Hide gone by lunchtime

174 comments on “Hide gone by lunchtime ”

• Comments are now closed

1. higherstandard 1

   28 April 2011 at 12:24 pm

   Congress Tart !
2. Zorr 2

   28 April 2011 at 12:26 pm

   I will be very interested in seeing how this affects the polling because this massively changes the setting…
3. The Economic Illiteracy Support Group 3

   28 April 2011 at 12:27 pm

   Presumably Don Brash’s cheque for his Act Party membership is in the mail.
   • the sprout 3.1

     28 April 2011 at 12:28 pm

     indeed 😉
     • Colonial Viper 3.1.1

       28 April 2011 at 12:28 pm

       Rodney had offered to pay for Brash’s ACT membership, wonder if that offer still stands? 🙂
       • Lanthanide 3.1.1.1

         28 April 2011 at 12:58 pm

         Brash already turned him down on it.
   • Monty 3.2

     28 April 2011 at 1:10 pm

     Well I will now be renewing my lapsed Act Membership. It will be great to have Don Brash at the Helm of Act and they can now provide a backbone to the Nats. In the meantime the Nats can control the centre. This leaves Labour to fight it out for the left with John Hatfield’s racist party and the looney Greenies (and to a lesser extent the Maori Party)
     • felix 3.2.1

       28 April 2011 at 1:43 pm

       You can’t bring yourself to use his maori name but he’s the racist?

       Good one Monty. LUL.
       • NickS 3.2.1.1

         28 April 2011 at 4:09 pm

         But dontcha know? It’s not racist if white dudes do it.
       • Monty 3.2.1.2

         28 April 2011 at 7:59 pm

         From Cactus Kate “ACT is primarily a pro-business, one law for all, anti-welfarism, low flat tax party”.

         Excellent. Please lefties continue to focus on raising Act’s Profile – you will help us easily exceed the 5%

         I call Hone “John Hatfield” because he is the racist. I like to remind him and all his feral supporters of his European Whakapapa as well. I like to remind people that we are all a bit of a mix of everything. Hone is a Racist. He is the one who calls us all while Mother-Fuckers, who would not let his daughter go out with a lad because of their race. So Felix who does not knowme, how about you don’t make assumptions when you know stuff all.
         • The Voice of Reason 3.2.1.2.1

           28 April 2011 at 8:09 pm

           Hone’s surname is Harawira, you dork. It’s his family’s choice and their absolute right to self identify any way they want. So what if at some point in their history they had an Anglicised surname? Or a percentage of pakeha blood running in their veins?

           It’s their history, their blood. And their name, any way they want to spell it.
         • felix 3.2.1.2.2

           28 April 2011 at 11:30 pm

           But Monty I know

           all I need know about you.

           Ignorant racist
           • Vinsin 3.2.1.2.2.1

             28 April 2011 at 11:33 pm

             Yeah Monty should go eat a bag of dicks, white ones though, cos the blacks ones are…

             Prone to violence and dole bludging.
         • twgmbd 3.2.1.2.3

           28 April 2011 at 11:44 pm

           “I like to remind him and all his feral supporters of his European Whakapapa as well. I like to remind people that we are all a bit of a mix of everything.”

           Just in regards to this remark – while you’re going around giving out your mixed heritage alerts, I hope you remember to do so the next time there’s a ‘feral’ cheeky darkie on the front page of your Dom who has committed some crime. If your grandfather’s sitting there fuming saying “bloody Maori’s” I hope you’d be consistent enough to tell him, no grandfather, “bloody NZer’s. We’re all a mix of everything”.

           Oftentimes it feels like when we do well, we’re “NZers”, when we stand up for our rights we’re “mixed”, and when we do bad, we’re “Māori”.

           Just my 2 cents!
           • Mac1 3.2.1.2.3.1

             29 April 2011 at 12:10 am

             “Oftentimes it feels like when we do well, we’re “NZers”, when we stand up for our rights we’re “mixed”, and when we do bad, we’re “Māori”.”

             True elsewhere, too, twgmbd. When Seamus Heaney, the Irish poet, became Poet Laureate he appreciated the selectivity of being labelled a British poet in the English press.
         • Blighty 3.2.1.2.4

           28 April 2011 at 11:59 pm

           I guess then that I’ll have to call you Gomeric’s hill http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/1/Montgomery from now on, because you’re a racist.
         • Jum 3.2.1.2.5

           29 April 2011 at 12:26 am

           Monty,

           “ACT is a… low flat tax party”.

           Oh dear. Does the business roundtable know that Act is actually gonna make them pay taxes? What are they going to do with the loop-hole lawyers and the overseas tax havens, etc etc.
     • The Economic Illiteracy Support Group 3.2.2

       28 April 2011 at 4:07 pm

       That’s the problem with politics in NZ at the moment – with posts like Monty’s that are actually serious, it’s impossible to do satire.
     • Draco T Bastard 3.2.3

       28 April 2011 at 4:51 pm

       National haven’t been in the “centre” for a looong time.
       • Monty 3.2.3.1

         28 April 2011 at 8:11 pm

         I agree – they have been a bunch of bloody lefties – Now National can control that middle ground and leave the right to Act, while Labour get squeezed into irrelevance.

         Oh Happy days.
         • mickysavage 3.2.3.1.1

           28 April 2011 at 8:24 pm

           So Atilla the Hun was a centrist?
         • Draco T Bastard 3.2.3.1.2

           28 April 2011 at 8:41 pm

           No, they’ve been radical right-authoritarian since at least the 1990s. They’ve always been authoritarian of course as Muldoon proved beyond doubt but before the radical turn to the right that Labour took in the 1980s they were probably a “centre” (IMO, Keynesianism is politically centre) party. Labours swing to the right forced National to go even more right. Now? Well, lets just say that National and Act are joined at the hip on the radical right side of the political spectrum and that both are dictatorial.
         • Jum 3.2.3.1.3

           29 April 2011 at 12:28 am

           Monty

           Pythonesque. Hiss.
4. freedom 4

   28 April 2011 at 12:30 pm

   ” If he was rolled, Mr Hide said, he would continue to “support John Key and work to honour the confidence and supply agreement”.

   “But Don Brash has been very clear about my future … He said there’s no room for me in Parliament.” ”

   is Hide about to be forced to resign from Parliament?
   • Tigger 4.1

     28 April 2011 at 1:09 pm

     “Mr Hide said he was “immensely proud of the Act Party” and would stay on in Parliament as a minister in the John Key led Government.”

     So no, I guess…or maybe yes. Brash is now leading a party he doesn’t even belong to so not expecting there to be much common sense going on concerning ACT…
5. rd 5

   28 April 2011 at 12:31 pm

   Don Brash the next minister of finance?
   • Monty 5.1

     28 April 2011 at 8:01 pm

     National will not do so because they do not have the balls. There would ne nothing better than the best economic mind this country has ever produced becoming the Minister of Finance.
     • Armchair Critic 5.1.1

       28 April 2011 at 8:35 pm

       There would ne nothing better than the best economic mind this country has ever produced becoming the Minister of Finance.
       So definitely not Don Brash, then.
     • mickysavage 5.1.2

       28 April 2011 at 8:40 pm

       What is Michael Cullen making a comeback?
     • Colonial Viper 5.1.3

       28 April 2011 at 8:41 pm

       There would ne nothing better than the best economic mind this country has ever produced becoming the Minister of Finance.

       An economic mind which still subscribes to the highly discredited free market neoliberal ideology which has already been proven time and again over years to be a load of shit?

       A free market ideology which only still exists because the big corporates and the already wealthy cream it under the system, promising benefits for the masses which never come (because the rich are too busy extracting wealth for themselves)?

       Trust you to push for impoverishing the country Monty.
       • ZeeBop 5.1.3.1

         28 April 2011 at 10:00 pm

         Free market ideology was not thought up, it was a natural emergence from a time of cheap energy and cheap credit. The opening up of middle east oil after the 70’s oil spike and the movement of by left and right governments to claim growth the resulted, and thus requiring a ideology. Basically the lazy politicians got out in front and declared the growth was their economic philosophy that did it. As we now are seeing as energy prices rise, and debt is huge that only the stupidest, least held to account, politicians remain advocates. i.e. little NZ off the beaten track beehive.
         • Colonial Viper 5.1.3.1.1

           28 April 2011 at 10:10 pm

           Free market ideology was not thought up, it was a natural emergence from a time of cheap energy and cheap credit.

           This is a ridiculous comment, free market ideology is not a fungus, it did not just become a “natural emergence” like a star forming in a nebula.

           Did the papers on neoliberal economics write themselves and publish themselves in economic journals?

           Was there no such thing as cheap energy and cheap credit during the oil gushes of the 1920’s?

           You are full of it.

           Basically the lazy politicians got out in front and declared the growth was their economic philosophy that did it.

           Maybe you should go look up the origins of the Chicago School of Economics before you start spouting more shite.
           • Draco T Bastard 5.1.3.1.1.1

             29 April 2011 at 12:12 am

             Laissez-faire

             There are some differences between Laissez-faire and neo-liberalism but not many. The two are often referred to as Classical Economics and Neo-Classical – guess which is which. Zeebop’s paragraph is overly simple but essentially correct although I think it would be more accurate to say the advent of the industrial revolution rather than cheap credit and energy brought about the growth meme that is at the heart of contemporary economic and political thought.
     • Name (required) 5.1.4

       28 April 2011 at 9:45 pm

       Monty’s probably correct, Don Brash is the best economic mind this country has produced. The problem is that the best economic mind this country has produced is still an unimaginative, third-rate, ‘stuck-in-the-seventies’ hack economist which is why New Zealand with everything it has going for it is still an economic basket-case.
6. sdm 6

   28 April 2011 at 12:35 pm

   Maybe Key could use the turmoil in Act to justify an early election – oh no wait, thats what Clark did…..
   • Colonial Viper 6.1

     28 April 2011 at 12:44 pm

     What the frak are you on about
     • Lanthanide 6.1.1

       28 April 2011 at 12:59 pm

       Clark went early in 2002 because of the Alliance disintegration.
       • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1

         28 April 2011 at 10:12 pm

         And ACT is still a functioning party with a functioning caucus and party machinery.

         So sdm is full of it with a false parallel he’s trying to draw.
   • the sprout 6.2

     28 April 2011 at 12:54 pm

     i had suggested before National would seek to engineer a reason to go to the polls early
     • Colonial Viper 6.2.1

       28 April 2011 at 2:20 pm

       Yep agree. John Key doesn’t believe the All Blacks have a chance this year and he won’t risk a late election because of that.
       • freedom 6.2.1.1

         28 April 2011 at 4:05 pm

         National desperately need the All Blacks to win. The RWC is a grenade of discontent and lately a whole lot of Sellotape is being wound around the pin
         • U 4 United 6.2.1.1.1

           28 April 2011 at 8:41 pm

           If this were true why hasn’t he already called for a pre-winter pre-RWC election? Viper is wrong, Key is currently risking a late election. if I were he, I’d have called a May general election.
           • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.1.1.1

             28 April 2011 at 8:47 pm

             Budget in May so I think that an election can be called for then (could be wrong though). That said, I don’t think NACT would have called an election before being able to put through this years budget.
             • Deadly_NZ …

               28 April 2011 at 10:59 pm

               Naa if he called a snap election it would have to be about 6 to 8 weeks out. Has to be seen to be fair. So mid to late July cold, wet, windy, miserable, winters afternoon, low turn out election. Now who will win in that scenario??
7. mickysavage 7

   28 April 2011 at 12:35 pm

   Yee ha

   Sharpen those stakes and prepare the garlic. One down but a few to go …
   • Colonial Viper 7.1

     28 April 2011 at 12:45 pm

     Problem is there are queues of these Right Wing undead waiting in the wings.
     • vrykolakas 7.1.1

       28 April 2011 at 1:25 pm

       Whew .. I was getting worried about you, Viper !
       • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1

         28 April 2011 at 2:21 pm

         🙂
8. Peter 8

   28 April 2011 at 12:36 pm

   Will the MSM be commenting on Keys incompetence with respect to his inability to retain loyalty from a high-profile party member, former party leader and colleague? How much does this move to Act represent wider dissatisfaction within National ranks?
9. r0b 9

   28 April 2011 at 12:38 pm

   Goodbye Rodney, you won’t be missed.

   One of the things I find most mind-numblingly stupid about ACT (and all the little ACToids) is their wilful ignorance on climate change. Does anyone know Brash’s position on this?
   • Pascal's bookie 9.1

     28 April 2011 at 12:47 pm

     Isn’t Gibbs a backer of Brash?
     • higherstandard 9.1.1

       28 April 2011 at 1:18 pm

       There are three key people running this behind the scenes Gibbs is one of them.
       • NickS 9.1.1.1

         28 April 2011 at 1:26 pm

         Thanks, evidently Gibb’s isn’t pleased with his return on investment with Hide, though he’d probably been better off focusing on National and trying to drag them back to the right.
       • joe90 9.1.1.2

         28 April 2011 at 1:55 pm

         Farmer and Heatly?.

         Various known donors to political parties show up here and there – Trevor Farmer (Act), Craig Heatley (Act), the Vela family (NZ First), and Doug Myers (Act).
   • NickS 9.2

     28 April 2011 at 12:59 pm

     It’ll probably be what Rodney’s was, i.e. “what’s the opinion of whoever’s paying me the most?”

     However a quick google shows that he’s “sceptical” and a NZH article suggests that Don understands sweet fuck all about climate change. Because teh evidence has rather fucking solid that the climate was potentially warming since the 1970’s iirc and thanks to Mann et al’s work in the 1990’s it was further reinforced that emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases altered heat exchange in the Earth’s atmosphere.
   • lprent 9.3

     28 April 2011 at 2:33 pm

     Does anyone know Brash’s position on this?

     I have no idea. But I bet that it eventually winds up as being “I’m too old to understand”. I’ve found that talking about climate change to people who are older than I am usually results in a discussion that has an emphasis on belief rather than science.
     • The Economic Illiteracy Support Group 9.3.1

       28 April 2011 at 4:36 pm

       Gordon Campbell nails the age issue:

       Since its inception, Act has always portrayed itself as a feisty party of new ideas, a think tank able to offer fresh solutions to the government. Not under Brash and Banks, obviously. Carbon test the pair of them, and you wouldn’t find a trace of freshness and originality in their combined political DNA. The problem isn’t so much that Brash is now 70 – its that he’s been 70 for the past 25 years. His policy positions haven’t changed one iota since 1985.
   • Steve Wrathall 9.4

     28 April 2011 at 3:17 pm

     What are these facts about climate change that you accuse us of being ignorant of? That we are in a moderate warming treand that has happened before and will happen again, and that loading costs onto NZ households will have zero effect on this?
     • r0b 9.4.1

       28 April 2011 at 3:21 pm

       What are these facts about climate change that you accuse us of being ignorant of?

       All of them.
       • Steve Wrathall 9.4.1.1

         28 April 2011 at 3:40 pm

         I’ll take your non-answer as an acknowledgement that you realise that climate alarmism is a busted flush, and ACT’s anti-ETS stance, positions it very nicely for thei year’s election.
         • r0b 9.4.1.1.1

           28 April 2011 at 3:43 pm

           Go buy yourself a copy of the book Eaarth, and a box of red crayons.
           • McFlock 9.4.1.1.1.1

             28 April 2011 at 5:48 pm

             His argument is so powerful he doesn’t need the crayons.
     • NickS 9.4.2

       28 April 2011 at 3:50 pm

       Oh, it’s you.

       I see you still haven’t picked up even the basics, even after all the hours spent by those on Hot Topic cluebatting you. So you know what? Just fuck off, you’re an utter twit and not worth wasting any serious amount of time on because you’ve shown time and time again that you cannot learn. But then again you are an ACToid…
10. Policy Parrot 10

    28 April 2011 at 12:41 pm

    Now, Prime Minister, you’ve ruled out working with so called extremists in the past, for example, this year alone you have ruled out National working with NZ First leader Winston Peters, and then, independent MP Hone Harawira (or any iteration of a political vehicle that involves him).

    Will you now, knowing that both New Zealand voters generally, and you yourself consider, Dr. Brash to be an extremist, work with him as leader of the ACT Party? And if so, do you consider such a hypocritical stance will hurt your image with voters?
    • Samuel Hill 10.1

      28 April 2011 at 12:52 pm

      No, because then he would have nobody to form a coalition with, and now that Brash is the leader of Act, Hide would not have any business still being a minister. This is the hypocrisy of John Key, a man who traded our livelihood’s away for his own and foreign investor’s profits in the 80s and 90s, and is now trying to “save the economy”.
      • Graeme 10.1.1

        28 April 2011 at 2:45 pm

        Have you got any more details on John Keys selling NZ down the drain back then as money meister.

        I heard he nearly crashed the NZ$ for his billionaire masters. but can’t find the details.
        Thanks
        • Draco T Bastard 10.1.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 5:11 pm

          Check on travellerev’s blog – I’m sure she’s done the most checking into John Key’s trader timeline.
    • Oleolebiscuitbarrell 10.2

      28 April 2011 at 1:24 pm

      “…knowing that both New Zealand voters generally…consider, Dr. Brash to be an extremist…”

      Ummm, the guy came within about 50,000 votes of being the PM in 2005. Doesn’t seem like the 900,000-odd people who voted for National then thought him to be an extremist. Or were those people extremists too?
      • felix 10.2.1

        28 April 2011 at 1:29 pm

        Key called him an extremist quite recently, didn’t he?
        • Oleolebiscuitbarrell 10.2.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 1:32 pm

          Dunno. If he did, it just goes to show just how centrist Key is.
          • the sprout 10.2.1.1.1

            28 April 2011 at 1:59 pm

            Here… Key calls Brash “a political extremist”
            Stuff, 26 April
          • felix 10.2.1.1.2

            28 April 2011 at 2:01 pm

            Nah it shows how centrist Key needed to appear in that particular setting to that particular audience on that particular day, but nothing Key says can ever be taken as meaning anything specific or particular. He’s very particular about that.

            When Key talks to the ACToids directly, however, he’s one of them.
    • Alwyn 10.3

      28 April 2011 at 2:16 pm

      John Key didn’t rule out working with Winston because he was “extremist”.
      He ruled out working with Winston because he could not be trusted and because he lied.
      Admittedly these traits seemed to make Winnie more acceptabble to Labour.
      • Carol 10.3.1

        28 April 2011 at 3:16 pm

        He ruled out working with Winston because he could not be trusted and because he lied.
        Admittedly these traits seemed to make Winnie more acceptable to Labour.

        Wow, and Brash, of course, is totally trustworthy and honest….. no wait… hollowman, ex-wives….
        • felix 10.3.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 3:51 pm

          … exclusive brethren deal, “gone by lunchtime”…
      • the pink postman 10.3.2

        28 April 2011 at 4:05 pm

        Two ex wives would say Brash cannot be trusted. Key has also lied so much I wonder if he has any idea what the truth is. At least Helen Clark told the truth when asked questions. She did not tell people just what they wanted hear. She must be laughing her head off at the UN office at this comedy .Being an opera fan she will be thinking what a good opera it would make .Verdi would make it a best seller , but I would prefer Rossini for this hillarious comedy .
      • Draco T Bastard 10.3.3

        28 April 2011 at 5:17 pm

        Considering how much John Key and Brash have lied I wouldn’t think that would be that much of a hindrance. Perhaps the real problem was that Winston was honest, egotistical but honest.
11. toad 11

    28 April 2011 at 12:46 pm

    The Return of the Living Dead.

    Wait for the announcement that Douglas has changed his mind and decided he still has something to “contribute” in Parliament.
    • Bored 11.1

      28 April 2011 at 1:18 pm

      Living dead indeed, so to sum up Rodney who else but the Bard…..

      “Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”.
12. Samuel Hill 12

    28 April 2011 at 12:48 pm

    So, what are the laws on how many parties you can be a member of?
    • Lanthanide 12.1

      28 April 2011 at 1:02 pm

      I’m pretty sure there aren’t any ‘laws’ about who can belong to what political parties – this isn’t communist China.

      It would be up the parties themselves to determine criteria for membership.
    • Graeme Edgeler 12.2

      28 April 2011 at 1:03 pm

      New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990:

      17 Freedom of association

      Everyone has the right to freedom of association.

      It’s up to the parties themselves. Some allow it (The Progressives with Labour). Some require it (United Future). Some forbid it (National).
      • Samuel Hill 12.2.1

        28 April 2011 at 1:07 pm

        So I can join as many parties as I like, Graeme?
        • Graeme Edgeler 12.2.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 3:56 pm

          You can join as many parties as will have you, not as many as you like!
          [the parties and the other members in them have freedom of association too.]

          You cannot stand as a list candidate for more than one party, or as a candidate in more than concurrently run constituency election.

          You can run as a constituency candidate for one party and a list candidate for another in some circumstances (e.g. when the Alliance was big, a candidate could be a Mana Motuhake or Green Party electorate candidate, and an Alliance list candidate).
    • Rich 12.3

      28 April 2011 at 1:07 pm

      There are none. Free association and that.

      (Although you can only be on one parties list at a time. Also, if anyone’s wondering, those not on a list at the last election can’t fill a vacancy as a list MP, even if everybody on the list stood aside. Brash can’t become an MP before the General Election unless Hide resigns, they have a by-election and he wins. Or John Key amends the Electoral Act under urgency to allow parties to nominate arbitrary candidates).

      Most normal parties have rules about multiple membership, require the leader to have been a member for a certain time, etc. ACT is different.
      • felix 12.3.1

        28 April 2011 at 1:25 pm

        “Or John Key amends the Electoral Act under urgency to allow parties to nominate arbitrary candidates”

        Couldn’t Gerry just wave his magic eclair and make it so?
        • Lanthanide 12.3.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 2:17 pm

          Only if he can spin it as being related to the earthquake recovery.
          • felix 12.3.1.1.1

            28 April 2011 at 2:44 pm

            How about “I’m trying to deal with Chch and I don’t need all this bollocks distracting me from the job. Don’s a Minister now, everyone shut the fuck up and get back to work”
      • Draco T Bastard 12.3.2

        28 April 2011 at 5:20 pm

        ACT is different.

        Yep, it’s for sale to the highest bidder which, in this instance, appears to be National.
13. Tom Gould 13

    28 April 2011 at 12:57 pm

    Amazing how the MSM can run this story like some kind of noble compromise between old friends, where one gets the top job without being either in Parliament or even a party member, and the other gets to keep all the perks and baubles and cash of high office? These lazy dickhead cub reporters really are pathetic. Little wonder the polls are the way they are.
14. hellonearthis 14

    28 April 2011 at 1:06 pm

    Does that mean he will give up his seat like they forced that nice lady to do when they got John Boscawen in?
15. felix 15

    28 April 2011 at 1:17 pm

    Bill English is so useless as a Deputy Leader.

    Every time he’s left in charge of the shop for a few days, all the shit goes down.
    • higherstandard 15.1

      28 April 2011 at 1:21 pm

      Why did you feel the need to include ” as a Deputy Leader.” ?
      • felix 15.1.1

        28 April 2011 at 1:27 pm

        Momentary lapse of impoliteness.
16. Pascal's bookie 16

    28 April 2011 at 1:17 pm

    Heather Roy laughs last eh. rember all the ACTrolls a-bleating hereabouts when that went down.

    Not so noisy now are they?

    Wonder how the blood letting behind the scenes in ACT will go.

    The new list will be fun. Who’s up, who’s down?
    • Carol 16.1

      28 April 2011 at 1:25 pm

      Act = the National Party B Team.
      • Pascal's bookie 16.1.1

        28 April 2011 at 1:38 pm

        Association of Retreads and Sockpuppets
      • McFlock 16.1.2

        28 April 2011 at 8:38 pm

        Them that can’t represent national.
        Them that can’t empathise join act.
    • Bored 16.2

      28 April 2011 at 1:34 pm

      They all have blood on their hands. Sort of sums up ACT. More quotes (this time Martin Luther King) “Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness”. Seems to me ACT profess altruism based upon selfishness and Wodders is the recipient of Brashes selfishness justified by his false altruism.
17. vrykolakas 17

    28 April 2011 at 1:32 pm

    What worries me is that Brash, on TV, looked as though he was mightily enjoying himself.

    Hey, it’s good to see an old man having fun .. for a while.

    Has he been down to meet the undead in Christchurch ?
    • Carol 17.1

      28 April 2011 at 1:42 pm

      Bash, on TV, looked as though he was mightily enjoying himself.

      How many more will the smiling assassin lead to their destruction. Rodders was the attack dog that spearheaded Key's entry into the PM role, And Rodders looked mighty pleased with himself immediately after the elections. Then came Turia, looking like the cat that swallowed the cream after the MP deal to support Key's government…. and now Brash holds out hope to get Nat back into power with a siupport partner…… will they never learn?
18. PeteG 18

    28 April 2011 at 1:40 pm

    It wil be interesting to see how this tweaks the balance of percentages. It could take a few months to settle in.

    It will also be interesting to see what Boscawen decides to do. With Hide leaving after this term it leaves the Act ranks very thin on grafters.

    A Brash/Banks ticket – more a pop gun than a BB.
    • ianmac 18.1

      28 April 2011 at 1:42 pm

      Has Hide said that he will resign? Will he still stand in Epson? Will he highly rank on the List?
      • Lanthanide 18.1.1

        28 April 2011 at 2:19 pm

        Brash said he wants him gone.

        The question is really if he’ll resign before the election or not. I’m leaning towards ‘not’.
        • Rich 18.1.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 2:56 pm

          If Hide resigns as an MP before the election is called, the law would generally require a by-election.

          The exception for this under s.136 of the Electoral Act would be if (the election being on the 26th Nov) Hide resigns after the 26th May *and* parliament passes a motion by a 75% majority agreeing to cancel the by-election.

          I would hope that Labour would refuse to support such a motion, but given their general supine attitude, they probably wouldn’t.
          • Anne 18.1.1.1.1

            28 April 2011 at 4:01 pm

            I would hope that Labour would refuse to support such a motion, but given their general supine attitude, they probably wouldn’t.

            Read Red Alert lately? Not a word about Brash and Hide. OK, I can understand them saying nothing until the outcome was known, but shouldn’t they have been out of the starting blocks by noon today? Supine attitide is right. So much ammunition for them but they’re too tired to respond?

            Edit: oh dear, just turned on Radio NZ and Goff’s in full flight! Better keep it up this time Goff.
            • Draco T Bastard 18.1.1.1.1.1

              28 April 2011 at 5:30 pm

              Still nothing there on it.
              • Carol …

                28 April 2011 at 5:33 pm

                It’s been buried in the main report about the Brash-over of Act:
                http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/73891/hide-makes-way-for-brash,-pledges-full-support

                But Labour Party leader Phil Goff says an ACT Party headed by Dr Brash would be bad news for middle and low income New Zealanders.

                Mr Goff says National will use ACT’s influence as an excuse to implement moves such as slashing the minimum wage, and cutting health and education services, Working For Families and interest-free student loans – all things “National had always wanted to do but didn’t have the courage to implement because they are not popular”.
19. ianmac 19

    28 April 2011 at 1:41 pm

    With Brash as the leader of a revitalised (???) Act, from whom will he take votes? He thinks about 10%+ but from whence do they come? National? NZF? Labour? Me? Not bluddy likely!
    • felix 19.1

      28 April 2011 at 2:37 pm

      In my humble estimation, that question both hits the nail on the head and totally misses the mark.

      On the head:
      There is no vast untapped resource of non-voting right wing extremists who are sufficiently into economic neo-liberalism, racism, and social darwinism and have just been waiting for the right political vehicle to get behind. People with those views are already voting National or ACT. There might be a handful of disgruntled National Front (or whatever they call themselves these days) to scoop up but they’re a bucket of fuck all.

      The noises from the ACToids suggesting that such a pool of support exists is, I believe, is a combination of their hubris and plain old-fashioned wishful thinking.

      Misses the mark:
      It doesn’t matter a bean. Everyone’s looking at this from ACT’s perspective but this is National’s show, not ACT’s.

      It doesn’t matter if ACT poach all of their support from National. ACT only exist (electorally) to provide National with a few free seats for the price of one. Rodney couldn’t provide those extra seats anymore so he’s gone. Simple as that.

      All the hopeful talk from the ACToids is just the chattering of useful idiots – useful to National that is. ACT doesn’t need 10%. ACT doesn’t even need 5%. ACT needs to win one seat and deliver five and National will let them stay in the sandpit and play with their toys.
      • Oleolebiscuitbarrell 19.1.1

        28 April 2011 at 2:39 pm

        They could take the foreshore discontents from Winsome.
        • the sprout 19.1.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 2:45 pm

          Yes could be problematic for Winston to some extent – and perhaps any plans to run in Epsom, although if Brash runs for it it’ll afford give Peters lots of coverage. I think a lot of potential NZF voters think NACT did Peters in last election, so they may still stay away from ACT II.
        • felix 19.1.1.2

          28 April 2011 at 2:47 pm

          I think they’ve already got all the foreshore discontents who can stomach ACT’s economics. But yeah, they’re bound to pick up a few single issue voters if they make the right noises.
        • Samuel Hill 19.1.1.3

          28 April 2011 at 3:27 pm

          ??? NZ First and Act have opposite views on selling state assets.
          • felix 19.1.1.3.1

            28 April 2011 at 3:52 pm

            Exactly, they have opposite views on just about everything economic.
            • Luxated 19.1.1.3.1.1

              28 April 2011 at 5:57 pm

              In theory they have opposite views on just about everything, NZF is nominally economically leftish and social conservative ACT is nominally economically right and social liberal. Of course in practice ACT are social conservatives too these days.
              • felix …

                28 April 2011 at 6:13 pm

                It’ll be interesting to see what happens to the last remaining shreds of ACT’s social liberalism under Brash.

                What are Brash’s views on legalizing drugs, for example?

                Will Peter McCaffrey’s fruity little club support an openly socially conservative ACT?

                Is that the reason for his new hairstyle?
                • the sprout …

                  28 April 2011 at 7:50 pm

                  Despite some polar differences, both ACT and NZF will run populist campaigns, that tends to attract a common type of voter
    • Colonial Viper 19.2

      28 April 2011 at 5:33 pm

      With Brash as the leader of a revitalised (???) Act

      When the undead can bring life and animation to an old Right Wing party, you know they are both screwed.
20. Olwyn 20

    28 April 2011 at 1:51 pm

    This from the Herald comments on the ACT takeover: “As a former Act supporter I would not vote for them if Mr Hide was leader. Don Brash would have my vote. Don Brash is straight talking and willing to swallow the bitter pills to move this country forward.”

    What is it with the NZ right! What is so heroic about the willingness to make others suffer for some sort of “general good” that is never clearly specified? Or if it is specified at all, only in biased prudential terms – so that “we will not be borrowing so much” for instance, without reference to how that borrowing came about or who it benefited.

    And the rest of us have come to expect so little that the best we can muster is a weary shrug when it is openly stated that Brash is in because he has the money, and a political party has been taken over in the manner of a business.
    • felix 20.1

      28 April 2011 at 1:56 pm

      “What is it with the NZ right! What is so heroic about the willingness to make others suffer for some sort of “general good” that is never clearly specified?”

      No no, the “general good” is making others suffer.
      • Bored 20.1.1

        28 April 2011 at 2:08 pm

        Cos being sadistic bastards it makes them feel good!
        • Colonial Viper 20.1.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 5:34 pm

          We must all sacrifice.

          Well, the 95% of YOU must, for the 5% of US 👿
    • Cheesefunnel 20.2

      28 April 2011 at 2:15 pm

      You’re correct there, it’s nowhere near the intellectual rigor shown by the left in those same comments. Example quote: ‘I would’t vote for any of those idiots. They’re like National want to take from the poor, give to there rich corporate mates.’
      • Bored 20.2.1

        28 April 2011 at 2:23 pm

        Cheees, howzabout you do a little deconstruct with some intellectual rigour on the concept of why the rich are rich? You might want to build into your case the idea that the poor cant possibly be poor because the rich have much more money….or the concept that the poor want the rich to be rich and give them their money freely to enable this. I look forward to your cogent intellectually rigorous and empirically demonstrable missive.
    • Rich 20.3

      28 April 2011 at 3:02 pm

      May have been Brash posting that himself.
21. Chris 21

    28 April 2011 at 1:58 pm

    Some of these comments on Brash are just nasty. Anyone who has met Brash will know he is sharp as a tack and is not ‘dementing’. [Politics aside.]
    As for the ‘undead’ comments they are just ageist comments.
    Its all very well looking at what the enemy is doing but when the opposition army does not have a clear plan of attack, the ranks are in disarray and it is someone leaderless it becomes an exercise in futility.
    • DS 21.1

      28 April 2011 at 2:04 pm

      I didn’t read the undead comments as being ageist (although I totally see how they can be now).

      I read them more as indicating his lack of heart and soul.
      • the sprout 21.1.1

        28 April 2011 at 2:08 pm

        Didn’t Key describe Winston Peters as being too old for politics?
        • felix 21.1.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 2:11 pm

          Dude, that was, like, on a totally different day.
    • felix 21.2

      28 April 2011 at 2:10 pm

      He’s not described as a zombie because of his age. That assumption says a lot about you and your own ageist predjudices.

      He’s described as a zombie because he’s a monster operating as an automaton in blind unconscious service to evil who survives on human flesh. Duh.
      • the sprout 21.2.1

        28 April 2011 at 2:11 pm

        exactly, it’s all in his wiki
        • higherstandard 21.2.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 2:20 pm

          is he on uncyclopaedia ?

          magic

          http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Don_Brash
          • the sprout 21.2.1.1.1

            28 April 2011 at 2:23 pm

            excellent
            • higherstandard 21.2.1.1.1.1

              28 April 2011 at 2:27 pm

              There’s something compellingly funny about batshit crazy OTT satire especially when politicians are the butt of it.
    • Draco T Bastard 21.3

      28 April 2011 at 5:43 pm

      As for the ‘undead’ comments they are just ageist comments.

      Nope, Brash and Douglas are called zombies because of their support of failed, and preferably buried, economic policies that promotes the benefits of a few at the expense of everyone else.
22. Frank Macskasy 22

    28 April 2011 at 2:06 pm

    I love that fact that, as the party of business and free enterprise, that ACT makes itself available for take-overs and mergers.

    Who know – maybe we can do a deal with the Chinese; two Crafar farms plus a slightly-used minor Party, at a discount price?
23. logie97 23

    28 April 2011 at 2:08 pm

    So, it would appear that ACT have no confidence in Hide.
    It would seem that his caucus in particular doesn’t have confidence in him.
    Yet Johnnie has. Go figure.

    The Party now has no leader in the House. How does that affect Hide’s salary?

    Presumably the Party has no official leader at the moment – just a nominal one.

    The Minister keeps his portfolios despite the fact the party who put him into Parliament have apparently no confidence in him. What does this say of Key’s judgement?

    Rodney Hide cannot do much more damage to local government, but he can still wreak havoc in the Education department.
    • Samuel Hill 23.1

      28 April 2011 at 3:46 pm

      If Hide had any honour he would resign from the Party, and there should be an Epsom by-election.
    • Colonial Viper 23.2

      28 April 2011 at 5:05 pm

      The Party now has no leader in the House. How does that affect Hide’s salary?

      Hide continues to get paid according to his Ministerial post. Part of the $$$$$ deal for him.
      • Treetop 23.2.1

        29 April 2011 at 3:15 pm

        Yeah the dollar deal to not have a by election.
24. jaymam 24

    28 April 2011 at 3:04 pm

    So, Brash will be ACT leader and Roger Douglas will be deputy.
    If Boscawen’s views on human-caused climate change are not going to be ACT’s future policy, there won’t be any point in voting for them!
25. the pink postman 25

    28 April 2011 at 4:30 pm

    The Brash take-over has opened up a number of questions . Top of the list where does the Maori now stand. How can they support the Iwi /Kiwi Brash. Where do the Nat members who have declared their support for a nuclear free NZ stand with Brash and his “Gone by lunch time” nuclear stance ? Then we have Key having to work with the man he dumped . The problems for the Left is that Brash will want his extreem Right-Wing policies put through . The other draw back is that the money will flow back to ACT from businness people who want lower wages and less union involvment.
26. Rodel 26

    28 April 2011 at 4:50 pm

    Has anyone asked the people of Epsom what they think?
    • rod 26.1

      28 April 2011 at 4:56 pm

      The Epsom voters have got a lot answer for already.
    • lprent 26.2

      28 April 2011 at 6:49 pm

      No. What they have asked has been a carefully worded poll comparing two lumps of politicly dead meat. Hide vs Banks.

      What they haven’t asked is how many would vote for either.
      • PeteG 26.2.1

        28 April 2011 at 7:07 pm

        I’ve been puzzled by his polling, scheduled for next week.

        Dr Brash says his polling asks right-wing voters if they’d vote for ACT under Mr Hide, ACT under himself, or a new party led by him.

        That’s not going to be any use now. Unless after the poll he decides to ditch Act now he’s stuffed it and starts his own party.

        It would be interesting to see how many choose Hide now he’s announced his exit.
        • Pascal's bookie 26.2.1.1

          28 April 2011 at 7:24 pm

          He’s not likely to start his own party now.

          Graeme Edgeler explains why here:

          http://publicaddress.net/legalbeagle/adventures-in-the-oia-or-why-don-brash-wanted/

          ACT gets tv funding for the campaign. A new party won’t.
27. Vinsin 27

    28 April 2011 at 5:06 pm

    Fuck Epsom.
    • Colonial Viper 27.1

      28 April 2011 at 5:12 pm

      The neighbourhood has gone to the dogs since I left Auckland.
    • felix 27.2

      28 April 2011 at 6:04 pm

      Yeah fuck Epsom. Overrepresented long enough.

      What were the numbers for the Nat/Lab/Green candidates last time?

      edit: not enough http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2008/electorate-12.html
      • Vinsin 27.2.1

        28 April 2011 at 6:15 pm

        The numbers were closer then they should’ve been from memory: Rodney 14000, Worth 12000, Sutton 9000 (I’m pretty sure it was Kate Sutton), Locke 7500. Obviously these are just round numbers. Yes Epsom has some serious explaining to do, overall I feel Epsom can go suck a giant A.I.D.S dick.

        I am pretty interested though as to what National will do here, they could grab another seat by challenging Epsom, sure that’ll destroy Act but I get the feeling they reckon they can win outright again – like they did when Brash was leader – either way it puts an interesting complexion on the upcoming election.

        edit: Ok well off with my guess.
      • Vinsin 27.2.2

        28 April 2011 at 6:25 pm

        I think the great thing about the link is it shows just how much limited Act’s party support was, I really do wonder with National’s overwhelming party support if they will just grab the seat. One must remember that last election National didn’t contest the seat, the one before that they did and Hide only just managed to sneak through.
        • felix 27.2.2.1

          28 April 2011 at 7:34 pm

          Yeah those numbers tell a story: There are more Green voters in Epsom than ACT voters.

          Remember, the only reason those 21,000 Nat voters voted for Rodney was to give National five ACT MPs instead of one Nat MP.

          What makes you think they won’t do it again?
          • Pascal's bookie 27.2.2.1.1

            28 April 2011 at 7:54 pm

            If it looks like ACT will get over 5%, why soil yourself?
          • Vinsin 27.2.2.1.2

            28 April 2011 at 7:55 pm

            Bravado, pride, arrogance. National have been riding a wave of almost never ending support for Key and so I wonder if someone might start thinking, fuck it, all in. The main reason that makes me think they will do it again is they ran they exact same campaign with Brash and missed out by 1 percent. Brash is a bumbling fool, Key is a smiling fucktard which most of NZ seem to love so I think they fancy their chances a lot more now. Obviously they could fall short but I don’t think National thinks that way. If you’ve looked at their short-sighted policies you’ll realise they campaign the exact same way. They’re a get in get what you can party, and I imagine a lot of their base is starting to flap their jaws about Key being so centre focused, Labour Lite, blah blah blah. Perhaps some peeps will be pushing for domination rather than survival.
            • felix 27.2.2.1.2.1

              28 April 2011 at 11:38 pm

              Yeah their base will be flapping as you say.

              But it ain’t their base that elected them.
              • Vinsin …

                28 April 2011 at 11:44 pm

                Well it wasn’t really Act that voted them in either, it was a weak turn-out of people that were plain bored of having a solidly run country; they bought into the change rhetoric that was hammered into everyone’s minds by National as well as most journo’s. To me this could actually be a tipping point for Labour and the left as suddenly the dominos start to fall and people realise about 10 people are better off today then before National. And by the way fuck Epsom, in their anally retentive – spend an hour lubing up – anuses.
                • felix …

                  29 April 2011 at 4:27 am

                  Bingo, it’s the “centre” or more accurately the swingers that elected National.

                  The base can do all the flapping and fapping they like but if Key loses the labour-lite centre swing voters they’re out.
          • Carol 27.2.2.1.3

            28 April 2011 at 7:55 pm

            And if National does run a soft candidate and encourage Nat people to vote Banks (and Brash by proxy), how can Key & National claim they are NOT joined at the hip with ActBrash policy-wise?
28. Samuel Hill 28

    28 April 2011 at 5:27 pm

    The only thing people need to know now is this

    Team Liberalization

    National
    ACT

    VERSUS United Future/Maori Party neutral e.g. will side with anyone.

    Team New Zealand

    Labour
    Greens
    NZ First
    Mana

    Thats it. Don’t vote for the Maori Party and don’t vote for United Future (does anyone?), they will side with whoever gives them a portfolio. Whatever you say, Winston is an attack dog who will destroy both leaders of the Liberalization faction in a debate. No other leader has this ability in the house. Peters has to win a seat or get over 5%. Hopefully Mana and Labour clean up the maori seats.
    • Peter 28.1

      28 April 2011 at 7:16 pm

      Agreed, but voters on the Left need to know ho best to vote – candidate & party? If you live in Epsom you will be told, what about the rest of us?
29. Penny Bright 29

    28 April 2011 at 5:38 pm

    FYI folks – a couple of posts I got on the NBR – helped to provoke some of semi-hysterical response that I know proves I am ‘on-target’!
    _____________________________________________________________________________

    This is the sort of ‘democracy’ that ANZACs were supposed to have died for?

    Where the ‘will of the people’ is supposed to be ‘the basis for the authority of government’?

    Where Don Bra$h, who apparently has the anonymous big business(?) cash – takes over the leadership of a party he’s not even a member of?

    In order to try and achieve a National/National (oops! ACT) coalition government to force through more Rogernomic$ type reforms?

    ‘Shonky’ corporate raider John Key plus ‘Don the Dictator’?

    ‘Don the Dictator- who apparently has no respect for lawful due process in his ACT /National takeover – so how much respect is he going to have for the ‘RULE OF LAW’ inside Parliament?

    Oh yes!

    How convenient.

    Parliament cannot be held accountable to the law because it is ‘sovereign’ and has the power to change the law.

    So – why bother with Select Committee processes at all?

    Why not pass EVERYTHING under ‘urgency’?

    This current National/ACT government has got this railroaded Rogernomic$-style blitzkrieg approach to the passing of legislation off pat…………..

    (hmmm….. where has this track been gone down before??)

    Why doesn’t Dictator Don just complete his new ‘unbridled power’ look – by growing some facial hair above his top lip?

    Why doesn’t Dictator Don then practice his new ‘unbridled power’ walk – swinging his outstretched straight arms without bothering to bend his knees?

    Concerned?

    MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE!
    Sunday 1 May
    Assemble 2pm
    Opposite Britomart

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
    Penny Bright | Thursday, April 28, 2011 – 1:24pm

    “John Banks as the probable candidate for the Epsom electorate? Has the new coup leader Colonel Brash underestimated the average IQ of the Epsom electors?”

    Fair question.

    So who IS going to stand in Epsom for National/National (oops! ACT)?

    Who is Don the Dictator/ Mr Burns going to select?

    Who do the money bag$ behind Don the Dictator/ Mr Burns want?

    YAY!

    ‘Democracy’ according to the ‘golden rule’ – those who have the gold – make the rules?

    ‘Clean, green’ NZ – the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ – yeah right!

    Not happy?

    MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE!

    Sunday 1 May
    2pm
    Assemble opposite Britomart
    Queen St
    Auckland

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
30. Rodel 30

    28 April 2011 at 10:11 pm

    Funny how JK manages to be out of the country when sh*t happens…….
    ………………….” Nuffing to do wiv me”………….. yeah right!
    I think Don should stand in Helensville… to make his point
31. Samuel Hill 31

    28 April 2011 at 11:16 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10722184

    Key says virtually no chance of Brash being top minister in National led government.
    • calltoaccount 31.1

      28 April 2011 at 11:26 pm

      Yep, spinning the right line on day one. But still just a line though, as shown by “virtually”.
32. Zarchoff 32

    28 April 2011 at 11:26 pm

    So it looks like it was “Don by Lunchtime”
33. Jum 33

    29 April 2011 at 12:34 am

    Another JKeyll scam going to plan. Get rid of Hide so the idiot voters who have suffered at his hands with the Auckland steal will breathe a sigh of relief, little realizing that the real scammer is still holding the reins of control, ready to bring in Brash and then Banks. We need to watch Len Brown’s back with this unholy trinity scheming.
    • MrSmith 33.1

      29 April 2011 at 7:11 am

      Yes I know what your saying Jum a member of National inc is now leader of Act .
      • Jum 33.1.1

        29 April 2011 at 7:18 pm

        Mr Smith

        I believe JKeyll and Brash decided before the 2008 election this plan of action. These ‘NZers’ had a long time and a lot of international and domestic advice on how to get control over New Zealand. This is a huge advantage point near Australia and China for military reasons, and with the frozen south, a treasure trove of spoils that environmentalist hackers would love to get their diggers into. And let’s not forget this great little treasure house of agriculture called New Zealand. The only thing keeping us away from complete takeover is a few people fighting back.

        This plan is payback for Brash when it became obvious he wasn’t a likeable leader for National and they needed a youngish rich white male with wife and kids to win against Helen Clark. Key did or does belong to an international neoconservative group; this will have been planned, have no doubt about that. Hollow Men proved how ruthless and cunning these ‘people’ are.

        As for Brash and Banks talking about a New Zealand for all the people I will always remember reading that their Kiwisaver company would be choosy who(m) they let in.

        Then there was the chit chat on Radio New Zealand with Jim Mora and cruds about public transport and how when talking with rich people public transport was just used by nasty, poor trash – I can imagine their clawed hands shook a little as they spat that out.

        I’ll be looking forward to as many people as possible around New Zealand ensuring that the perfectly upstanding people that use public transport get to hear what the ‘chattering ruling class’ is saying about the lowly public transport users.

        – the old National supporters with the gold cards who can’t drive anymore, the intelligent University Students that can’t afford cars or are environmentally conscious, the mothers and children I saw yesterday taking the exciting train trip to the city in the school holidays, the young teenagers (male and female) that are too young to drive off on their first trip to the cinema or whatever, the activists that tie all this together into a very strong campaign rhetoric and more importantly the Grey Power groups that have in their mission statement that they are against privatisation of our assets.
34. millsy 34

    29 April 2011 at 12:49 am

    y’all realise wer’e probably fucked now…
35. MrSmith 35

    29 April 2011 at 7:15 am

    This image of the ‘Mad Hatters Tea Party’ keeps popping into my head and there’s Rodders on a spit over the fire slowly being turned by Roger, Brash sitting at the head of the tale with a Dunces hat on.
    • Rodel 35.1

      29 April 2011 at 2:39 pm

      I think we have enough material in NZ now for a ‘Daily Show’
      Someone invite Jon Stewart over.
36. gnomic 36

    30 April 2011 at 1:14 am

    Much earlier a sockpuppet wrote: “There would ne nothing better than the best economic mind this country has ever produced becoming the Minister of Finance.” This was a reference to LotsaCash aka TheDonBrash.

    Are you trying to split my sides? That comb over imbecile the best economic mind ever in the shakey isles? No, sorry, not even a candidate for the title. Wolfgang Rosenberg perhaps? Bill Sutch must be a leading runner. There must be others – even Brian Easton or Brian Gaynor or Rod Oram or Bernard Hickey or Liam Dann on a good day or at a pinch Mary Holm and the Fallow creature would have more idea. Perhaps even a panel of the above and others, there must be some other minds that can actually think and derive useful conclusions from data, whose names elude me for the moment. Bear in mind that not every PhD in economics actually has a clue about the real world.

    As for the electronic entity calling itself Monty, I understand that after dousing yourself in a volatile fluid, flicking a lighter, and leaping from a high place, death is almost certain. Following this procedure will raise the average IQ and free up valuable resources which useful organisms can employ in the struggle for survival. You owe it to the universe.

    Oh dear. While following the career of Donald Thomas Brash, aka LoadsaCash, I came upon the following hagiographic passage by one Jim Eagles of The Granny, a former business editor of that mighty organ of capitalistic thought.

    ‘But as an outstanding economist, successful chief executive, notable Governor of the Reserve Bank and excellent communicator, Brash is one person who might be able to get the message across.’

    This was while the Donald was leader of the misnamed ‘National’ Party, That didn’t end well for them. May we hope that he will once again bring ruination on the rightists.

    Anybody looked into the Don’s 5 years in Washington 1966-71? Who was programming that mighty brain back then? He must have met somebody from the company surely?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS