night, wondering if there was a dog.

   Did god create man, or man create god? (one for the feminists)

   And did religion begin when the first con man met the first idiot? (Mark Twain)
7. JakeQuinn 7

   10 June 2009 at 11:40 am

   He could have answered “um, Bill English, next question please”
8. Tom Semmens 8

   10 June 2009 at 11:47 am

   “…stinkmeaner
   June 10, 2009 at 10:31 am

   God died the second this blog was created…”

   “Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours, ran to the market-place, and cried incessantly: “I am looking for God! I am looking for God!”

   As many of those who did not believe in God were standing together there, he excited considerable laughter. Have you lost him, then? said one. Did he lose his way like a child? said another. Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? or emigrated? Thus they shouted and laughed. The madman sprang into their midst and pierced them with his glances.

   “Where has God gone?” he cried. “I shall tell you. We have killed him – you and I. We are his murderers. But how have we done this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is it not more and more night coming on all the time? Must not lanterns be lit in the morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we not smell anything yet of God’s decomposition? Gods too decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whosoever shall be born after us – for the sake of this deed he shall be part of a higher history than all history hitherto.”

   Wow, more powerful than the French Revolution! More impact than Engels! More relevant than Marx! The Standard has achieved what Friedrich Nietzsche could not!

   What a twot you are stinkmeaner.
   • Draco T Bastard 8.1

     10 June 2009 at 12:05 pm

     Revolutions that bring about an abrupt change in society tend to start small.
   • Stink 8.2

     10 June 2009 at 12:08 pm

     Takes one to know one.
   • stinkmeaner 8.3

     10 June 2009 at 2:10 pm

     Thank you for taking my bait.

     You exceeded even my wildest expectations of nonsense.

     It must suck for you that you spent a portion of your day responding to the most obvious of bullshit statements.

     And what the fuck was with this comment – “more powerful than the French Revolution! More impact than Engels! More relevant than Marx! The Standard has achieved what Friedrich Nietzsche could not!”

     What did they achieve sorry? God self importance (or is that impotence) is rampant on this site.

     A.E StinkMeaner esq.
     • wtf 8.3.1

       10 June 2009 at 2:34 pm

       read a book, chump
       • stinkmeaner 8.3.1.1

         10 June 2009 at 2:42 pm

         Pft, if i coud raed a book, i woudnt earnz $12.fidy working at foodTown.

         Win 4 state educationz
         • Pascal's bookie 8.3.1.1.1

           10 June 2009 at 3:01 pm

           Grammar boy huh?
9. infused 9

   10 June 2009 at 12:12 pm

   I would have said no. What’s the big deal?
   • Anita 9.1

     10 June 2009 at 12:25 pm

     David Slack recently gave the best analysis I’ve seen of Key’s response to all current events and social issues:

     Because as the unexpected question is put to him and he blinks in the floodlight, the thought going through his mind appears to be:

     I am their leader. I must find out where they are going, so I can lead them there.
     • . 9.1.1

       10 June 2009 at 12:37 pm

       anita didn’t you mean
       “I am their dictator, I must find out where they want to go- so I can say I am taking them there,but take them to where my puppetmaster wants me to go…do they like me? do they love me?why don’t they love me?”BLINK.
       • NZowned 9.1.1.1

         10 June 2009 at 12:58 pm

         Maybe he had the new prospective owners of NZ’s telecommunication (a foreign object )in his eye, and on his mind, blink.

         “‘When you look across the Tasman at what happened when the Howard Government sold its majority holding in Telstra offshore, you have to wonder why you would want to create a monster on our shores by allowing Telecom to be sold off to foreign interests. “
         • . 9.1.1.1.1

           10 June 2009 at 1:27 pm

           Money is his God.
           He worships at the Church of greed.
           So how the heck is he going to publically discuss( disclose) his beliefs?
   • merlin 9.2

     10 June 2009 at 1:48 pm

     It’s this evasiveness of his. Why can’t he just say what he thinks? Why does he refuse to be honest and straight up with us?
     • aspie 9.2.1

       10 June 2009 at 1:56 pm

       Its not his evasiveness.He cannot be honest or straight.
       That post sounded like you were spinning an idea for the new Chupachups ad’ why chuck why can’t you be honest’.

       I’m sorry I am really trying to be friendly- but you are not naive and so I cannot get away without a protest on that last post.
10. infused 10

    10 June 2009 at 12:13 pm

    I’m in moderation or banned. woot.
    • Anita 10.1

      10 June 2009 at 12:26 pm

      Clearly
      • infused 10.1.1

        10 June 2009 at 1:44 pm

        It was in moderation
        • felix 10.1.1.1

          10 June 2009 at 1:56 pm

          Everything in moderation.
          • vto 10.1.1.1.1

            10 June 2009 at 7:51 pm

            including moderation
11. Anthony Karinski 11

    10 June 2009 at 12:48 pm

    Pity Sarah Palin is already taken. What a wonderful couple they would have been.
12. Nick 12

    10 June 2009 at 1:22 pm

    Cool clip, perhaps the real question is “does God believe in shonky Jonkey?”
13. mickysavage 13

    10 June 2009 at 2:12 pm

    It takes a great deal of skill when answering such a question to look confused AND calculating. Key appears to be attempting to answer in such a way that he will not annoy either believers and agnostics. I suspect that he has only been able to annoy both groups.
    • aspie 13.1

      10 June 2009 at 2:25 pm

      ‘I strongly believe people have the right to individual religious freedom, and that religion should not be left up to the Govt to discuss or debate ”
      …and he does not get baited.Everyone is happy.
14. Rex Widerstrom 14

    10 June 2009 at 2:53 pm

    “Do you believe in God?”… the non-secular equivalent of “have you stopped beating your wife?”, guaranteed to trap you into offending at least some of the audience.

    Why on earth (excuse the pun) do we need to know whether our politicians believe in God, Ganesh, Satan, or one of those little idols with the outsize penis?!

    Unless they start banging on about it and/or using it as a means to get themselves elected on a “Christian” platform, it’s their own business.

    This line of questioning from an interviewer seems to connote “are you one of us?” or – from the alternative perspective – “are you one of those ‘Christian’ weirdos?”. I mean why else would she want to know? He’s not a US President who can potentially veto an abortion law. He’s not a US Supreme Court nominee. He’s an elected official in a secular Parliamentary government.

    While it’s much decried as a political tactic my advice to any politician confronted with the question would be to respond with a question – “What relevance do you think that has to my performance of the duties of [elected office]?”

    Or, if you can get away with it, the even more accurate “None of your damn business. Next question”.
    • felix 14.1

      10 June 2009 at 3:03 pm

      Couldn’t agree more.

      I was quite pleased in the “leaders debate” last year when both Clark and Key answered the question with a polite but fairly firm no – not because I have a problem with religious people running for office but because it was such a pleasant contrast to the American election where a candidate’s religious beliefs are treated like a serious political issue.

      Your suggested answers would have pleased me even more, of course.
      • RedLogix 14.1.1

        10 June 2009 at 3:44 pm

        Rex,

        Couldn’t agree more. As one of the more overtly religious posters here I feel qualified to reaffirm the vital principle of separation between the state and church. I don’t like anything that blurs it.

        I’ve no problem with Key volunteering his views on faith, if he so chooses… but to my mind it’s not a good line of questioning for any interviewer (outside say a specifically religious program) to be taking.

        On the other hand, Key really should have been better prepared.
        • . 14.1.1.1

          10 June 2009 at 4:16 pm

          Redlogix you seem to be an agreeable fellow,(excuse my ignorance I am new to this blog), but what are the delightful ( Nazi?)posted symbols assigned to certain bloggers on this site?

          Preparation doesn’t stop you from repeatedly putting your foot in your mouth (and today Keys was paired off with Palin).
          • merlin 14.1.1.1.1

            10 June 2009 at 5:24 pm

            The blog authors have explained the symbols in the FAQ.

            They’re automatically generated symbols based on the characters in your email address, designed to stop people stealing each other’s names. It also lets others know that several of the ‘different’ people who have commented on this thread have the same email as you, so are presumably the same person.

            The random symbol is the same thing repeated four times, so sometimes it can look a bit swastika-like. You can register and upload your own image like some do or change the email you supplied to one that doesn’t generate that symbol
          • designated a Nazi symbol 14.1.1.1.2

            10 June 2009 at 5:54 pm

            What an unfortunate random shape occurrence.
            With the Central bank getting a pretend spank today I think I’ll have to keep it.
            Cheers Merlin.
15. Noko 15

    10 June 2009 at 3:32 pm

    Ah, Eating Media Lunch! How I wish thee was back on television. But I guess if it was, the funding would be cut because of the ‘global economic recession’.

    Captcha: appease students – isn’t that the opposite of what Key did?
16. Quoth the Raven 16

    10 June 2009 at 4:56 pm

    “I look at religion as doing the right thing. I don’t define it as someone who neccessarily goes to church on a Sunday.”

    uh huh. What a philosopher we have as a leader…

    I’ll just leave it there.
17. SDL Sparo 17

    10 June 2009 at 6:25 pm

    In line with the title – though not content(threadjack I am not) – I figure some of the good folks here would like to know..

    … the Green-European Freedom Alliance bloc captured 53 of the EU parliament’s 736 seats, compared with 43 spots in the last 785-seat assembly.

    And I do so because once upon a vacation visit here a visiting vicar to a church near the folks’ place was all the way out from England to tell of Greenpeace and so on’s “very real popular capacity” of taking the public’s discretionary purse away from the church..

    These days to my knowledge it’s all pals again and like PBO said in that last big speech of his peacemakers are ‘the sons of God’. Sons and daughters..

    And likely in Mount Albert, too.

    Peace be with you..

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS