Daily Review 12/04/2017

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, April 12th, 2017 - 42 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

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

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

42 comments on “Daily Review 12/04/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. The decrypter 1
    12 April 2017 at 5:46 pm

    Red tie with bits of rice stuck to it. Subliminal indeed.

  2. The Fairy Godmother 2
    12 April 2017 at 6:21 pm

    Lani Hagaman is keeping on with the legal bullying. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11837227

    One wonders if it really is because she wants to clear her husband’s name. Andrew Little doesn’t have the sort of money she wants. Could it be that she is desperate to have National re-elected and is it because she is such a strong party supporter or is there some other reason?

    • BM 2.1
      12 April 2017 at 6:34 pm

      I think she sees it as her duty to clear her husband’s name before he dies.

      Unfortunate for Andrew Little that Earl is on his death bed otherwise she’d probably let it go.

      Good lesson for the man though, he’ll think twice before shooting his mouth off now.

      • adam 2.1.1
        12 April 2017 at 6:41 pm

        Hope not, if you beg for government contracts – I want scrutiny!

        If you look fishy, I want the smell looked into.

        As for your spin BM – utter drivel.

        • ankerawshark 2.1.1.1
          12 April 2017 at 6:58 pm

          The irony of course is that taking legal action, attempting to sue for 2.3 mill and saying she wants to go back to court imo only serves to make them look bad. They seem to be ruining their own reputation imo

      • Pete 2.1.2
        12 April 2017 at 6:46 pm

        Her husband’s name has been cleared. I don’t think anyone believes there was anything sinister in the situation Andrew Little referred to.

        To me though her action comes across like that of a vindictive person who can’t stand to be seen as a sort of a loser since the result wasn’t as she wanted. I don’t see her husband’s good name as her motivation, but getting Andrew Little and dealing to him.

        That’s politics.

        • BM 2.1.2.1
          12 April 2017 at 6:49 pm

          That could be the case, she obviously despises the man.

          Rule number 1
          Never piss off a woman with money.

          • Muttonbird 2.1.2.1.1
            12 April 2017 at 8:00 pm

            She’s giving Andrew Little loads of airtime and if she continues he will gain in stature as a representative of the people against big money.

            Ordinary Kiwis are suddenly appreciating Andrew Little because Hagaman continues to promote his virtues.

            Labour couldn’t buy this coverage.

            • BM 2.1.2.1.1.1
              12 April 2017 at 8:03 pm

              Yeah, that’s the one 🙄

              • mickysavage …
                12 April 2017 at 8:06 pm

                How do you feel about a situation where the uber wealthy can terrorise everyone else because they are a bit upset? And pollies can be stopped from doing their job because of the fear of legal action?

                • BM …
                  12 April 2017 at 8:17 pm

                  The smarter politician would take advantage of parliamentary privilege and use that when they want to slag off an innocent party.

                  Thus you don’t run the risk of having your dumb arse dragged before the courts and losing your home and any other money you haven’t taken steps to protect.

                  • Muttonbird …
                    12 April 2017 at 8:21 pm

                    Innocent party? Pull the other one. No intelligent person can ignore the contract for donation scam pulled by the National government and the Hagamans.

                    National were basically funnelling public money into their own party war chest.

                    Even if you want to pretend there’s no link between Hagaman and the National party, in literal effect public money paid to the Hagamans was returned to the National Party.

                    Andrew Little was correct – that does stink.

                  • mickysavage …
                    12 April 2017 at 8:58 pm

                    The smarter politician would take advantage of parliamentary privilege and use that when they want to slag off an innocent party.

                    And the more principled politician would not and say publicly what they thought.

                    • Pete George …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:06 pm

                      And the more principled politician would raise issues of potential concern and refer them for investigation without making unsubstantiated attacks on private citizens and companies.

                      And when their concerns proved unfounded they would acknowledge and hurt immediately and not wait for half a year and a court appearance.

                    • ropata …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:14 pm

                      beige badger shows his true colours, deep blue tribalism, and lack of interest in sustaining a decent democracy. useless.

                    • Pete George …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:17 pm

                      Sustaining a decent democracy requires holding the Government to account decently.

                      And decent debate , important for a decent democracy, doesn’t resort to lame personal attacks and making ill informed accusations.

                    • ropata …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:24 pm

                      It’s good that AL didn’t do that eh.

                    • McFlock …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:30 pm

                      Funny how this indecent attack was simply expressing concern at two publicly-available facts.

                    • Psycho Milt …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:33 pm

                      I get the feeling something doesn’t have to be very indecent at all for Pete to get the vapours.

                    • Pete George …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:34 pm

                      So why did Little say of Lani Hagaman in court ““I apologise to her now for any hurt”?

                    • McFlock …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:48 pm

                      Give her the opportunity of backing out with a bit of dignity?

                      It’s not like he said “I’m sorry for even raising the issue”

                    • Psycho Milt …
                      12 April 2017 at 9:53 pm

                      You know that apology where you say you’re sorry if anyone took offence, which basically means “I’ve been told to pretend I’m sorry so I’m making a statement, but I’m not really sorry and also fuck you asshole?” It’s that apology.

          • Psycho Milt 2.1.2.1.2
            12 April 2017 at 9:26 pm

            Rule number 1
            Never piss off a woman with money.

            Our legal system shouldn’t be facilitating and enforcing that rule, it should be finding ways to make it no longer a rule. How much money a person has should have fuck all to do with their ability (more importantly, lack of it) to restrict freedom of speech.

          • Cinny 2.1.2.1.3
            12 April 2017 at 11:10 pm

            Tell you what BM, she looks like a bored gold digger on an ego trip.

            I think she’s doing more damage to her ‘brand’ than Little ever did. The jury ruled that Little did not defame Lani.

            Maybe she is just keeping busy with a little project while she counts down the days?
            After all she does have power of attorney.
            She could just let it go and spend as much time as possible with her husband.
            Court cases are stressful, why inflict more stress on a ‘dying’ man?

            Would she not be busy enough settling affairs and the like, it’s a busy, sad and stressful time, many visitors and so on. Least that’s what I’ve experienced many times when elders have been approaching their completion of this life time.

            Does anyone know what exactly is Earls condition please?

        • WILD KATIPO 2.1.2.2
          12 April 2017 at 6:58 pm

          Indeed. If she goes at it again all its going to do is make her look like a National ( neo liberal sycophant ) party gold digger.

          We’ve had a former National party PM who repeatedly pulled a waitresses ponytail for over 6 months and when ask to desist still carried on and thought it was a great joke. And thus committed common assault . Then when caught out , –
          even blamed his wife for doing it.

          Change the names and the country , appropriate it to politics , – and the message it contains regarding this woman’s real intent and her reaction from the courts decision..

          Chopper Reid – Harden the fuck up, Australia – YouTube
          Video for harden the fuck up australia youtube▶ 1:48

          • BM 2.1.2.2.1
            12 April 2017 at 8:02 pm

            I liked this one

            • WILD KATIPO 2.1.2.2.1.1
              12 April 2017 at 8:30 pm

              Hahaha !

              Nice one !

              Cept there was a time when cockies made the stuff and it was still affordable – without Fonterra and without having the banks force family farming concerns off their land to make way for the corporate intensive dairy farmers and their banker masters. And adding to our carbon footprints to boot !

              And so,… getting back to the analogy above – time for a certain duplicitous wealthy woman to drop the pretense about a court case being all about protecting the family name and owning up to the real motives…

      • JanM 2.1.3
        12 April 2017 at 7:50 pm

        Are you really that naive, or just deeply cynical?

    • adam 2.2
      12 April 2017 at 6:38 pm

      This really does have a bad smell. It feels like dirty politics all over again.

      If you go begging to the government for millions of dollars then you have to face the fact the public will want to know.

      If you donate to one political party which makes up the government of days before it happens, –
      then expect the average person to think nothing smells – then you are deluded, or out of touch.

      If you can’t handle the jandle – get out of the game, and stop begging for government contracts if you can’t handle public scrutiny.

      But most of all, stop being a poor loser.

      • The Fairy Godmother 2.2.1
        12 April 2017 at 6:54 pm

        And if you attack the leader of the opposition with vexatious litigation during election year you could look very desperate to continue with the friendly government. Own goal Lani you stink more and more with your actions. Go back to that awful litigious country you came from.

    • Anne 2.3
      12 April 2017 at 6:46 pm

      Could it be she wants some ready cash because she knows there’s going to be a family haggle for hubby’s millions once he passes this mortal coil and it could last for years?

      • Carolyn_nth 2.3.1
        12 April 2017 at 6:49 pm

        Or there’s this:

        It was about politics when Little’s team presented a letter Earl Hagaman had written to Prime Minister John Key in 2009, saying he was doing a “great job and unwinding some of the horrendous miscarriages Helen [Clark] set up to defraud the taxpayers.”

    • Psycho Milt 2.4
      12 April 2017 at 9:31 pm

      One wonders if it really is because she wants to clear her husband’s name. Andrew Little doesn’t have the sort of money she wants.

      It’s pretty straightforward – that supposed slam-dunk case against Little got nowhere and it’s still 5 months to the election, so National would like Lani to go once more into the breach, dear friend. The resulting court costs are effectively a different form of donation to National by the Hagamans.

  3. ScottGN 3
    12 April 2017 at 7:04 pm

    Funny how election year can focus the minds of MPs. National has argued black and blue that country of origin labelling was unnecessary but today they’ve pulled a swifty U turn. Funny that.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11837225

    • ianmac 3.1
      12 April 2017 at 7:30 pm

      Yes Scott. Water. Housing. Labelling. Next will be a start on City to Airport rail – starting next year. Mopping up all the undone issues. Might even be funding for those destitute associations which have collapsed from withdrawn funding.
      Hope?