Open Mike 07/03/2017

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, March 7th, 2017 - 52 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

52 comments on “Open Mike 07/03/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. weka 1
    7 March 2017 at 6:11 am

    Ah, the non-war mongering president,

    Update: Trump has approved at least 36 drone strikes or raids in 45 days—one every 1.25 days.

    In Obama’s 8 yrs, only one 45-day period (in 2012, when CIA bombed Pak Taliban constantly) saw such numerous drone strikes.

    Troubling: We’ve no idea of Trump’s legal interpretation, what targeting standards apply, what strategic objectives these strikes support.

    For an alleged “non-interventionist” president, Trump is quite willing to OK a huge quantity of strikes so early in his presidency.

    Finally: Trump admin’s absence of transparency + accountability, and vast increase in lethal strikes, is a terrible combo for democracy.

    https://twitter.com/MicahZenko/status/838760996160344065

    • weka 1.1
      7 March 2017 at 6:14 am

      Thread,

      …she persisted.
      🗽‏ @leahmcelrath

      We are at a critical point in our #resistance.

      Trump is feeling the heat and melting down.

      …

      In many ways, that makes our situation more dangerous than ever before.

      Trump knows he’s cornered. Cornered animals have nothing to lose.

      https://twitter.com/leahmcelrath/status/838777751381360640

    • mauī 1.2
      7 March 2017 at 8:37 am

      Lets bring back that peace loving leftist pres Obama then, only 26,000+ bombs last year and I’m sure they were all surgical strikes…

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy

      • marty mars 1.2.1
        7 March 2017 at 12:22 pm

        I’m sure trump will trump Obama if he ever lasts as long. He’s setting up some big ones by shitting on the military – they’ll want to rub his stinking face in his statementa of their ability and will. Thus he will warmonger and all nations will get pulled in – the Pacific, Europe, the east, the med – where he looks is where strife will increase.

    • Bill 1.3
      7 March 2017 at 9:50 am

      A bit of a stretch to characterise Trump as “non-war mongering”. If my recollection is right, the only issue that was pointed to in relation to his “non-war mongering” was Russia.

      The guy said he was going to bomb ISIS members and families. Right off the top of my head, he’s been openly far too supportive of Israel, threatening towards Iran and saber rattling with China.

      We’ve no idea of Trump’s legal interpretation, what targeting standards apply, what strategic objectives these strikes support.

      Obama also had the prerogative to launch drones with no oversight. And he did. Trump is merely using a system of non-accountability set up under Obama and used by Obama.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1
        7 March 2017 at 11:27 am

        The guy said he was going to bomb ISIS members and families. Right off the top of my head, he’s been openly far too supportive of Israel, threatening towards Iran and saber rattling with China.

        Yep. Everything I saw indicated that he was itching for a war.

      • weka 1.3.2
        7 March 2017 at 11:54 am

        “If my recollection is right, the only issue that was pointed to in relation to his “non-war mongering” was Russia.”

        Not quite. It was that he was isolationist, so no foreign wars (war on terrorism excluded). The Russian thing was in relationship to Clinton wasn’t it?

        • Sabine 1.3.2.1
          7 March 2017 at 12:44 pm

          nah, mate you are getting this mixed up somehow.

          Trump is a nationalist, who is saving the world from WW3 by only bombing targets that are Russian approved as that will prevent WW3 with Russia.

          Clinton was literally just the scary vagina, who can’t use emails correctly, is a war monger and will ring in a nuclear holocaust on Jan 22nd for breakfast.

      • Andre 1.3.3
        7 March 2017 at 2:34 pm

        “Trump is merely using a system of non-accountability set up under Obama and used by Obama.”

        It seems that Trump can’t stand even the tiny little bit of heat from Obama’s system of non-accountability and may be trying to pass the decisions and accountability down the chain.

        http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/03/01/generals-may-launch-new-isis-raids-without-trump-s-ok.html

    • Psycho Milt 2.1
      7 March 2017 at 7:42 am

      Given the way Devyn Springer peddles obfuscatory socialist “bulshytt” (per Neal Stephenson), it’s pretty rich for him to claim “…the liberal creation of the “alt-left” is part of the historical assault on the left by those willfully apt to compromise with fascism.” The German socialists’ support of fascism on the basis of “After Hitler, us” should be a little harder to forget than that. Those of us who would have been more like the “social fascists” of the SDP that the socialists refused to compromise with to defeat fascism certainly don’t forget it.

    • Carolyn_nth 2.2
      7 March 2017 at 8:43 am

      Thanks weka. This from the Springer link:

      It is not an end to identity politics we seek, rather a politic that encompasses the realities of different identities infused with class analysis and observation of power dynamics.

      The version of identity politics that Springer, and some others on the left, are criticising, is one that I have long called “liberal feminism”. I know there are issues with the use of “liberal” as a negative. For me a liberal feminist has always been one who accepts the status quo of capitalism and its patriarchal, imperialist culture – only want equality for women within that system e.g. Judith Collins.

      But maybe “conservative feminism” would be a better term.

      I see Springer refers to Angela Davis as a positive example of an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist feminist:

      As longtime political activist, writer, and academic Angela Davis (who Wolcott surely would categorize as “alt-left” by his standards) explains in her latest book Freedom Is A Constant Struggle, we “find our strength in collectivities,” and through the “intersectionality of struggles, not only identities.” It is in this same breath that the left wishes to not disrupt or dismiss identity politics, rather move beyond identity politics into a deeper analysis of institutions of power which can easily be infused by the layers of identity-based oppression.

      I like this because Davis was also my choice for an example of a more anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist feminist, in my last post on EveningReport.

      It is about power. And Springer, via Davis explains that the regimes of power can only be dismantled by collective actions from ordinary people – from the bottom up.

    • Bill 2.3
      7 March 2017 at 9:07 am

      I spluttered and laughed at yesterday’s link. There is no more an ‘alt-left’ than there is an ‘alt-right’. (I guess some will disagree with my take on ‘alt-right’, but hey)

      There is a radical center or a liberal center or (call it what you want) status quo that’s kind of lost its sheen – people vote against it when the opportunities arise.

      There are some people who hold authoritarian political views that are a part of what we’d normally call the ‘right’ who have been labeled the ‘alt-right’ as though their views are somehow utterly disconnected with the more general body of ‘the right’. They aren’t. They are a continuation or extrapolation.

      There are also people on the left who hold authoritarian political views and they (just as the suppossed ‘alt-right’ represent an certain extrapolation of left thought and politics…

      The center is lashing in all directions and seeking to cast anything that challenges the status quo as thoroughly despicable…it’s a kind of political infanticide.

      On the other hand, there is the non-authoritarian reaction to all this nonsense. And that non-authoritarian streak doesn’t can’t speak against so-called identity politics because they (‘identity politics’) are a fundamental expression of power – asymmetries of power.

      We can fall down a collapsing rabbit hole and be buried by meaningless debates on such things and ‘left and alt-left’ and ‘right and alt-right’, or we can draw a meaningful and revealing distinction between authoritarianism (of the left and right) and non-authoritarianism (of the left and right)

      • saveNZ 2.3.1
        7 March 2017 at 9:38 am

        +1 Bill

      • marty mars 2.3.2
        7 March 2017 at 9:46 am

        Thank you for your contibution to this meaningless debate.

        Alt right is a thing imo it is known by its seeds.

        People that believe in identity politics can be criticized, as identity politics itself can be, must be, and is, by people that believe in it.

        The middle is just the hole on a farmers farm – all the shit gets chucked down it. It is used to attract pests.

        • Bill 2.3.2.1
          7 March 2017 at 10:07 am

          I didn’t mean to suggest individual approaches to ‘identity politics’ are beyond criticism. For example, like Corolyn -nth, I’ve long been critical of the accommodation sought by liberal feminism . But there can be no objection to basic analyses of power per se from non-authoritarians.

          If alt-right is known by its seeds, then are you not saying the same as me? That the so-called ‘alt-right’ is just an extension or expression of the right?

          If we allow it (and some imagined ‘alt-left’) to be separated out, then ‘the centre’ gets to construct a ‘basket of deplorables’ into which it can toss all and sundry who speak against it by the simple act of labeling any criticism ‘alt’ (ie ‘unacceptable) right or left…as opposed to their contained and constrained ideas of, I guess, ‘liberal’ left and’ liberal’ right

          In other words, by granting those terms legitimacy, we’d acquiesce to giving the ‘Project Fear of ‘the centre’ a certain degree of form, definition and efficacy.

          As already said, rather than slicing and dicing everything to the ‘nth degree’ drawing a quite simple and obvious line between authoritarian and non-authoritarian is far more useful.

          • marty mars 2.3.2.1.1
            7 March 2017 at 10:25 am

            I meant deeds lol but seeds is right ☺

            I agree it is a subset of rught and structured to appeal to those who don’t identify as right so it is its own thing as well. Because it is disguised it needs to be called out.

            I think an authoritarian axis of analysis is also helpful.

    • Andre 2.4
      7 March 2017 at 6:00 pm

      There’s something particularly delightful about seeing someone using phrases such as “…which reads like a tabloid-writer grabbed a thesaurus and attempted to assault the left…” or “Logical fallacies and facetious arguments are made quickly within Wolcott’s “article” when he ungracefully pulls quotes…” to argue against someone else’s opinion, when those sentiments are equally (if not more) validly applicable to his own piece.

  3. Sam C 3
    7 March 2017 at 7:55 am

    Espiner grilling Joyce re Super this morning and claimed that 0.6% of $1000.00 is 6 cents. And then had the temerity to call such a balls up a “rounding error”. Epic fail.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 3.1
      7 March 2017 at 8:16 am

      The media are the opposition in your mind, eh.

    • dv 3.2
      7 March 2017 at 8:23 am

      Understanding of maths WRONG twice!!

      Not even close to a rounding error as 6 cents in 1000 is 0.006%
      0.6% of 1000 is $6!!!!!!

      Not only can’t work percentages, doesn’t under stand rounding.

      Thank heavens he is not the finance minister!!

      Oh but wait………Bugger

      • One Anonymous Bloke 3.2.1
        7 March 2017 at 8:25 am

        Um, it was Guyon Espiner who made the “rounding error”. Sam is doing his best to divert attention from Mr. Fuxit’s performance.

        • dv 3.2.1.1
          7 March 2017 at 9:00 am

          OH, so did Fuxirt fix it?

          • One Anonymous Bloke 3.2.1.1.1
            7 March 2017 at 9:02 am

            He seized the opportunity to waste airtime on a diversion. Have a listen to the interview, eh?

        • Sam C 3.2.1.2
          7 March 2017 at 11:00 am

          Not trying to divert at all. But you could tell from the glee in Guyon’s voice that he thought he had scored a big hit on Joyce. Um, not so much.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 3.2.1.2.1
            7 March 2017 at 11:09 am

            That time Mr. Fuxit did better sums than a journalist. It’s nice that you have something to feel good about 😆

  4. saveNZ 4
    7 March 2017 at 9:46 am

    Very good post about Auckland’s pollution of the Waitemata harbour and how the government and council are minimising and covering it up.

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2017/03/02/guest-blog-mike-lee-aucklands-dirty-secret-can-we-handle-the-truth/

    • bwaghorn 4.1
      7 March 2017 at 1:44 pm

      you’ll never get an angry response to a dirty water post unless you insert the words
      ”DIRTY DAIRY FARMERS” better luck next time

  5. saveNZ 5
    7 March 2017 at 9:48 am

    And on a similar vein about increasing pollution cover ups…

    Forest & Bird quits water forum, saying govt ignores advice

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/326009/forest-and-bird-quits-water-forum,-saying-govt-ignores-advice

  6. ianmac 6
    7 March 2017 at 10:21 am

    Surprised?
    “Jacinda Ardern, my nominee to be our next Deputy Leader, has just been confirmed to the role, with the unanimous support of Caucus.”

  7. garibaldi 7
    7 March 2017 at 11:08 am

    It’s not just Trump who is wrong about Islam. All the monotheists are wrong when you take a step back and see how their actions are basically the opposite of what they preach.
    Jews ,Christians and Muslims… they are all tarred with the same brush. Blind faith in something supernatural at best, or patriarchal power hungry bastard at worst.

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

  8. greywarshark 8
    7 March 2017 at 11:18 am

    Some tips from my 1880 book of etiquette:

    Avoid politics and religion, and all topics likely to excite argument, or to lead to warmth of feeling or expression…

    Avoid whatever is personal in tone or allusion; neither flatter nor make observations of an offensive character; do not even indulge in badinage unless with friends, who will not be likely to put a false construction on your words, or to take in earnest what you man in sport…

    (In discussion); Never charge him with having made a wilful misstatement; suggest a correction, rather than make it, and if the point in question is immaterial, it is best to let it pass unnoticed. (I think this is one good piece of advice to adopt.)
    If addressed in an offensive tone,… even when you perceive an intention to annoy or insult, either pass it over..or..withdraw…Such a thing as a ‘scene’ is, above all things, to be avoided.

    Seems to me that this type of approach has passed to us through our majorly British connections and why we have been dubbed (by a Brit who thinks he is better,) as ‘the passionless people’.

    May we have lots of discussions, with offensive tone sometimes, and limit ourselves a little so we have only one or two “scenes” a day – too many and they cease to be interesting events that stand out form the normal intercourse.

    And let’s have interesting comments that might break this constricting rule of Britishness, xenophobia and lack of learning.
    Do not interlard your conversation with French and other languages. (Moi!) If you are tempted into a Greek or Latin quotation, apologise to the ladies for its use, or translate it…Puns and slang terms are to be avoided as much as possible.
    Well, how do you like that ladies, get back to your embroidery and female duties, and don’t give out that you have any education or ideas of your own. Not the thing, you know. Feeling smothered, mother? Don’t frown girly. Look pretty, talk pretty, be agreeable, and conform or else you won’t find a husband and being married is really the only thing for a woman of good family and repute. For rabid feminists who don’t understand sarcasm, I’m channelling that male society.

    Let’s keep on having informed, honest, interesting discussion all pointed towards building knowledge, understanding and the ability to form thoughtful scenarios to be used as a base for shaping policy to keep our world in balance at a high level of wellbeing which is above just accumulation or exchange of money or virtual tokens.

  9. Sabine 9
    7 March 2017 at 1:02 pm

    its only identity politics if …..

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/us/politics/planned-parenthood.html?_r=0

    hey, stop all those pesky abortion, and we are not gonna cut your funding.

    (lucky, the signer of this document has a penis and can thus walk away from any female he fucked and got pregnant, so clearly this is a win win – cause he wont ever need an abortion, or a pap smear, or birth control or any such thing, cause rich too.)

    2017, still protesting this shit.

    • weka 9.1
      7 March 2017 at 3:51 pm

      But think of all the women in Syria not being bombed.

      • Bill 9.1.1
        7 March 2017 at 6:14 pm

        Not the first time you’ve thrown that riposte in relation to the debacle around abortion in the US .

        But do you really mean to suggest that the welfare of Syrian women is somehow lesser than that of US women – that no challenge to ‘Roe versus Wade’ would have outweighed the sum total suffering that would have been inflicted upon Syrian women with a ‘no-fly’ zone (Clinton’s Syrian preference)?

        And what of the many Syrian women who right now can no longer access abortions because they are unfortunate enough to live in areas ruled over by western backed and armed militias/terrorists? Is that of any lesser significance than women in some US states being denied abortion services?

        What about women in Libya having no access to abortion services (or much of anything else) since the western engineered overthrow of Gaddafi? Or the women in Afghanistan who enjoyed a great leap backwards in their rights as a direct consequence of western meddling there, after having already taking a backwards tumble with the ascendancy of the Taliban?

        Iraqi women? It doesn’t matter that they’re negotiating a decimated health service/system due to years of western sanctions, two invasions and a clusterfuck of an occupation? (Yeah, yeah, I know. It’s not “really” an occupation)

        The direction of travel in the US with abortion is lamentable. But I’m a bit lost when it gets played off against suffering elsewhere in a way that would suggest that that suffering (potential and/or actual) is somehow inconsequential or secondary.

        Thank fuck there’s less bombing of women going on in Syria than there would have been with a ‘no-fly’ zone. Does that make the shit around abortion in the US okay? No – just as no challenge to Roe versus Wade would not in any way have excused the imposition of a ‘no-fly’ zone in Syria.

        • weka 9.1.1.1
          7 March 2017 at 10:59 pm

          “But do you really mean to suggest that the welfare of Syrian women is somehow lesser than that of US women ”

          No, I don’t. I’m not the one that pitted those two politics against each other.

          I think it’s highly problematic to make arguments politically where one is trying to trade off one sets of women’s rights against another. As soon as you start weighing up abortion against Syria, you’re in fucked up territory. It’s even more problematic for left wing men to do this without risking minimising some pretty fundamental human rights of women. And I’d say it’s almost impossible to do that since the US election.

          My previous comment was wholly sarcastic.

        • Sabine 9.1.1.2
          8 March 2017 at 11:05 am

          mate if we have to stop working for the welfare of women until other women in other countries have rights we would still be burning women on the stakes on grounds of witchcraft.

          But i guess welfare for women has absolutely no meaning if one has a penis.
          It makes it so much easier chastising women who might not be bombed as greedy and selfish and why won’t you just shut up until the women in syria ain’t being bombed anymore or the women in Saudi Arabia get to drive a car, or the girls in Afghanistan are not being married of at 13, or the Duggar women in the US stop breeding like cattle.

          yeah, It must be really good to be a man.

  10. FlashinthePan 10
    7 March 2017 at 2:14 pm

    I have a question…

    If the Cullen Fund contributions had not been suspended by National would it cover shortfalls in funding Super going forward?

    If not, couldn’t we just increase contributions?

    Or, is the problem much bigger than that?

  11. greywarshark 11
    7 March 2017 at 3:35 pm

    Another 4 minute wait to get onto site, and then from Home to Open Mike a further 4 minutes. Even the statcounter readout has to wake itself up, shake, and start counting again! Are machines allowed to discriminate, is this fair, wot abart equality then. I am in the slow queue while other b…s go flying by because I haven’t got a new toy with all the bells and whistles. Sniffs…

    Sabine
    The bloke might have to be careful himself as I think that syphillus is on the rise, a nasty VD.

    The thing for an ultimate authoritarian government of the future would be to ban sexual intercourse. and rapes would go down, births would go down, and we would be a less stressed planet and people. Maybe. Ordinary living might be better but wars would go up where men are away from their civilised lives to a theatre of war where you ad lib the moves so you can manage to live. Then there is an excuse for letting the soul go and doing whatever you can get away with. So women need to tame the world thoughtfully rather than with emotion or admonishment, fat chance but a noble cause.

    • Andre 11.1
      7 March 2017 at 4:32 pm

      Did you try BMs answer from a couple days ago that blocks secure.statcounter.com? It worked for me, joe90 and maybe weka. It’s also sped up a few other sites like HuffPo and Salon that would be very slow cause of loading lots of shite. Yes, I did a brief check on it before installing and it seems legit.

      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-05032017/#comment-1306780

      • greywarshark 11.1.1
        7 March 2017 at 9:59 pm

        okay Andre thanks. I copied the link but don’t dash in to muck my machine around, as if I would know how to do that purposefully. I wonder why we suddenly need this new antiblocker.

  13. repateet 13
    7 March 2017 at 4:20 pm

    Nikki Kaye is getting publicity rubbishing Jacinda Arden for a Super flip-flop.

    Gold medal gymnastics material that, to be part of a whole big team doing a big group flip-flop and being so aware as to discern in the spinning landscape that someone else could be doing the same.

    How come the spinning one’s perception gets the attention?

  14. Morrissey 14
    7 March 2017 at 8:45 pm

    Ben Carson Refers to Slaves as ‘Immigrants’ in First Remarks to HUD Staff
    by LIAM STACK, New York Times, March 6, 2017

    Ben Carson’s first full week as secretary of Housing and Urban Development got off to a rough start on Monday after he described African slaves as “immigrants” during his first speech to hundreds of assembled department employees. The remark, which came as part of a 40-minute address on the theme of America as “a land of dreams and opportunity,” was met with swift outrage online.

    Mr. Carson turned his attention to slavery after describing photographs of poor immigrants displayed at the Ellis Island National Museum of Immigration. These new arrivals worked long hours, six or seven days a week, with little pay, he said. And before them, there were slaves.

    “That’s what America is about, a land of dreams and opportunity,’’ he said. “There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters, might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

    The comparison was first reported by USA Today and quickly drew the ire of social media users who attacked the secretary, who is African-American, for what they saw as racially insensitive comments. …..

    Read more…
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/us/politics/ben-carson-refers-to-slaves-as-immigrants-in-first-remarks-to-hud-staff.html?rref=collection%2Fnewseventcollection%2FThe%20Trump%20White%20House&action=click&contentCollection=Business%20Day&module=Collection&region=Marginalia&src=me&version=newsevent&pgtype=article

    • marty mars 14.1
      7 March 2017 at 10:09 pm

      “But they too had a dream that one day…”

      too sickening to have a decent comment on it – I hope carson suffers for those statements.

      • Morrissey 14.1.1
        8 March 2017 at 7:16 pm

        In the Trump administration, stupidity and ignorance are rewarded handsomely.