Hollow Men 2 ?

62 comments on “Hollow Men 2 ? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Colonial Viper 1

   1 June 2013 at 12:14 am

   Nacht der Messer…but why now? What has triggered this cold internal war to suddenly turn into a hot, public war?

   Perhaps the Gilmore Restaurant Incident is going to prove to be National’s Gulf of Tonkin.
   • NickS 1.1

     1 June 2013 at 12:46 am

     Probably Gilmore leaking the documents that show funding is being sought from right-wing groups in the US, allowing the liberal faction something tangible with which to attack with.

     Given the significant negative PR caused by the Hollow Men revelations about the attempts by the non-voting Exclusive Brethren to impact on the NZ political scene, perhaps the more liberal faction in National are betting the involvement of US groups will trigger a backlash within the party. Thus undermining Collins leadership ambitions and reminding the conservative faction who’s boss.
     • Colonial Viper 1.1.1

       1 June 2013 at 12:57 am

       Ah of course, the front lines waiting for carriages of ammo to arrive. Thank you station master Gilmore.
       • Pascal's bookie 1.1.1.1

         1 June 2013 at 10:01 am

         Nah. Whale was saying Gilmore. Discount whale to zero. Gilmore was rejected as a Lusk candidate according to the do, so he wouldn’t have access.

         This is coming from caucus. Nats plan is to be portayed as centrist. Lusk/Collins want overt conservatism like the GOP and Thatcher. It’s about language more than policy.

         Ninth floor just kneecapped these fuckers.
         • felix 1.1.1.1.1

           1 June 2013 at 12:08 pm

           Language indeed. These people aren’t conservatives, they’re radicals.
         • NickS 1.1.1.1.2

           1 June 2013 at 12:54 pm

           Ninth floor just kneecapped these fuckers.

           Ramen.

           Also I doubt that National wants to be beholden completely to donors, given the utterly fucking mess that’s made in the US and the fact it restricts political flexibility to change tack if the public gets pissed off with a particular policy.
       • NickS 1.1.1.2

         1 June 2013 at 12:28 pm

         The best weapon for fighting shit-slingers like Slater is the truth.

         Used at the right time, aimed properly, it’s the political equivalent of a tactical nuke.
   • xtasy 1.2

     1 June 2013 at 1:00 am

     “Nacht der langen Messer” is the correct term, CV, the night of the “long knives” that is, not just the kitchen knives, eh!
     • Colonial Viper 1.2.1

       1 June 2013 at 1:06 am

       lol yes quite right and very observant of you mate, however I downgraded it as National have not quite got to the stage of taking away and murdering their internal rivals in the dead of night yet!
2. xtasy 2

   1 June 2013 at 12:56 am

   How old and young is that info referred to, I ask. I actually sense there is heaps going on in the back rows in and outside of Parliament. There are rumours within the National Party, but there are also backroom rumours from the Labour Party!

   I sense that some members are getting the message now, that Shearer is not and never will deliver the results and feedback that the party needs. How about going into an election with a limp horse, from the start, you would have to be a total imbecile and idiot to do this. And who i n Labour’s caucus would voluntarily sign over victory to the conservative or neo lib Nats before the votes have even been cast?

   Hey, there is something moving, something big, and this is in a number of parties, but first of all within Labour! Shearer is DEAD, he is mincemeat and a gonner, in days if not weeks to come.

   He will never win Labour the election, and Norman is tired of him, same as Winston, both have no more time for a horse that has nothing but limp legs.

   Add this and other infos together, and we will see some major developments in the coming months. Enjoy the excitement. X
   • Colonial Viper 2.1

     1 June 2013 at 12:59 am

     How about going into an election with a limp horse

     With the utmost kindness and respect dear sir

     I believe the term is “lame”. As in, “lame horse”.
     • xtasy 2.1.1

       1 June 2013 at 1:05 am

       Yep, you are correct, “limp” is a term more suited for the “action phase” of things, lame is the correct term when it comes to inaction, especially political powerlessness combined with resultant inaction.
       Apologies, I had a long night on various forums, also spent 3 days working on “feed back” to the Auckland Unitary Plan, which is another big story.

       Thanks for correcting, CV, you are so “alert’, always, and that at this late hour!
       • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1

         1 June 2013 at 1:07 am

         Tories, like rust, never sleeps, kind sir, and until they are defeated neither shall we.
       • mikesh 2.1.1.2

         1 June 2013 at 5:35 am

         Should it not be “lame duck”
         • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.2.1

           1 June 2013 at 10:20 am

           Hmm quite possibly, but a “lame duck politician” sometimes has another meaning in terms of where they are in the electoral cycle.
     • David H 2.1.2

       1 June 2013 at 9:26 am

       Sorry CV it’s a Lame Duck. Oh now there’s a coincidence.

       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame_duck_%28politics%29
       • Colonial Viper 2.1.2.1

         1 June 2013 at 10:20 am

         🙂
   • Tim 2.2

     1 June 2013 at 1:06 am

     “I actually sense there is heaps going on in the back rows in and outside of Parliament. There are rumours within the National Party, but there are also backroom rumours from the Labour Party!”

     I’d suggest there is ‘heaps going on’ not JUST within political parties.
     The abuse of power and disregard of democracy and process is becoming so blatant its beginning to embarrass people.

     I’d say there are a few in the judiciary that are getting a bit uppity about it all by now as well.
     • xtasy 2.2.1

       1 June 2013 at 1:14 am

       Tim – I agree, I am furious, about a number of pollies, some of whom I contacted re major issues and also asked for support, but there are those and those others amongst them!

       As for politics, they are all living in another sphere, really, they live in the “Beltway”, or whatever they call it, and they all know each other, sometimes drink with each other, but i n Parliament they pretend to “fight” each other. There is some fake crap going on, and that is why I want more radical, community based participation and them challenging MPs and so to say and do the things they just “talk about”.

       NZ Parliament has turned into a shameless free-loading debating forum of little sincerity and value. We have established parties and their lobbies run the show, and they have for far too bloody long got away with it. They have also key influences with media and more.

       Democracy is now a bloody farce, to be honest, no matter what you stand for. That is why in Europe there has been this rise of Pirate Parties and the likes, but even they cannot solve the major issues of representation and voters not being heard and represented.

       Something more radical is needed, I feel.
       • Tim 2.2.1.1

         1 June 2013 at 10:10 am

         sorry, needed some heavy rest.
         Couldn’t agree more! I think there are some that are beginning to wake up slowly – unfortunately unless it is soon, we’re in for dire times. I mention the judiciary, because amongst their ranks there are some decent sort of people, and some who are becoming mighty concerned about the state of things.
         Labour is still in self-destruct mode – it’s bleeding good people (Charles C, Georgina B, etc), and neutering others (DC). If it carries on that way, all that will be left is the scar tissue (Trev, etc.)
         National are now doing the same.
         Then there are the cargo cultists wallowing in their self-importance with the eye for self-preservation first and foremost (MP perhaps), and others that have been so bad that their days are numbered.
         You’re right though – they’re all feeding on each other, and each other’s egos, and they’ve forgotten what the hell they’re there for.
         I ditched Labour membership a while ago, and I’ll not join Greens – at least until they answer some basic questions I asked of them several weeks ago.
         There’ll be people in National (those that probably consider themselves ‘elder statesmen’, who’ll be mighty concerned about our democracy – I’ve noticed them ‘hinting’ at it from time to time.
         Same with the judiciary, and even the police.
         As yet, unfortunately they are in the minority, but the crass ‘master of the universe’, totalitarian behaviour of the current junta is definitely beginning to embarrass some.
         • Peter 2.2.1.1.1

           4 June 2013 at 12:58 pm

           Yeah I’m the same. Left Labour, can’t bring myself to join the Greens. An accountable, well-resourced and grassroots Labour party would solve many of these problems, but those that want such a thing will need to be prepared to use political force to achieve their objective. No amount of strategy writing or constitutional editing will force Caucus to give that to Labour’s members. Harder tactics need to be employed.
           • lprent 2.2.1.1.1.1

             4 June 2013 at 1:56 pm

             Same here. I’m still a Labour member still doing a direct credit to them monthly. But I’ve given up doing any serious work for them and I’m going to party vote Green next election. But it is unlikely that I’ll join the Greens. I’m more likely to look at doing work that crosses party boundaries on the left – like this site for instance.

             I can tolerate a lot of stupidity from a political caucus. After all I remained a member throughout the late 80’s and early 90’s for instance and got more active. But the current *structural* incestuous incompetence that has been displayed in caucus over the last few years is something that I can’t vote for. It leaves little hope that there is any incentive for the party to be able to improve itself. If they can’t figure out how to work together while in opposition then they’re going to be dead weight in government (just look at the short-term scattergun stupidity of this National government for instance).

             So I’ll vote for/reward a party that still shows some promise
3. Richard 3

   1 June 2013 at 6:17 am

   Nats start throwing their toys out of the cot: National turns on hard right advisor
   • karol 3.1

     1 June 2013 at 7:27 am

     Whoa! Way to expose the anti-democratic mind-set of the Nat’s and their allies.
     Key may not be as blatant, and may compromise somewhat with Kiwi’s of a more egalitarian mind-set, but, ultimately, same MO:

     The leaker was clear in his purpose – the National Party needed to clean house. It might be the broadest church in politics – as its 49 per cent poll rating suggests – but the insider says there is no more room for Mr Lusk and associates, who include blogger Cameron Slater….

     Mr Lusk’s plan began with selecting like-minded candidates young and seeding them in “safe blue” electorates which would vote National. He said local body politics should be targeted to get “fiscal conservative” councillors and mayors. And training was the key for the politicians, he said, so “when they are elected they can make real change based on solid planning rather than intent”.

     The message was also important – “dominate the media by controlling the message through credible right wing blogs”. Mr Lusk also said there needed to be a focus on “taking over the public sector” to create a pool of fiscal conservatives who would work with politicians.

     He also recommended making fundraising more professional and dominating company boards to help build a “war chest”. “I can provide resumes for several people who are fiscal conservatives and understand the role they will play in the future.”
     …
     Overall, the work needed to be guided by a long-term strategy which would see a smaller government which was focused on “changing education, increasing mining’s contribution to GDP and making property development easier”.
     …
     “If donors buy into this and the next National government does not offer former ministers jobs then there will be a very clear incentive for the next crop of ministers to listen carefully to donors rather than ignoring them.”
     • Alanz 3.1.1

       1 June 2013 at 7:41 am

       “might be the broadest church in politics” – LOL !!!!!$$$$$$$!!!!!!
     • vto 3.1.2

       1 June 2013 at 9:22 am

       ” for the next crop of ministers to listen carefully to donors rather than ignoring them.”

       This should set alarms bells off all over the whole place.

       Perhaps the practice of accepting donations by political parties should be banned. In fact, made a criminal offence.
       • Draco T Bastard 3.1.2.1

         1 June 2013 at 10:31 am

         This should set alarms bells off all over the whole place.

         It should do. It is obviously about the rich being the government and not the people.
     • Murray Olsen 3.1.3

       1 June 2013 at 10:17 pm

       I struggle to think of any credible right wing blogs. Even Farrar, who pretends to be civilised, lets his contributors get away with the most vile bigotry and racism. I suppose Lusk would mean WhaleSpew, but I doubt if he ever convinces anyone towards their cause. The contributors there just seem like a captive audience of the already brain dead.
4. One Anonymous Knucklehead 4

   1 June 2013 at 7:49 am

   From the Herald story:

   He urged those reading it to “stop donating to the current government”. “They have not listened and will not listen.” He urged supporters to “blackball” current MPs to stop them “trading on their time as MPs to build a lucrative business career”. It would show MPs “the consequences of ignoring donors”. “If donors buy into this and the next National government does not offer former ministers jobs then there will be a very clear incentive for the next crop of ministers to listen carefully to donors rather than ignoring them.”

   This. This is the sale of policy we’ve been aware of but unable to verify. This is how it leads to the sale not just of policy, but of politicians.

   It’s corrupt, no matter who does it. It creates a serious conflict of interest for MPs, who are meant to be kept at arms length from donors for precisely this reason.

   It amounts to bribery.

   PS: Obviously it isn’t “Democracy Under Attack”, though, eh Granny?
5. tc 5

   1 June 2013 at 8:20 am

   Here we go folks, an MSM assisted meme that NACT are really good guys and all this extreme hard right stuff is those naughty boys lusk, slater, etc etc……note thecareful portrail of Farrar as not one of them. More massaging of the great swindle and detraction from the next flog off of assets and democracy and selling out in general.
6. wyndham 6

   1 June 2013 at 8:25 am

   Such serious leaks surely have to be sourced to Gilmore as part of his ‘utu’ threats.
   There will probably be more to come.
   • karol 6.1

     1 June 2013 at 8:32 am

     From the NZ Herald article this morning:

     … the papers were leaked by a “senior National Party source” to the Weekend Herald, TV3’s The Nation and Fairfax.

     Gilmore was just so much collateral damage in a far bigger cold war struggle in the Nat Party.
     • Colonial Viper 6.1.1

       1 June 2013 at 10:25 am

       Ahhh, except “collateral damage” is a term which applies to innocent civilian bystanders. I suspect he was actually a foot soldier (who thought himself a General) that was nominally on Key’s side, and who’s demise was made an example of to demonstrate the real destructive power Lusk’s side had with the media.
     • felix 6.1.2

       1 June 2013 at 11:57 am

       Hi karol, “senior party source” is a phrase with quite a specific meaning in journalism, isn’t it?
7. Sanctuary 7

   1 June 2013 at 8:37 am

   Funny sort of cold war. Looks more like a full on civil war to me.
   • Paul 7.1

     1 June 2013 at 11:35 am

     Agreed. I think there are 3 related articles in the Herald.
     Certainly a battle has been going on that has spilled out into MSG.
     Is it, though, as simple as it appears?
     Is this ani attempt to position Key as a moderate right winger…part of the new meme, devil-beast, extreme Left Greens blah blah blah…….?
     • Rodel 7.1.1

       1 June 2013 at 10:28 pm

       Paul.you are right. It’s so obvious….Gee those Lusks and co are so like Republicans I feel safe with nice John Key in the centre. Not sure if its orchestrated by C Textor or Lusk but it’s persuasive.
8. karol 8

   1 June 2013 at 8:41 am

   And this from David Fisher on this morning’s NZ Herald:

   A political strategist who has trained National Party MPs says the Ports of Auckland colluded with right wing bloggers to undermine industrial action against the Ports of Auckland.

   The claim is in a leaked document written by controversial strategist Simon Lusk – and hotly denied by the publicly-owned port company.

   The document was dated February 2012 – when the port strike was most heated – and is part of Mr Lusk’s strategy for the National Party.

   It read: “The right currently controls the blogosphere, and the political journalists repeat much of what appears on blogs.

   “The case in point is the way the Maritime Union have received huge negative publicity about their salaries, based on POAL (Ports of Auckland Limited) working with certain bloggers to control the story. Financial support for these bloggers will enable them to build their credibility and readership.”

   …
   Mr Slater said he covered the strike as other media outlets did. He said there was no arrangement with the port to do so and he had not discussed it with Mr Lusk.

   He said yesterday he had never actually been paid although believed he should be. On the port, he said: “I hate unions pathologically. I’ve hated them since I was 15 years old and I would do it for free.

   “I have never been paid for any posts about unions, ever.”

   But Team Key in the Nat Party certainly has the knives out for Slater right now.
   • vto 8.1

     1 June 2013 at 9:09 am

     So Whaleoil says this ““I hate unions pathologically. I’ve hated them since I was 15 years old ”

     That sort of view, formed at such a young brainless age yet held firm as if that is a strong point in favour of holding such a view, points strongly and directly to a lack of consideration, a lack of understanding of people, and most importantly a total lack of history.

     What a supreme ignorant toss-pot.

     toss toss
     wank wank
     goob goob
     whaleoilwank
     • muzza 8.1.1

       1 June 2013 at 10:01 am

       Sounds like transference by Slater, and large helpings of projection.

       Wonder what happened to him as a youngster, to foster such stong distain for the unions, what else was he *pathalogical* about, using such emotive expressions!

       Or , it could just be Slater is mouthing off again, hard to tell, because anyone with such distorted views, can be misleading, then again , it takes a level of emotive intelligence to mask ones self, even online.
     • Paul 8.1.2

       1 June 2013 at 11:25 am

       Oops…. made the mistake of going on Whale Oil to see what was going on with this story.
       Some of the folk who add comments at the bottom have certainly eaten more than their share of angry pills.
       It’s like reading a non-stop rant. Not good for one’s health.
       • felix 8.1.2.1

         1 June 2013 at 12:00 pm

         Have you noticed that much of it is like reading an angry rant from one person?
         • NickS 8.1.2.1.1

           1 June 2013 at 1:11 pm

           Well, Slater has made his blog comments thread culture into an echo chamber.
           • Paul 8.1.2.1.1.1

             1 June 2013 at 3:29 pm

             It made me feel ill reading the comments, that’s for sure.
             Are all right wingers such angry people?
             • NickS …

               1 June 2013 at 3:57 pm

               Nope – just the rabid talk-back fringe, who also happen to make most noise.
               • xtasy …

                 1 June 2013 at 8:07 pm

                 Yes, the couple of handful of regulars there are self deluded jerks of the worst kind, and as Whale shuts so many others out, they can go around and claim they speak for the wider public out there.

                 It is really disgusting, and while David Farrar with his blog also favours his tribe, and swiftly tries to shut up critics, he does at least not go as far as Slater, the “blogger” pampered by many Nats and more so the remaining few ACT followers.
       • xtasy 8.1.2.2

         1 June 2013 at 7:59 pm

         Paul – once I briefly looked at his blog (the Whale’ s that is), and what struck me was, that when you want to give a negative thumbs down on a comment, he expects you to register.

         That does not apply for giving a thumbs up for any of his hateful, despicable and rightist comments.

         No wonder he can claim to be so “popular”. Who will as non regular bother to register, and possibly expose themselves for direct abuse and cutting off?

         That guy is a master of playing dirty, and he has to moralize on unions and others. A sicko of the worst kind the man is.
   • ghostwhowalksnz 8.2

     1 June 2013 at 3:21 pm

     Easy for PoAL to deny , as they outsourced all their pushback against the union to a private security company- the same industry the Oily Orca was in until it went belly up.
9. Jenny Kirk 9

   1 June 2013 at 8:46 am

   Disturbing comments in today’s Herald – first from John Armstrong, and secondly from John Roughan …….. where is this scaremongering coming from ? The Greens are being demonised, and Labour encouraged to go with NZ First ! !

   
   From JA “…………. The survey asked voters whom they trusted when it came to managing the economy – John Key and Bill English, or, David Shearer and Russel Norman………….
   That Key and English were preferred by 55 per cent to 37 per cent came as no great surprise to Labour. ……………..
   What really annoyed Labour was the inclusion in the poll’s question of Norman, the Greens’ co-leader, instead of David Parker, Labour’s finance spokesman………………….
   Labour will not relinquish control of that most powerful of portfolios for three reasons: first, to maintain outright control of the coalition and maintain its stability by having the prime minister and finance minister coming from the same party; second, to avoid panicking the many voters who are yet to be convinced that Greens are not “whacko”, as Key puts it; and, third, the Greens are anyway unlikely to hold a high enough ratio of seats to Labour’s to force the issue……………..
   Shearer is increasingly making references to a “Labour-led” Government – not a “Labour-Greens” one.
   This is in part to counter Key’s demonising of such a combo as the “devil beast” by making it clear that Labour will very much be in charge……………………
   But it is also becoming clear that Labour increasingly thinks it might be preferable to strike a deal with Winston Peters………………….”
   ———————————————————————————————————————-

   From JR
   “……………….. When Russel Norman snarls about business and profits, he might be winning the 10 or 12 per cent of voters that the Greens need to be in play after the next election. But he is turning off the mainstream that Labour needs if it is to get close to the 40 per cent it would need to lead a coalition……………………….
   The real loser is Labour. Its failure to gain much traction from the Green embrace must be a subject of intense discussion within the party now. It was visibly hard enough for somebody like Shane Jones to stomach at the time. He must be bristling now……………….
   So what is David Shearer to do? Obviously he needs to give the Greens a wide berth from here on but more than that, he needs to stop condemning John Key for every little thing. It is just opposition politics and it never works. ………………”
   • kiwicommie 9.1

     1 June 2013 at 8:55 am

     They clearly are having one of those desperate PR off weeks, anything in an attempt to distract the public from their National party idols playing dirty politics; and just another attempt to make Labour and the Greens divided for the next election – think back to 2011.
     • karol 9.1.1

       1 June 2013 at 9:13 am

       Team Key is moving to bolster their weakening position. Smear Slater-Lusk as “far right”, smear Greens as “far left”, splitting them from Labour, and claiming the “centre right” position for Key.
   • Olwyn 9.2

     1 June 2013 at 1:42 pm

     Matthew Hooton expressed a similar view a few days ago, and it possibly has to do with positioning within National’s ranks, as Karol says. http://thestandard.org.nz/another-peters-brain-fart/#comment-637968 However, with the appointment of Shane Jones to Maori Affairs, and, if Bomber is right, their failed attempt to parachute Shane Taurima in to stand for the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election, it is hard to know just what to believe. http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/05/28/the-gutting-of-shane-taurimas-career-autopsy-of-a-candidate-selection/

     Perhaps its a bit of both. The right wingers of Labour hanging on like grim death, despite member discontent and mediocre polling, while National are confident in their ability to trump them in the centre-right stakes, so long as they can pull their extremists into line.
10. TheContrarian 10

    1 June 2013 at 9:10 am

    I honestly can’t fathom how anyone could want to impose fiscally conservative economics given that it fails every time, all the time.
    • Ben 10.1

      1 June 2013 at 9:33 am

      Depends a lot on what you define as “failure” I suspect.

      The 0.001% probably view fiscally conservative economics as a resounding success.
    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 10.2

      1 June 2013 at 9:35 am

      Lusk spells it out: the National Party imposes these policies because that’s what they’ve been paid to do.
      • Ben 10.2.1

        1 June 2013 at 9:49 am

        The way I read it, that is what they’re being paid to do but the current batch is failing to deliver, and they need to be sent a message that this isn’t what their donors are paying for.

        It’s a pretty clear that in Lusk’s view – and by extension Judith Collins – policy is for sale.
        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 10.2.1.1

          1 June 2013 at 10:40 am

          Perhaps Key provides access to richer donors clients than Lusk can.
    • Pascal's bookie 10.3

      1 June 2013 at 10:07 am

      Contrarian.

      I know right?

      It’s about presuppositions I think. So it’s not so much that they are starting from a different set of premises about what works, and what things the govt ought to do. They have a different set of more basic notions about what politics itself is.
    • geoff 10.4

      1 June 2013 at 11:34 am

      Can’t fathom it? Why not, it’s easy.
      Fiscal Conservatives(reptiles) would rather have a larger cut of a small economy than a smaller cut of a large economy.
    • NickS 10.5

      1 June 2013 at 1:19 pm

      I honestly can’t fathom how anyone could want to impose fiscally conservative economics given that it fails every time, all the time.

      Unexamined and inflexible a-priori beliefs does tend to have that effect, making people only register information or worse, twist it, to fit their worldview. See young earth creationism for the Ur example, and Stalinists for the lulz.

      The only thing that breaks it is a tactical nuke level of cluebatting, although compartmentalisation can defeat even that r.e. biology graduates still believing in creationism or economics graduates thinking the gold standard so totes works. While being otherwise on teh ball in adapting to new information.
      • Colonial Viper 10.5.1

        1 June 2013 at 3:32 pm

        Unfortunately, the direction and decisions that people or civilisations choose is not particularly rational or logical, NickS. It’s not how they construct their own lives, the cities we live in, the economy that we have built.

        Scientists and academics not only tend to explain the data they see using interpretations which fit within their existing belief systems and acceptable world view (peer review orthodoxy basically guarantees this), they also end up setting up the trials and experiments which deliver those results from within the framework of their existing belief structures and world view.

        biology graduates still believing in creationism or economics graduates thinking the gold standard so totes works.

        Interesting that you use the phrase “graduates” here, I assume to designate those young junior acolytes still low down on the totem pole of the academic and scientific Order, and hence vulnerable to participating in heresies against the orthodox norm you evangelise.

        If you look around, there are plenty of “Professor” level PhD types who believe in religious dogma, and who are highly irrational in their personal lives…just like ordinary human beings.
11. infused 11

    1 June 2013 at 3:03 pm

    This is a cunning plan.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS