Deranged Jacinda syndrome

Written By: - Date published: 9:14 am, June 10th, 2019 - 105 comments
Categories: Carmel Sepuloni, Dr Deborah Russell, jacinda ardern, labour, making shit up, Media, phil twyford, spin, the praiseworthy and the pitiful, uncategorized, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

I attended Te Pai Court in Waitakere last Wednesday where I had the privilege of watching a presentation on the Wellbeing budget.

Local MPs Carmel Sepuloni, Phil Twyford, Peeni Henare and Deborah Russell all spoke.  They were committed, knew their stuff and presented really well.

Jacinda was also there.

Much as I like and admire the others she was streets ahead of them.  Her knowledge of the subject matter, her empathy and her awareness stood her apart.

I have known a few Labour leaders.  David Lange was exceptional in his ability to reach out to people, David Cunliffe had huge intellect and an ability to explain complex problems in very simple terms.  Jacinda has the best of both of them.

The right are struggling to work out what to do.  Currently their strategy is to attack her over every glib attack line thrown up on right wing twitter.  So the day after her Waitakere speech she visited Marlborough where she again spoke about the wellbeing budget, this time to the local Chamber of Commerce.

This caused the right to get into a lather.  

Why you may ask.

Well instead of doing this in their view she should have jetted over to the opposite side of the world to take part in a photo opportunity to mark the 75th anniversary of D-day.

Newstalk ZB’s Andrew Dickens started things off four days ago.  From the Newstalk ZB website:

New Zealand’s Governor General Dame Patsy Reddy attended on behalf of the New Zealand Government, with no appearance from Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern or Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters.

Andrew Dickens asked why neither of them had gone to the event, when other world leaders – including Australia’s Scott Morrison – had attended.

Dickens noted that, as far as he could see, Ardern had not attended a D-Day events in New Zealand, which left him “surprised and horrified”. 

“I want to find out what she thinks is so important on the 75th anniversary of D-Day that she should be in Marlborough talking about her budget and not at the National War Memorial. It seems like the call is getting worse.” 

Then Mike Hosking had a rant about her this morning.  In the printed version he said this:

” … when the explanation came it sadly, yet again, gave you the sense she is either fantastically out of touch, or really isn’t all that invested in the job (or perhaps doesn’t quite get the weight of the position).

“I can’t be every where at once.” That was it, and that is Ardern in a nutshell.

Stating the bleeding obvious, no she can’t be everywhere at once, none of us can. But the places we are at, at any given time, is decided generally on a basis of importance: we prioritise.

Every parent has been through it a million times. We can’t be everywhere our kids want us, our employers want us, our partners want us. This if life, so we work out what matters.

I would argue D-Day matters. And it matters more than what she decided mattered more, a meeting in Marlborough spruiking her Wellbeing Budget. In fact she might be the last one standing arguing that a meeting spruiking a Budget beats the commemoration of a significant day in history.

Yep photo opportunities at the opposite end of the world are way more important than bedding in what will probably be the most important of her political career, not to mention the most important for tens of thousands of kids living in poverty.

But Hosking and Dickens and talkback radio land think she should have gone for the photo op.

This speaks volumes about what their priorities are.

We on the left used to be accused of suffering from Deranged Key Syndrome.

I think the right wing equivalent is clearly appearing.

105 comments on “Deranged Jacinda syndrome”

  1. Grant Insley 1

    They forget when Key went to a Baseball game in America instead of a Memorial service in NZ?

  2. Adrian 2

    3rd of October 1943, NZ troops D-Day in Europe landing in Italy at Taranto. Aaages before the one up north and fought Germany for 9 months before D-Day North.

    Bloody NZ, 1st again ,though to be fair, US troops arrived there three weeks before.

    BTW, Hoskins not behind the Paywall, was it a case of "Oh fuck, nobody is reading him'

    That worked out well,eh?  

     

    • Sanctuary 2.1

      It goes like this – 

      Hosk, since we went behind the paywall your click throughs are down. You cost us a sh*tload of cash, so we expect you to perform."

      Hosking then doubles down in the batshit crazy stakes, cos he wants to upgrade the Ferarri next year.

    • bwaghorn 2.2

      I guess its possible the herald is getting paid not to have hosking behind a pay wall . 

       

      • woodart 2.2.1

        or the herald realize that hoskings rants arent worthy of a paywall and are the heralds loss leaders, white bread… pams, or budget. perhaps pams. he looks like a pam….pam hoskings..has a ring, like a stain in a loo. the headlines that the herald use to spruik his column are hilarious, NZ version of national enquirer….the downside of having to appeal to buffoons is that you need to come up with stupider and stupider headlines, he has become a caricature of himself…

  3. Rapunzel 3

    Why are they even persisiting with that rubbish? The majority public view of trying to meddle in budget week and some one who would rather not admit it has warned them

    https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2019/05/why_national_shouldnt_fall_into_labours_trap_of_under-estimating_the_prime_minister_of_the_day.html.

    Yet Bridges persists and his party lets him, they have very deep underlying problems that are yet to be seen with quite a "samey" line-up that once included JLR at the heart of it Brown, Bidois, Bridges, and female MPs who are either victims or bullies it seems a whole depeth of understanding the public, emplathy, vision, policy is missing – Bridges single attribute seems to be personal ambition and NZ is not in synch with that at all having seen it all before.

     

  4. observer 4

    Ardern was at the commissioning of the Navy's new ship, Manawanui. She "launched" it in Devonport, on … June 7 (or June 6 GMT).

    If she had not been there, Hosking and the Nat MPs pushing this D-Day smear would have effortlessly switched tack –

    "Ardern snubs our gallant sailors, goes on overseas junket to meet Queen".

    To repeat the post on poll thread: 72.5% approval rating for the PM. The desperate and deranged only increase her support.

    • Yeah, exactly.  If she had gone off to listen to pompous blowhards blathering on about our brave lads etc in Portsmouth, Hosking would have had a rant about air miles hypocrisy, eagerness to rub shoulders with world leaders and expensive photo ops.  What Ardern does or doesn't do affects only the details of the propaganda, not the strategy.

  5. Chris 5

    "…the most important [budget] for tens of thousands of kids living in poverty."

    If that's true Ardern's sights have been lowered considerably since being elected.

    • left_forward 5.1

      What are you saying? – Jacinda was a strong advocate for relief of childhood poverty when in opposition.

       

      • Chris 5.1.1

        Yes, and when in government, also, and has still delivered nothing to address difficulties faced by those on the lowest incomes.  All talk and no trousers, typical Labour, more of the same.

        • left_forward 5.1.1.1

          The budget is all about talk Chris – the trousers come after the budget is set – this is how it works – you’re still not making sense.

          • Chris 5.1.1.1.1

            "…the most important [budget] for tens of thousands of kids living in poverty."

            If a budget is all about talk how can this one be important for kids living in poverty?  What is it about this budget that's of any significance to changing the lot of those on the lowest incomes?

            • left_forward 5.1.1.1.1.1

              Saves me having to type it all out for you – please read this and tell me what you don't understand –

              https://www.budget.govt.nz/budget/2019/wellbeing/child-wellbeing/initiatives-children-in-state-care.htm

              Over $1.5 billion of new and extended initiatives.
              You are just proving the point of the article – if you were genuinely interested in addressing child poverty, you would know this already.

              • Chris

                "…the most important [budget] for tens of thousands of kids living in poverty."

                My original point was about kids living in poverty and addressing issues facing those on the lowest incomes, not how kids are treated.  The link you've posted is about social work initiatives.  It says nothing about addressing income adequacy.

                The link you should've posted is this one:

                https://www.budget.govt.nz/budget/2019/wellbeing/child-wellbeing/initiatives-fairer-welfare-system.htm

                 And why the invective? I might try it myself next time.

                • left_forward

                  You did not restrict your point to income support  –

                  …[Adern] has still delivered nothing to address difficulties faced by those on the lowest incomes

                  One billion to improve a wide range of social supports for families facing difficulties and a half billion increase in benefits, is a fucking lot more than nothing!

                  My invective, as you characterise it, is about your writing off as nothing such a significant budget for people in poverty and the efforts of a Government trying to make a difference.

                   

                  • Chris

                    Thanks for attempting to tell me what I was referring to, but I was referring to the incomes of the poorest.  That said, I do understand how defenders of the current regime will do anything to steer discussion away from benefits and benefit levels.  It's been a no-go zone for die-hard Labour supporters since the party reneged on its promise to reverse the 1991 benefit cuts.  I don't care whether you're a die-hard Labour supporter or not because it doesn't matter, but your responses so far are consistent with their bullshit, and epitomise everything that's wrong with the left in this country right now.

                    Now, getting back to your bullshit, your position conflates social work support with income support, which is a tactic that isn't new.  Successive governments, both Labour and National have done it for decades now.  So I'm afraid you're not special.  More likely uncritical, unthinking, similar in this respect to many Labour-can-do-no-wrongers.

                    What conflating those two concepts does is assume that problems caused by income inadequacy can and should be addressed with a social work solution.  The objective, of course, is to take attention away from income adequacy issues, which is precisely what your response here tries to do.  I don't think you've necessarily deliberately done that here, though.  In your case it's more likely you've blindly accepted a standard line and regurgitated it as if it's yours, so don't take it personally. The point here is that the outcome is the same, which is reinforcement of a blame-the-victim mentality: the poor need specialist help, not liveable incomes.

                    I think it's great this government is increasing the level of social work support.  Of course it's "a fucking lot more than nothing", but that's not the point.  If you want to debate changes to income maintenance policies announced in the budget shown in the link I posted above, then debate them, but the increased social work spend will mean jack shit for tens of thousands of families, so don't use it as an excuse for maintaining an inadequate benefit system.

                    I'd like to say that you already know that, but you probably don't, just as I expect you not to have read the WEAG's report, or bothered to listen to commentary on it.  As with the Labour-can-do-wrongers, it's people like you – those bereft of a critical faculty – who are the reason why the left in New Zealand is so fucked.

                    • left_forward

                      I attempted only to clarify and understand what you were saying in the light of the published information about the budget. You make a lot of assumptions and conclude that I and others are 'fucked'. This may very well be so in my case, but you don't actually have a clue – seems the invective is on the other foot… kettle, black and all that.

                      It helps if you want to communicate a point about income for you to actually mention it.

                      You might have said for example –
                      Typical fucking Labour – still not increasing benefits for the poorest in our community. That would have been clear – I would have thought ‘what a good point, I must go and check that out’.

                    • Chris

                      "…the most important [budget] for tens of thousands of kids living in poverty."

                      If that's true Ardern's sights have been lowered considerably since being elected.

                    • left_forward

                      … and on income support – how does your wiz bang critical faculty process a half a billion dollar increase in benefits and render it down to nothing?

                       

                    • Chris

                      It's about $530 million over four years, so that's $132 million a year.  The current total spend per year on the benefits the increases apply to is $4.7 billion.  So compare those two figures as a percentage, then sit that alongside what the WEAG recommended.  You'll see it'll do sweet fuck all in terms of what's needed.

                      $320 million of that goes to pinning increases to how NZS is adjusted.  That's welcomed of course, but the base line hasn't changed since the 1991 benefit cuts. There's a raft of reasons why it will bring minimal impact on people's ability to meet basic needs.

                      The other $200 million over four years goes to removing the penalty sole parents get clobbered with for not naming the other parent and increasing abatement thresholds.

                      Removing the penalty on sole parents is simply paying the full rate of benefit which in almost all cases should've been paid from the beginning.  Government research shows that most penalties are imposed in situations for which there is an exemption so should never have been put on in the first place.  So it's not an increase – it's largely what people should've been anyway.

                      Increasing the abatement threshold was a long time coming and will help a number of individuals, but it affects only people who have part-time work and are able to engage in part-time work. People on the lowest incomes are again passed over.

                      A wiz bang critical faculty, as you put it, isn’t needed to work this out, just a quick read and a bit of common sense.

                      And finally, just for good measure, you're a complete fuckknuckle.

                    • left_forward

                      Yes Chris, so it is not what we wanted but it is more, much more than nothing – thank you.

                      You seem to have a bit of an anger problem – your reactions were unnecessary and distracting. Relax, I for one, am going to enjoy the little extra bit of income when it finally comes.

                    • Chris

                      It's still sweet fuck all when compared to what's needed which you seem to have accepted.  No anger with your comments, entertainment in fact.  Think you're projecting a bit there given the amount of misplaced invective in your comments.  I refused to be drawn until I asked about it, but you took the opportunity to continue, which of course gave me licence to have a bit of fun at your expense.

                  • The Chairman

                    Half a billion dollar increase in benefits.

                    Are you talking about the Family Package?

                    If so, that was announced long before this well-being budget.

                    • Chris

                      left_forward won't know what you're asking.

                    • left_forward

                      No the half a bill increase is as Chris has finally described in his most recent post.

                    • Chris

                      Finally?  I thought it was obvious when the first thing I said referred to kids living in poverty, and if it wasn't obvious that you would've looked it up, as you say you do.  You're an interesting fuckknuckle, aren't you?  I will concede that.

                    • Chris

                      $530 million over four years, compared to current spending of $4.7 billion a year.  $320 million of that is playing catch up on previous CPI increases from a base rate that hasn't changed since the carnage caused by Richardson's 1990 "mother of all budgets" and won't make a jot of difference to the numbers of people sleeping in cars and going to food banks.  $200 million is made up of money that should've gone to sole parents but didn't, and those in part-time employment.  So again the lot for those on the lowest incomes remains the same.

                      "…the most important [budget] for tens of thousands of kids living in poverty."  My arse.  The only important thing about this budget is that it reminds us that the poorest should expect nothing from this government, and for this reason we must remain vigilant.

                    • left_forward

                      Almost a complement – cheers to you too, but please stop calling me fucked or fucknuckle or whatever.

                      You are clearly frustrated with my persistence in asking you to account for your comments. You made inaccurate assumptions about my motives for doing so.

                    • Chris

                      I decided to give a taste of your own medicine.  I warned you by asking why you needed to attach personal attacks to your comments and said that I would try it too.  You responded by continuing which was an unnecessarily fuckknucklish thing to do so you deserved what you got.  

                      My comments were clear from the begining – I was talking about poverty and the incomes of the poorest.  You responded with reference to extra social work support announced in the budget which has nothing to do with income maintenance.  This whole discussion, while entertaining, has grown not from your persistent questioning of what I was saying, but from your persistent misundertanding of what I was saying.  Surely "kids in poverty" and "those on the lowest incomes" refers to the incomes of the poorest, and not vote care and protection or whatever Oranga Tamariki were given in the budget.

                      There's been no frustration caused by your confusion, merely a chortle or two, especially when all you needed to do was "go and check that out", which you eventually did, but it was fun while it lasted.

                      I'll look forward to next time, although that might be a wee while away because benefits and the lot of the poorest doesn't get discussed that often on this site.  If it does, and you feel the urge to make me accountable for my bullshit, feel free to go crazy with the barbs because it'll give me licence to call you a you-know-what again.

                       

                       

  6. Kat 6

    Those last swirls of bathwater going down the plughole always make that loud gurgling, almost a screeching, strangled, deranged sound.

  7. Peter 7

    Hosking was all pissy when the PM's baby was born. The fuss upset him. "It's only a baby," he said, the code for "who the fuck cares, she's getting attention, it's only a bloody baby, everyone's been one at a some stage." 

    So he goes to London for a week for a royal wedding. You know, a wedding, a lot of people have one. And tries to build it up into the most important thing in the history of the world.

    Yes Mike everyone's been a baby, are you figuring on leaving your babyhood behind?

    • michelle 7.1

      hoskings was all pissy when they lost the election i enjoyed watching his face and his reactions and i will enjoy watching it again when they get a hiding at the next election cause they don't have a decent leader actually do they have decent  person in their party 

      • Nick 7.1.1

        Michelle, The natz seem to have no decent humans in their party, it's very sad, considering the influence and profile and responsibilities they have.

        And, to listen to Bridges speak is just so ridiculous, it's like Monty Python outtakes. 

  8. AB 8

    We have an oversupply of idiot, right wing opinion writers who mistake  their own material comfort as a marker of a successful society. They are a handbrake on progress.

  9. michelle 9

    Look after the living our soldiers died for us to have a better life exactly what Jacinda is trying to do. But our Maori soldiers will be turning in their graves seeing how we have been treated like shit after they made the ultimate sacrifice.  

  10. Sanctuary 10

     with the decline of blogs in favour of twitter and without Slater feeding Farrar then farrar laundering the smears to the press gallery the whispering smears campaign they used against Helen Clark won't work anymore, so the Nats are a bit stuck at the moment.

    • Stuart Munro. 10.1

      It does no harm that Jacinda is both pretty and kind, every cheap shot makes the author look like a churl. The day will come when the Gnats realize that they cannot just fling poo like a cage full of monkeys, they have to create a critique that makes them appear to be a more credible government. Not in our lifetimes of course, the penny takes a mortal long time to drop for people as thick as the Gnats.

  11. mac1 11

    “So the day after her Waitakere speech she visited Marlborough where she again spoke about the wellbeing budget, this time to the local Chamber of Commerce.”

    In Blenheim she spoke to 300 Chamber of Commerce members, District Councillors and the Mayor. The event cost $34.50 and was a fine occasion as she showed the reasoning behind the Wellbeing Budget, the shift in process and thinking, the need for measuring progress, the increased accountability, the rationale behind the major expenditure changes.

    She showed empathy, charm and poise, even in the face of an 'in your face' local CEO from the salmon industry who asked a question in the full meeting and then badgered her afterwards.

    It was left to the PM to discern that the chair of the meeting from the Chamber was allowing questions only from men from the specially designated seating for dignitaries so classified in the front three rows. She had to point this out and then one question came from one woman from amongst us lesser mortals in the further back rows. The chair then closed questions to allow a time for informal meeting with the PM in the foyer which the salmon man then monopolised.

    Poor chairing, poor organisation, poor hosting. It showed that the captains of industry really do not know how to organise, as there was not even a glass of water provided for the PM. A plastic bottle of water had to be fetched in by the chairman and given to the PM. There was not even a flat surface to put the bottle on. There was no person detailed to shut down the haranguing monopolisers afterwards, and move the PM on to other people.

    But she kept her cool, her kindness, her behaviour appropriate. She read the audience well and was fully capable of footing it with the questioners.

     

    • Simbit 11.1

      Thanks for those details Mac1. She sounds like a class act, not the first time she would've been at risk of being compromised by poor local leadership I'm sure. Won't be the last. I suspect she picks up 20, 30 votes everytime she's in a public meeting of this size. 

      As for D-Day, it only mattered on, well, D-Day. The next day was D+1, getting to D+2 was the focus etc. etc…

      • greywarshark 11.1.1

        That's a good point about the handling of the meeting.    I have strong views about how this should be done correctly so that all who want to have a say get a chance, and the importance of a timekeeper who treats speakers fairly.    It is courteous to run the meeting well, but also to enable people who have travelled to the venue to have a good chance to hear the speaker on whatever subject is of importance to them.

        I think well run meetings to allow the above are in the minority.

    • Gabby 11.2

      Sounds as if they organised it just the way they wanted it.

      • mac1 11.2.1

        Partly so. There was a plan for seating and questioning and have seen similar pre-arrangements in other organisations, from election meetings to AGM/conferences.

        But my experience in politics also is that many top managers don't know how to organise minutiae, as that is left to staff. The organisation I represented at the meeting could have organised that meeting fully as we run public meetings as part of our work, annually. We have good organisers, and use them.

        Otherwise, we would look bad as the Chamber of Commerce does in this situation, especially when trying to showcase to the Prime Minister how state of the art local business and industry is, when they can’t even organise a simple public meeting!

    • Sarah 11.3

      Back a few years I heard Jacinda debate in the House on child poverty and thought then that she was the best MP in Parliament. She was a backbencher, passionate, articulate, and knew her stuff. I'm not surprised at her ability during this meeting, but am impressed yet again by her. A big heart coupled with a huge intellect.

      We have to work hard at grassroots level to help keep her as our PM in the coming election as the knives will be everywhere.

      • mac1 11.3.1

        A little update today. Two young women overheard discussing the PM's visit above. "Did you hear Jacinda speak?" "The other replied "Yes, she was great."

  12. Enough is Enough 12

    Nice use of the right's Key meme from the last National Government.no

  13. Reality 13

    Hosking and his ilk are so having the sulks and tantrums because Jacinda's ratings are so high.  Almost funny, if it wasn't so unbalanced.  If she had gone to the 75th commemorations, he would have been tumbling over himself to rant about her photo ops with world leaders.  He really is a thoroughly horrible person.  Why does the Herald allow him to constantly spout his nastiness.  Do people ever query the Herald about this?

    • Sarah 13.1

      In the past a few of my friends and I did, got zero response, and now we just don't bother to read his spite. Giving him clicks is what keeps him there so we decided not to.

      • greywarshark 13.1.1

        Try writing a letter addressed to the CEO about Hosking.    It would annoy the hell out of them having to deal with something physical that takes energy to crumple up and throw in the rubbish bin.

  14. ankerawshark 14

    Ha, ha, ha, ha ha.  Great feeling to see Mike fail so miserably when trying to attack the PM.  He's hurting bad………….

     

  15. ankerawshark 15

    Also wasn't Jacinda attacked by Mike or some of his elk for having to take an extra flight to get to the Pacific Forum due to breast feeding baby Neve.  Might not have been Hosking though.

    The right have nothing at the moment………except leaks.  Oh the hypocracy of Simon leaking after being up an arms about being leaked on………

     

    BTW think I said this before, but my young hairdresser said they were not political at all, don't follow it.  But somehow politics came up (likely me) and they said, thought it was great the money being spent on mental health.  And Jacinda was doing a good job.  Suspect Labour will get his vote.

  16. esoteric pineapples 16

    "This speaks volumes about what their priorities are."

    I don't they have any priorities full stop, same way as vandals don't have priorities

  17. ankerawshark 17

    Priority Esoteric is to gain power any way they can and then do nothing and help out their business buddies….

    BTW around the time of the budget I was asking myself what did National spend our money on??????  Ok roads of national significance and of course the flag, but was scratching my head.  Maybe one of our resident trolls can enlighten me, although they may not be joining us on this post because the realize the humiliation that is Mike H.  Hard for them to deny or bare.

    • dv 17.1

      2.6 billion on SCF

       

      • WeTheBleeple 17.1.1

        Handouts for some poor Saudi billionaires.

        225K for eminem cheeky

        Tax cuts for the wealthy.

        Pony tail hush money.

        Spies.

        Spyware.

        Some crappy pay software that didn't work.

        Box seats at the rugby.

        An All Black lap dance.

    • Sarah 17.2

      Our debt, in 2017, was $60b take off the $10b passed on by Labour in 2008. The gross, the actual money borrowed before you take out the value of stuff like SOE's, hospital buildings, or roads, was about $90b over the 9 years. I've wondered for years where it all went as it's a lot of money and Chch was almost fiscally neutral after insurance and all that lovely extra GST earned.

      Add in the revenue and taxes and they had a lot of money to play with – I've always thought our essential services should have had money pumped in but it was all tightening belts, and austerity for anyone who wasn't already comfortably well off.

      One of the big spends was South Cant Finance, but I read an article the other day which basically said it was all completely unnecessary. 

  18. Jess NZ 18

    Our local religious extremist Nat MP Simon O'Connor promoted a public meeting on "Can We Afford Budget 2019?", with himself and a Nat finance mate Alastair Scott MP as experts. When he first posted it on Neighbourly, replies were enabled 🙂 I asked if we could afford NOT to, given current inequality, and questioned the value of the information in the event given only opposition Nat MPs there and no government representation to reply.

    Nek minnit, event deleted and reposted with replies disabled. 

    I assume a meeting like this would be funded by the party, not all of us?

     

  19. Chris T 19

    I do find it a bit off she didn't go to be fair.

    Or at least send Ron Mark.

    • left_forward 19.1

      You have read the article and the comments Crusty?

       

      • Rapunzel 19.1.1

        Things may not have reached "perfection" yet but some are having a devil of a job accepting the mood change of the majority of NZers.

    • peterh 19.2

      And if she had gone. all you pricks would have said, why is she out of the country all the time, and at the end of the year look at all the money she spends on overseas travel

       

       

      • Chris T 19.2.1

        Um no.

        Pointless web conference and one day jaunt to China that could have been Skype yes

        D day no

        And as I said. What is Ron Marks pathetic excuse?

  20. observer 20

    If this is for 1944, then next year is … OK, you've worked it out.

    So next year the PM will probably attend events of some kind … VE Day, VJ Day, Hiroshima/Nagasaki, etc. Whether in NZ or overseas. She might even make a speech saying war isn't much fun.

    Bookmark this year's Nat-Rants now, and revisit when "Ardern plays politics in election year", and Hosking is "Outraged".

  21. Yeah shes bullshit,… according to Mike the greying , balding silly haircut Hoskings …

    Meh , … he's a spent force. Pay him no heed. No one cares what he thinks.

    This speaks volumes :

    …'' We on the left used to be accused of suffering from Deranged Key Syndrome. I think the right wing equivalent is clearly appearing''….

    * @ IPRENT , – for God'sakes do something about your website. No longer happy about holding down the damn delete button for 5 minutes deleting multiple copies of some trivial arsed comment or link or You Tube just to post here.

    FFS.

    A closer look at – Guy Chases Bigfoot In The Woods – YouTube



     

     

     

     

    • BM 21.1

      The problem is more than likely at your end.

      • WILD KATIPO 21.1.1

        … '' Keep your end up , mate '' … is what my father used to say to me… he's 89 and my mother is 93,… she still drives around Auckland traffic and is as lucid as she was when  45… so according to that ,… your stuck with me for  a very long, long time.

        I hope your in it for the long haul mate  cos I aint going nowhere's soon.

        • Psycho Milt 21.1.1.1

          Your dad obviously knew a thing or two.  No-one else has reported experiencing these problems with The Standard, which means BM is right and your dad's advice needs heeding:  it's your end that needs keeping up and that isn't lprent's job, it's yours.  Try a different browser or something.  

      • In Vino 21.1.2

        Rarely do I agree with you, BM.

        Show some manners to lprent, Katipo.

  22. Tiger Mountain 22

    Memo to Herald:
    Please put “Cockskin” behind the Paywall–for the love of etc…our ripped jean hero has done more than enough for his Nat masters, surely…

  23. BM 23

    Hosking makes some good points, complete lack of political awareness by Ardern.

    What a doofus.

    • Hosking makes some good points? – ROFL !!!

      But I will agree with you on one point , Hosking IS a doofus !

      He's a dinosaur , politically biased , and irrelevant. And the ONLY reason anyone EVER  listens to him nowadays is for the comedy value , we no longer have McPhail and Gadsby , … but we DO have Mike Hosking.

      And even then ,… the humour is totally misplaced and at the wrong crowd. 

      And that's why we tune in regularly … to see the dumb arse right wing in all their glorious Shakespearian pantomimes being played out as the unwitting fools they are .

      Kind of like the village idiots yearly day out except , – that its a weekly event.

      • Stuart Munro. 23.1.1

        "He's a dinosaur"

        Jesus – he's barely even a lizard.

        • WILD KATIPO 23.1.1.1

          Skink ,… perhaps.

            • bewildered 23.1.1.1.1.1

              I pray for the day when chickens can cross the road and there intent is not questioned

              • In Vino

                And I pray for the day when even the Befuddled can tell the difference between 'their' and 'there'.

                • Anne

                  My bugbear is 'bought and brought'. I cannot believe how often the younger generation in particular get it wrong. They don't teach English proper… like they did in our day In Vino. 🙁

                  • Incognito

                    To be fair to the younger generation, I find it increasingly difficult to tell apart Mike Hosking and Simon Bridges. They are starting to sound so similar.

                  • Unfortunately JA gets 'bought' and 'brought'  wrong every time. And if she's not careful she'll lose some of the shine and the perceived 'connection' with the electorate (well deserved IMHO) if she buys into much more polly and spin-speak. (Too much time with the 'officials' prolly).

                    By the way, Sue Allen on Stuffed would have it that Soimon should be preard ofiz eggsent. Oim thinkung she prolly thinks it's koina quaint.

                    • Anne

                      Unfortunately JA gets 'bought' and 'brought'  wrong every time.

                      Yes. And together with 'anythink and everythink' it's not a good look.

                      Some people here see it as me being "anti Jacinda". It’s the opposite. She’s the best thing to happen to NZ in many a decade, and I don't want to see her ridiculed for it. We have already seen how low the Nat opposition is prepared to go in the last two weeks.

                    • I'm tempted…..so I will.

                      As in

                      JA bRought a load of gluten-free muffins and a bottle of whiskey to last year's Martinborough 'bRing and buy' cake stall and post election conference.

                      Whilst Jacinda didn't purchase a thing, officials bOught the lot whilst she toasted their efforts with a glass of whiskey, as they quaffed local chardonnay using local grape varieties picked by slave labour..

                      Bring and Buy

                      Brought and Bought

                    • In Vino

                      This may be deliberate policy on the part of JA.

                      John Key constantly mangled the English language, but was hugely popular.

                      Geoff Palmer was probably the most grammatically competent PM we have ever had, but he had no success with public popularity.

                      JA is making herself a common person by this not-too-posh talk, while she has a similar charm to John Key's – except that I find her more credible, … at least in words if not always in deeds. 

                    • Anne

                      I think its a generational thing In Vino. Jacinda is by no means the only one of her generation to mix them up.

                      The best way to remember is to think of them in their present and past tenses:

                      Buy a cake. Bought a cake – buy/bought.

                      Bring a cake. – Brought a cake – bring/brought.

                • WeTheBleeple

                  But it was a surprisingly good joke.

    • Dukeofurl 23.2

      Did Key go to the 70th D Day ?

      Not photographed amoung the world leaders, but the Governor General  at the time is 

  24. Bewildered 24

    I am sure Mike is very happy that he lives rent free in all your heads and the profile you provide him 

    • barfly 24.1

      Mike who?

      • Bewildered 24.1.1

        Hmmm joining the dots not your strong point Barfly Hint follow the threads albeit I know you are taking the piss 😊

        • Drowsy M. Kram 24.1.1.1

          National ~40%, yet "The lowest result ever for an opposition leader in our poll."

          Comparisons to Ardern do Bridges no favours – nor the Hosk for that matter.

          Applying Occam's razor, Bridges is awful, and "Maureen Pugh is f***ing useless."

          Nevertheless, Bridges is safe for now – after all, who really wants his job?

  25. Dukeofurl 25

    Some time , maybe about 15 years ago , emails were revelaed which showed the Business Round Table back in the late 80s and 90s was paying  media columists extra money on top of their regular fee for  'favourable' stories that covered   topics that    essentially were aligned  to neoliberal economics in  all sorts of things  like education hospitals, taxation Social   welfare etc.

    Some were paid  for 'opinion pieces' that are often offered to  Newspapers for Free. 

    Newspapers like the Dominion and its right wing editor of the time were in on the  deal and knew their  paid for columnists were getting extra money.

     

    Its almost like those times have returned  and  someone with deep pockets is funding  opinions that  align with the  Right wing.   These people would have a deep antipathy to Ardern and labour and  money to do something about it 

    • Muttonbird 25.1

      I reckon Stacey Kirk is getting a top up from the National Party.

    • Dukeofurl 25.2

      People like Martin Bradbury were quickly pushed off the stage when  he would talk in a completely negative way about Key.

      Yet now the tables are turned ,  totally negative views about Ardern and labour are mainstream

  26. R.P Mcmurphy 26

    mike hoksing is a horrible nasty little man with no manners, morals, scruples or any idea whatsoever except his unbounded desire to consume and acquire. anything that stands in the way of his obsession will get the full treatment only available to nasty little right wingers like him who have spent their lives sucking up to the owners and bosses. He never created anything on his own and he never will and if push came to shove he would be the absolute last person I would choose to have my back in a conflict. all mouth and no backbone.

     

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Compliance strengthened for property speculation
    Inland Revenue is to gain greater oversight of land transfer information to ensure those buying and selling properties are complying with tax rules on property speculation. Cabinet has agreed to implement recommendation 99 of the Tax Working Group’s (TWG) final ...
    7 days ago
  • Plan to expand protection for Maui and Hector’s dolphins
    The Government is taking action to expand and strengthen the protection for Māui and Hector’s dolphins with an updated plan to deal with threats to these native marine mammals. Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage and Minister of Fisheries Stuart Nash ...
    1 week ago
  • Cameras on vessels to ensure sustainable fisheries
    Commercial fishing vessels at greatest risk of encountering the rare Māui dolphin will be required to operate with on-board cameras from 1 November, as the next step to strengthen our fisheries management system. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Fisheries Minister ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Greatest number of new Police in a single year
    A new record for the number of Police officers deployed to the regions in a single year has been created with the graduation today of Recruit Wing 326. Police Minister Stuart Nash says the graduation of 78 new constables means ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Ensuring multinationals pay their fair share of tax
    New Zealand is pushing on with efforts to ensure multinational companies pay their fair share of tax, with the release of proposed options for a digital services tax (DST). In February Cabinet agreed to consult the public on the problem ...
    3 weeks ago