Open Mike 09/10/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, October 9th, 2016 - 294 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen 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 …

294 comments on “Open Mike 09/10/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Andre 1
    9 October 2016 at 6:30 am

    Samantha Bee has her own hot mic incident. All usual Samantha Bee warnings apply, including swallow your coffee and put the cup down.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/samantha-bee-leaked-audio-donald-trump_us_57f8ac44e4b0e655eab4a07f?section=&

    • Draco T Bastard 2.1
      9 October 2016 at 11:48 am

      Such deficiencies seem to be a major malaise in NZ since the reforms of the 1980s implemented greed and cost cutting in favour of doing the job properly.

      • The Chairman 2.1.1
        9 October 2016 at 12:14 pm

        The result is a huge fix up bill and public safety issue which potentially puts lives at risk.

  3. Tory 3
    9 October 2016 at 7:07 am

    Congratulations to Tim Shadbolt, Tracy Hicks and Robert Guyton on their reelection in Southland, as a Southlander living overseas these 3 have worked for the interests of Southland and its great that Southland avoids the party politics that plague other metropolitan towns and cities. While there will always be differences of opinion I think the rest of NZ could learn a thing or too from Gore, Invercargill and Rural Southland about getting on with things rather than infighting etc.

  4. The Chairman 4
    9 October 2016 at 8:08 am

    Total annual KiwiSaver fees exceed $300 million in the last year.

    The ratio of returns to fees was $3 of fees paid for every $13 of returns. That means fees consumed about 23 per cent of returns.

    With future investment returns predicted to be lower, the next few years could see that percentage rise.

    Annual earnings fell to $1.3 billion from $3 billion in 2015.

    The proportion of noncontributing members has grown slightly from 42.6% at the end of 2015 to 42.7%.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/85019659/ten-revelations-from-the-financial-markets-authoritys-annual-kiwisaver-report

    https://fma.govt.nz/assets/Reports/_versions/9042/161004-FMA-KiwiSaver-Report-2016.1.pdf

    • Colonial Viper 4.1
      9 October 2016 at 8:33 am

      Thank you to Labour for creating a great system for funnelling two million Kiwi workers wages to Wall St and the financial sector.

      • Lanthanide 4.1.1
        9 October 2016 at 8:54 am

        There are more $30b in funds invested in kiwisaver.

        I’d like to hear of your plan for where that money would be invested, in a way that allows investors to pull it out to build houses or when they retire, without the money being invested in banks or the stock market.

        • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 8:59 am

          I heard the country is short of about 100,000 houses.

          $30B might be just enough.

          Also, it’s only electronic funny money, invested in electronic/paper pretend assets.

          Might as well put it towards something real and beneficial to Kiwis right here right now.

          • Lanthanide 4.1.1.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 9:40 am

            How does investing in building houses provide investment returns? How do these people cash the money out when they want to retire?

            Are you suggesting that kiwifund managers should instead have gone into residential housing and managing tenancies?

            The market rate for residential tenancy management is 8% + GST. That’s a lot higher than the fees we’re talking about.

            • save nz 4.1.1.1.1.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:04 am

              “How does investing in building houses provide investment returns? How do these people cash the money out when they want to retire?”

              We keep our immigration levels up and we just turn NZ into one giant house building economy for mostly Asia where there is plenty of demand for citizens to leave.

              Often migrants want to have a look first which keeps tourism levels up.

              And the world needs more water and food, so we can sell them our water super cheap and our farms and assets like Silver Ferm farms.

              That’s the Natz vision for our economy.

              Sadly I’m not sure if there is much of an alternative vision from other political parties or maybe they can voice it in a way that is easily understood.

              BTW – this economic approach does nothing for productivity and we are middling at best for GDP in spite of having the 3rd highest population growth after Israel and Luxembourg.

              http://sciblogs.co.nz/the-dismal-science/2016/10/05/new-zealand-envy-world-middling-best/

            • alwyn 4.1.1.1.1.2
              9 October 2016 at 10:28 am

              You shouldn’t be asking such awkward questions Lanthanide.
              “How does investing in building houses provide investment returns”.
              Have another read of the things CV, save NZ and The Chairman are saying.
              What they really want isn’t to use the money in people’s Kiwi Saver accounts, or the Government Super Fund or the Cullen Fund to be used on that sort of thing. They want to grab it and spend it on their own little hobby horses and to blow it on their pet little projects.
              That is why I don’t trust ANY Government to own and run businesses. They can’t resist the chance to throw money at things they favour, rather than things that make any sense.

              They also can’t resist the temptation to claim that they have to right to help themselves to other peoples hard earned savings or businesses that private individuals have developed.

              Why do you think that save NZ talks about “our farms and assets like Silver Fern farms”. He thinks they are HIS assets.

              Why do you think that The Chairman talks about “That money could be funding new publicly owned (SOEs) exporting ventures”.
              He doesn’t want to spend his own money on things he favours. He wants to spend YOUR’S

              • Lanthanide …
                9 October 2016 at 10:39 am

                Yip, I almost wrote “you’re no better than politicians who see a large pot of money set aside for public pensions and can’t help themselves but raid it for their pet projects”.

                I believe it was James Shaw who just recently said the superannuation fund money should be put towards building renewable power plants.

                • alwyn …
                  9 October 2016 at 11:04 am

                  If I had used your words, which convey exactly what I meant I could have saved such a lot of typing.

                  The Greens have an almost unique ability to choose the most foolish economic proposals. One of them is the way they propose to encourage people to use “greener” forms of transport, in particular electric cars. They want, I understand, to exempt them from FBT. That is of course a subsidy or rebate on such vehicles.

                  The Economist, a couple of months ago published a brief article on the most effective way of getting people to use greener forms of vehicle. The ways it could be done were higher fuel charges, higher registration charges for polluting vehicles or a rebate on green machines. All these were tried in Switzerland.

                  The rebates procedure was the worst. Why am I not surprised that it was the one chosen by the New Zealand Green Party?
                  http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21702762-why-fuel-taxes-are-best-way-encourage-sales-greener-cars-not-easy-being

              • The Chairman …
                9 October 2016 at 11:04 am

                Something for you to ponder, alwyn

                One can invest in little with a dollar, but collectively (through government) that dollar can be turned into millions, vastly increasing investment opportunities.

                The local private sector is lacking when it comes to exporting, hence the need for Government to help fill this void.

                The alternative which tends to be pursued is to seek offshore investment.

                However, when one looks at our current account, one can see how well that has been working out for the nation overall.

                http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/key-graphs/key-graph-current-account

                • alwyn …
                  9 October 2016 at 11:09 am

                  Why don’t you set up a KiwiSaver scheme then that announces it’s policy is the set up such companies?
                  Then invest your own KiwiSaver money, and that of anyone else who wants to join up, in such ventures.
                  Just don’t force people to do so if they want to get higher returns, and a better retirement, elsewhere.
                  Why do you think YOU have the right to determine where I invest my retirement savings?

                  • The Chairman …
                    9 October 2016 at 11:37 am

                    KiwiSaver membership is not mandatory, hence I’m not forcing anyone to invest.

                    Moreover, the level of risk you decide to select is up to you.

                    While your suggestion could be of some benefit to the nation and myself, it doesn’t reach the scale of what I was suggesting, thus produce the wider benefits.

            • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.1.1.3
              9 October 2016 at 11:58 am

              How does investing in building houses provide investment returns? How do these people cash the money out when they want to retire?

              Wrong questions.

              The correct questions are:
              Why do we insist that we need private investment?
              Why do we insist that people must get something for nothing from having money?
              Why do we insist that people need to ‘save for their retirement’ when saving money saves nothing at all?

        • The Chairman 4.1.1.2
          9 October 2016 at 9:55 am

          I have a suggestion.

          That money could be funding new publicly owned (SOEs) exporting ventures, which will boost the productive sector, creating new jobs whilst growing the nations wealth.

          • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.2.1
            9 October 2016 at 10:10 am

            Shall we go for more economic growth, and more resource consumption, that’s a viable long term strategy.

            • Red 4.1.1.2.1.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:27 am

              From an investor point of view I am not sure I would take your investment advise CV, country risk is huge, all assets tied up in high risk business start ups, liquidity is crap,, no diversification etc. dont confuse Wall Street the market with the underlying assets if they are shares, these are real companies making real things that you see around you and that you buy and use every day,

            • The Chairman 4.1.1.2.1.2
              9 October 2016 at 10:43 am

              Sustainable investment would be the priority, CV.

              • Colonial Viper …
                9 October 2016 at 8:21 pm

                Yes that’s like Green Growth (or to make the comparison more obvious,
                “clean coal”)

          • Lanthanide 4.1.1.2.2
            9 October 2016 at 10:27 am

            There’s nothing stopping Kiwisaver managers from setting up such companies themselves right now.

            • The Chairman 4.1.1.2.2.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:44 am

              But that won’t avert the clipping of the ticket.

              • Lanthanide …
                9 October 2016 at 12:26 pm

                Correct, but if your idea is such a sure-fire winner, why aren’t any of the kiwisaver funds organising it?

                Is it because they’re lazy? Or is it because the potential reward isn’t worth the risk?

                • The Chairman …
                  9 October 2016 at 1:06 pm

                  They lack the scale, scope and resources the Government can bring to the table, therefore they may find it less feasible.

                  • Lanthanide …
                    9 October 2016 at 1:07 pm

                    Right, too risky.

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 October 2016 at 3:30 pm

                      While there is a level of risk in all investments, I was highlighting the Government is in a better position to capitalise.

                      Moreover, our economic circumstance requires it.

        • Nic the NZer 4.1.1.3
          9 October 2016 at 8:13 pm

          You may want to look into the economic theory called the ‘paradox of thrift’. This demonstrates conclusively that to the extent NZers saving propensities are raised this increases the average NZers saving rate by no dollers what so ever. Its impossible for Kiwisaver to succeed in its primary (stated) policy goal of raising NZers savings rate. Its actually just another branch of the neoliberal onslaught and in practice an attempt to run a govt budget surplus by minimising pension payments over time.

  5. Ad 5
    9 October 2016 at 8:25 am

    Top work to Richard Hills on Auckland’s North Shore beating out Grant Gillon.

    Also will be awesome to see Efeso round the table.

  6. Colonial Viper 6
    9 October 2016 at 8:38 am

    Long form interview of Syrian President al-Assad by Denmark’s TV2

    The Syrian Government knew in advance that the ceasefire would fail because they already understood from previous experience that the Americans had no genuine motivation or ability to separate out “moderate” rebel groups from the jihadists, as required by the ceasefire agreement.

    http://thesaker.is/interview-of-president-al-assad-to-denmarks-tv-2-moderate-opposition-is-a-myth/

    • Olwyn 6.1
      9 October 2016 at 11:01 am

      The most telling, and also chilling, bit of this interview is the reference to the Cuban missile crisis, followed by this, Now the situation is different, because in the United States you don’t have superior statecraft. When you don’t have superior statecraft, you should expect anything… He is not the first to make this observation, and it was openly visible in Samantha Powers’ petulant, childish address to the UN, and in a presidential debate that could easily have passed as an audition for a part in a reality TV show. Even if you go back a short way to Bush Snr. and Dukakis, you could not then have imagined the standard of sober-mindedness for high office falling so low.

      The TINA doctrine expresses a position that brooks no negotiation. Its adherents seem to want to elevate people who are able to win over the public and follow directions (as with reality TV). Where Kennedy was able to leave Cuba more-or-less alone in exchange for not having a missile base next door, these people seem incapable of such moves. To do that would be inconsistent with the “hard choices” that they believe they must make. Both Kerry and Obama do seem, prima facie, better than that, but also seem unable to rein in the silliness and hubris that has developed to an alarming degree within US public life.

      The question as to whether Putin and Al Assad are good or bad pales alongside the question as to whether the west is currently capable of sober, mature behaviour.

  7. Sanctuary 7
    9 October 2016 at 8:59 am

    An interesting piece for the Standard’s resident dupe of Russia…

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/29/world/europe/russia-sweden-disinformation.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0

    • Colonial Viper 7.1
      9 October 2016 at 9:05 am

      the US wants to keep surrounding Russia with NATO forces and NATO bases. Business as usual for the empire.

      BTW New York Times propaganda was instrumental in the pro-war drumbeat which led the US public to the Iraq War, and the disastrous implosion of Libya.

    • Paul 7.2
      9 October 2016 at 9:21 am

      There are many dupes on this site of the USA.
      They still believe their lies after 9/11 and Iraq.
      You should listen to John Pilger.
      No doubt you’d call him a ‘dupe of Russia’.
      He also happens to be a most respected independent journalist.

      • TheExtremist 7.2.1
        9 October 2016 at 9:28 am

        This has been posted 3, 4 maybe 5 times in as many days. What ever point you are trying to make has already been made

        • Colonial Viper 7.2.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 9:29 am

          It appears that the point may have been made, but from your comments the point certainly has not registered.

      • Red 7.2.2
        9 October 2016 at 10:31 am

        John pilger blah blah, Like a broken record on this guy Paul, what’s the count on how many times you have posted this video

      • Chooky 7.2.3
        9 October 2016 at 3:16 pm

        +100 Paul … worth watching!…interesting if scathing comments on the mainstream media, the American Election …. and demonisation of Donald Trump… war criminals Hillary Clinton and Obama too…also Madeleine Albright

    • Psycho Milt 7.3
      9 October 2016 at 10:21 am

      “Then the fake document becomes the source of a news story distributed on far-left or far-right-wing websites,”

      That’s the weirdest thing about the Putin fan-boys – there are as many of them on the loonier fringes of the left as there are on the loonier fringes of the right. I wouldn’t have expected to see people on the left cheerleading for right-wing nationalist authoritarians, but it looks as though for some people their (US) enemy’s enemy is their friend. Newsflash, suckers: your enemy’s enemy isn’t your friend, but does enjoy having useful idiots on-side.

      • Colonial Viper 7.3.1
        9 October 2016 at 10:30 am

        Presenting Putin’s useful idiots – anyone who disagrees with the establishment

        This weekend we once again got confirmation that any time the generic narrative spectacularly falls apart, and the “establishment” is caught with its pants down (or, in the case of the DNC, engaging in borderline election fraud leading to what the FT just described as “Democrats in turmoil”) what does it do? Why blame Putin of course, and more specifically his “useful idiots”, and hope the whole thing blows over quickly.

        Not convinced? Here is the proof.

        http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-24/presenting-putins-useful-idiot-anyone-who-disagrees-establishment

      • TheExtremist66 7.3.2
        9 October 2016 at 10:37 am

        That’s what strikes me – how you can say your left wing but support a authoritarian right wing conservative

        • Paul 7.3.2.1
          9 October 2016 at 11:45 am

          And you support US neocon foreign policy in Ukraine. Latvia, Syria….
          Supporting the policies of Bush, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld. now that’s a progressive stance.

          • TheExtremist66 7.3.2.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 12:15 pm

            Nowhere, ever, have I supported the US.
            why do you lie? Why are you so stupid as to think criticism against Putin somehow implies supporting the US? Is your worldview that binary?

        • marty mars 7.3.2.2
          9 October 2016 at 2:02 pm

          CV has spurned the left and has declared he’s no leftie.

          • Paul 7.3.2.2.1
            9 October 2016 at 2:03 pm

            I think cv presents an honest left wing viewpoint.

          • Chris 7.3.2.2.2
            9 October 2016 at 2:17 pm

            If anyone’s spurned the left it’s Leftie and those of his ilk, not CV. CV challenges the so-called left by asking if they’re left enough. Leftie epitomises what’s become the current mainstream neo-liberal left by accepting without question and without exception every single thing Labour says and does. That is called spurning the left.

            • Paul 7.3.2.2.2.1
              9 October 2016 at 2:20 pm

              I agree.

              I like the fact that cv questions the neo-liberal left’s domestic policies, as well as questioning the left’s slavish support of extreme neocon US foreign policy.

              It is worth noting that cv gets a lot more flak from the right wing trolls than our neo-liberal Labour commentators on this site.

            • Chooky 7.3.2.2.2.2
              9 October 2016 at 2:52 pm

              +100 CV…is a very pertinent and well informed commentator….one can learn a lot from him… one of the reasons I keep coming here..if not the main reason

              …and he certainly gets the discussion going

            • marty mars 7.3.2.2.2.3
              9 October 2016 at 3:10 pm

              Bullshit. He isnt left he says so or are you calling him a liar

              • Chris …
                9 October 2016 at 3:22 pm

                It’s interesting we’re having a discussion about CV’s politics – I’m sure he must be having a decent chuckle, but I digress.

                Now, getting back to that discussion. If “he isn’t left” (what ever that may or may not mean), what would you say he “is”?

                • Chooky …
                  9 October 2016 at 3:41 pm

                  …a truth inquirer/ speaker…and a very very well informed analytical ,intelligent one

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    9 October 2016 at 8:16 pm

                    Hi Chris and Chooky and Paul

                    Cheers to the three of you. Sorry I missed most of this thread as it unfolded.

                    Marty Mars is a good guy and correct in basically saying that I no longer subscribe to the groupings of the traditional (mid 20th Century based industrial pro growth social democratic)/establishment (sold out for power centrist free market)/liberal identity politics left, and that I have said so explicitly.

                    (And yes he is also correct that I am “proud” of this.)

                    Sadly, the established conventional Left have only a small fraction of the answers needed for what is coming down the pike over the next ten to twenty years.

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:25 pm

                      thank you cv – I don’t judge your comment but accept it and respect it too – unlike some of your supporters who don’t accept let alone respect it and want to try and create a problem where there isn’t one – that’s you chris.

                      I am also very very happy that you don’t identify as a left thinker, supporter or activist.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 10:14 pm

                      I still turn out to support left wing mates in their efforts when I can of course, but that’s not the direction my own politics is in.

                • marty mars …
                  9 October 2016 at 4:00 pm

                  I don’t care other than he isn’t left – he says the left/right model is outdated so I suppose he is panpolitical.

                  • Chris …
                    9 October 2016 at 4:32 pm

                    You’re becoming as one-dimenional as Loftie but unlike him, there’s still hope. Just think a little harder, I do believe you’ve got it in you.

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 4:48 pm

                      no need to be a patronising git there chris – curb yourself.

                      I already answered – I don’t care. He doesn’t care what I think he is. He is happy not to be on the left. It isn’t that controversial or hard to understand. Hopefully you won’t come back with slimey bullshit now that that has all been cleared up ffs.

                    • Chris …
                      9 October 2016 at 4:53 pm

                      This slimy enough for you?

                    • weka …
                      9 October 2016 at 5:51 pm

                      Chris, and Paul, whatever disagreements there might be about CV’s politics or the value of CV’s contributions here, it is most definitely true that CV earlier this year declared himself to not be left wing. He’s said it a number of times, and many of us remember this because of how it happened and the context it happened in.

                      I think it’s 50/50 whether CV himself, who is still active in this thread, will confirm this himself. That alone tells us much about the problems here.

                      You owe marty an apology.

                    • Chris …
                      9 October 2016 at 6:24 pm

                      Sure, but what does that mean? marty mars seems to be saying that this means CV’s some kind of extreme right wing something something. That’s the implication and marty mars won’t say otherwise. It’s a meaningless accusation.

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 6:29 pm

                      I never said or implied that at all fuckwit – don’t try and spin some wank game geezer. It is a fact, he said it – deal with it. You are the only one making shit up.

                    • One Two []
                      9 October 2016 at 7:19 pm

                      MM, you’re becoming increasingly irrational in recent weeks through your comments, including insulting people with bad language

                      Looking back over time it seemed to be an exception, now it seems to be the rule..

                      Perhaps you could take some time to evaluate if all the emotive vitriol you currently have for CV, primarily but not exclusively, is worth it
                      ..

                    • weka …
                      9 October 2016 at 7:08 pm

                      Sure, but what does that mean? marty mars seems to be saying that this means CV’s some kind of extreme right wing something something. That’s the implication and marty mars won’t say otherwise. It’s a meaningless accusation.

                      What it means is that marty said repeatedly that CV doesn’t consider himself to be left wing anymore. There is no further implication about being extreme right, although marty did suggest it might be called pan-political.

                      There are lots of things to accuse CV of, but marty didn’t do that. Reminding that CV himself doesn’t consider himself to be left wing is a relevant comment on its own. Any inference is something you’ve decided, not something marty has said. Here’s the exact quotes. Feel free to scroll up to see them in context, but I think they stand pretty clearly on their own.

                      Marty is in quotation marks, others in [ ].

                      “CV has spurned the left and has declared he’s no leftie.”
                      *
                      [I think cv presents an honest left wing viewpoint.]
                      
”He doesn’t – ask him he is proud of it.”

                      *
                      “Hes not left he has said this it isnt a conspiracy just a non judgemental fact .”
                      *
                      [If anyone’s spurned the left it’s Leftie and those of his ilk, not CV. CV challenges the so-called left by asking if they’re left enough. Leftie epitomises what’s become the current mainstream neo-liberal left by accepting without question and without exception every single thing Labour says and does. That is called spurning the left.]

                      “Bullshit. He isnt left he says so or are you calling him a liar”
                      *
                      [Now, getting back to that discussion. If “he isn’t left” (what ever that may or may not mean), what would you say he “is”?]

                      “I don’t care other than he isn’t left – he says the left/right model is outdated so I suppose he is pan political.”
                      *
                      “I already answered – I don’t care. He doesn’t care what I think he is. He is happy not to be on the left. It isn’t that controversial or hard to understand. Hopefully you won’t come back with slimey bullshit now that that has all been cleared up ffs.”

                      CV: Marty Mars claims you have “has spurned the left” and that you are “no leftie.”
                      Hi Paul, I no longer count myself as a member of the traditional left wing (jobs, industrial growth, organised labour, social democracy), or the establishment left wing (centrist market model Labour/Greens), or the liberal identity politics left wing (take your pick).
                      Not because there aren’t useful elements within there, but because they are completely unsuitable and inadequate for what is coming down the pike in the next 10 to 20 years.

                    • Chris …
                      9 October 2016 at 7:09 pm

                      Say what you mean then, son. All you’ve said is that CV’s “not left”. What the fuck does that mean, you one-dimensional little weasel. What are you accusing CV of being, then? Far left? Fuck, I’d be proud if someone called me that, but you’ve said nothing apart from “CV’s not left”. If you call yourself “left”, then heaven fucking help us.

                      [you’ve had this explained to you several times already, including by CV himself. If you’re not willing to listen to people and just want to be abusive, take the night off. – weka]

                    • RedLogix …
                      9 October 2016 at 7:26 pm

                      Equally it should be plain that CV is no right winger either; the old left/right labels no longer stick quite like used to.

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 7:55 pm

                      1,2 – I haven’t insulted cv by clarifying that he says he isn’t a left winger – get a grip.

                      chis – your having a wankathon by yourself over your made up outrage over your made up conclusion which has been clarified for you at least 3 times now. Seems you are too up yourself and your rightonrick approach – guess what geezer – these are the south seas here not blighty. And my original comment was a clarification for the extremist you dick.

                    • Chris …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:29 pm

                      If that’s all mm’s saying, that CV’s “not left”, and that’s all he’s concerned about, I suggest that he’s concerned about nothing because what he says, that someone is “not left” means absolutely nothing. I’m glad that the fact mm hasn’t been saying anything at all has been clarified.

                    • Leftie …
                      9 October 2016 at 10:21 pm

                      You’re a patronizing Nat fan troll, Chris.

                  • Muttonbird …
                    9 October 2016 at 7:17 pm

                    Panpolitical is it. CV wants to see the world burn. Not positive like Steph asks for and critical in all the wrong places.

                    CV has an ego the size of Trump’s and a platform the size of Tinkerbell’s.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:08 pm

                      I want to see the world burn?

                      Nah, I’m just totally amazed that so few people can see that the world is already completely on fire.

                      And it’s not fun at all. But I can understand the ostrich mentality.

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:10 pm

                      cv why don’t you clarify your non left status for chris above – he’s really struggling to understand and is trying to take his anger out on others.

                    • weka …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:21 pm

                      @marty, CV already has. I’ve quoted him in one of the subthreads too.

                • McFlock …
                  9 October 2016 at 4:46 pm

                  I used to suspect that CV was a leftie with poor planning skills whose failed intrigues had resulted in a massive overcompensation of naysaying and uncritical parrotting of propaganda to preserve his inflated but fragile ego.

                  But when he shat a brick over Swarbrick’s cv, I glimpsed a midlife crisis and concomitant shift towards general toryism when he finally gets putinlove out of his system..

                  • TheExtremist …
                    9 October 2016 at 4:49 pm

                    Pretty much spot on

                    • Muttonbird …
                      9 October 2016 at 7:20 pm

                      +1. He wastes so much energy in the wrong fucking direction.

                      If only he and Chris Trotter would move on from 1984 and help the modern Labour movement we might be in a better place.

                    • TheExtremist66 …
                      9 October 2016 at 7:33 pm

                      A prime example of “Pommers Law” (look it up)

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    9 October 2016 at 8:06 pm

                    But when he shat a brick over Swarbrick’s cv

                    Ah yes the 22 year old LLB BA double degree cafe owner arts patron journalist 2degrees employee fashion designer/fashion label launching marketing consultant mayoral candidate.

                    Some people looked at that and decided – astonishing youth prodigy. I looked at that and decided the obvious.

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:09 pm

                      The toilet paper is with chris – he’s just about finished cleaning himself up.

                      [marty can you also please take a step back from the abuse, thanks – weka]

                    • RedLogix …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:17 pm

                      Young women these days are graduating from University in greater numbers, succeeding in business and establishing powerful political/business networks far faster and more effectively than young men the same age.

                      It was a mistake to gauge Swarbrick by male standards.

                      [RL: I’ll make a moderation note here rather than pick on any one poster. The levels of personal abuse have gotten WAY too high. I’m not going to intervene here because I don’t think I’m the right person to do it. I’m leaving it over to weka to moderate as she sees fit and totally support any action she takes. ]

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:30 pm

                      RL you know and I know full well the fast networker fast job changing fast ladder climbing always on the look out for the next stepping stone careerist types, and yes in our beautiful modern day they are definitely both men and women.

                      Based on her CV would you have seriously considered hiring Swarbrick for a key mid level management position in a large, demanding organisation?

                      I would not have.

                      BTW if she keeps at politics she’s not going to end up as a left winger. Centre, maybe. Possibly. Just a guess.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:31 pm

                      Fashion labels and cafes are like any other small business – starting one has no indication of scale, just company registration. And fashion and art overlap quite a bit.

                      The thing is, I’ve met people like Chloe. Rarely, but it happens. They do a lot of work in a lot of different fields, and yes even do double degrees (double honours in one case I knew) at the same time. Fuck, look at Cook Bros. That started with five marketing students getting bank loans to buy equal shares in a pub.

                      You have no knowedge of her politics, no knowledge of her background, no knowledge of any impropriety, no idea of how much financial assistance she had as opposed to saving and leveraging on what she built.

                      You just can’t believe that her CV is plausible because it looks much better than yours. Rather than have your delicate ego scratched, you’ll adopt the myth that what she wrote can’t be true.

                    • Penny Bright []
                      9 October 2016 at 10:24 pm

                      Is support for privatisation via Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) – now acceptable supposedly ‘left wing’ / Labour policy?

                      Yes or no?

                      Penny Bright

                      ‘Anti- privatisation / anti-corruption Public Watchdog’.

                    • Penny Bright []
                      9 October 2016 at 10:34 pm

                      Chlöe Swarbrick
                      September 24 at 8:27am

                      Hey Penny, I support certain PPPs to see certain necessary infrastructure built.

                      It is a practicality, and does not need to be evil, especially with requisite controls in contracts.

                      I am against the TPPA, and my track record in journalism will show that.

                      I support density because cities operate best, and most efficiently, when they are denser.

                      Where would you like to see Auckland growth go?

                      Forever sprawling outwards, without the support of infrastructure or job opportunity?

                      My whole campaign is premised on engaging the disengaged – bringing Auckland’s disenfranchised back into the conversation.

                      I do not think we can have a representative democracy when only 1/3 of the city votes, let alone when there is a large correlation there between voters and homeowners protecting their interests.”

                      Chloe Swarbrick – in my opinion – practical, pragmatic PRIVATISER.

                      Remember folks?

                      “The key thing in life is sincerity. Once you can fake that – you’ve got it made.”

                      Penny Bright

                      ‘Whistle-blower’.

                    • One Two []
                      9 October 2016 at 11:58 pm

                      CV’s instinct is correct..

                      People will believe whatever they want, especially when they are trying to put their ego over the top of another

                      Such as you’re doing in this instance

                      Do you even realise what you were doing?

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:37 pm

                      thank you moderators – message received.

                    • RedLogix …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:45 pm

                      I’m mostly with McF on this one. I’ve never met Swarbrick and I’ve no idea if she over-egged her CV or not. But I think you made a mistake in casting judgement on it with insufficient information.

                      As McFlock says, such ‘over-achieving’ young people do exist and I’m happy they do.

                      Whether she has the maturity and skills to operate as a senior manager within Auckland City is perhaps a better question, and one that the voters delivered an answer on. But then again look at Helen Clark who was active in politics at a very young age; youth alone should be no barrier to activism. Swarbrick looks like talent and there’s every chance we’ll see her some time down the track.

                      As you must know personally CV, politics is a tough game, and staging a recovery from setbacks is a lesson best learnt young. Wish I had.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:55 pm

                      So the call is uber hardworking uber effective networking outstanding multitasking fast rising career star then? OK happy to go with your call. Swarbrick for Mayor 2019.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:58 pm

                      You just can’t believe that her CV is plausible because it looks much better than yours.

                      Huh?

                      Oh yeah, you’re a salaryman, I suppose you still need a CV don’t you.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 October 2016 at 9:09 pm

                      Oh yeah, you’re a salaryman, I suppose you still need a CV don’t you.

                      lol
                      oops I touched a nerve.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 9:14 pm

                      What do you mean “touched a nerve”?

                    • McFlock …
                      9 October 2016 at 9:51 pm

                      lolk
                      You only jump to deflection when you’re strugging for a reasonable response.

                      Come on, what exactly about Swarbrick’s cv made you think it was unbelievable: that a 22yo might have started a few small companies, maybe one during uni? It’s easy to form a company – friend of mine registered one for a single theatrical production. It’s a good way of keeping boundaries separate, especially if you’re juggling a lot of different plates.

                      Was it the use of the word “patron” that pissed you off? Or did the double egree just activate your anti-education reflex?

                      Or are you incapable of self-reflection?

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 9:53 pm

                      Yes I particularly loved “patron of the arts”. so informative

                    • McFlock …
                      9 October 2016 at 10:16 pm

                      So the word “patron” made you disbelieve the entire thing?

                    • McFlock …
                      9 October 2016 at 10:45 pm

                      That’s nice, Penny.

                      It still doesn’t mean her CV is padded.

                    • McFlock …
                      10 October 2016 at 12:06 am

                      CV’s instinct is correct..

                      Really? You have evidence Swarbrick’s CV was untrue? Feel free to present it, rather than pretendng you’re some sort of deus ex machina swanning in to proclaim the truth based solely on your own authority..

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      10 October 2016 at 12:18 am

                      I never said that Swarbrick’s CV was “untrue” McFlock.

                      In fact, I think it is highly likely that Swarbrick did/attempted all those things on her CV.

                      edit – soz I see you weren’t replying to me

                    • McFlock …
                      10 October 2016 at 12:40 am

                      I never said that Swarbrick’s CV was “untrue” McFlock.

                      No, you just called it “obvious crap”

                      In fact, I think it is highly likely that Swarbrick did/attempted all those things on her CV.

                      “did/attempted”?
                      Even when you’re backtracking, you can’t but help suggesting that not everything in the list of what she did, she actually did, rather than attempted.

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 October 2016 at 1:09 am

                      Is this conversation really necessary?

                      If I claimed to be a ‘patron of the arts’ on the basis that I have a couple of paintings I’ve paid a few hundred dollars each for … then strictly speaking I’m not lying. But to someone who maybe had spent a lifetime spending millions, like say David Walsh, collecting and building a magnificent gallery … then it doubtless he’d think I was talking crap.

                      And while I own a couple of companies, they really are of such modest consequence I wouldn’t dream of calling myself ‘company director’. Even though strictly speaking it’s true.

                      And when I’m employing staff, I see far too many CV’s that are blatantly embellished. Typically people who claim high levels of competency in multiple skill areas that I know each one might take 3- 5 years to become good at, when they’ve barely been out of Uni a couple of years. Again strictly speaking they probably aren’t exactly lying, but neither do I find their claims convincing.

                      At 22 yrs of age, did Swarbrick over-egg her CV? I’d be surprised and delighted if it did indeed stand up to scrutiny; but equally you can hardly be too harsh if others express skepticism.

                      You and CV can bat this one about all night, but in the absence of hard information about Swarbrick it becomes an exercise in sour, sterile sniping.

                    • weka …
                      10 October 2016 at 2:05 am

                      @Red

                      You and CV can bat this one about all night, but in the absence of hard information about Swarbrick it becomes an exercise in sour, sterile sniping.

                      That was my main response the other day when it came up. There’s bugger all information to go on. Myself, I don’t have a problem with what she is claiming, and am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt unless something concrete gets presented. I just thought CV’s comments weren’t based on much other than his own antipathy (and he wasn’t very upfront about what he was meaning, but that’s another kete of ika)

                  • Leftie …
                    9 October 2016 at 10:35 pm

                    +1 McFlock.

            • Leftie 7.3.2.2.2.4
              9 October 2016 at 10:18 pm

              As per usual, you post a load of rubbish Chris.

  8. Grey Area 8
    9 October 2016 at 9:13 am

    In today’s story in the Sunday Star Times about funding needed for transport improvements touted by mayoral candidates: “And while Bridges says he is keen to work with councils to improve their get-around-ability, he won’t buy into their pork barrel politics with taxpayer dollars. ”

    Admittedly that’s the journalist’s spin as he is quoted as actually saying: “I’m very keen to keep up a new approach I’ve had where we manage to strip aside the politics, use evidence-based information, and have officials working together”.

    But isn’t this the same man who plucked 10 phantom bridges out of thin air to tempt the voters of Northland?

  9. Sanctuary 9
    9 October 2016 at 10:03 am

    Pilger’s best days were a quarter of a century ago, today he tiptoes along the line between journalist and crank.

    Drawing an equivalance between a publication like the the New York Times and Putin’s asymentric state use of black propaganda is exactly the sort of false equivalence that fuels Trumpism (a sneering imbecile also beloved of CV) and brings delighted smiles to the kleptocracy running the Russian mafia state. One can read the NYT (with a mind to it’s bias) with a reasonable degree that it is reporting facts, albeit with a (often considerable) slant. Departing news for fantasy, and defending that fantasy as some sort of equvalent, is disgraceful and (to mix metaphors) simply tells me that CV has painted his high horse into a corner, and rather than climb down and wear the sticky results he’ll just keeping upping the ante until, one presumes, he is defending David Icke’s right to an equal hearing in the flat earth “debate”.

    • Garibaldi 9.1
      9 October 2016 at 10:13 am

      Bullshit Sanctuary. Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once…. The best propagandists in the world are the Americans. Period.

      • Colonial Viper 9.1.1
        9 October 2016 at 10:19 am

        Sanctuary thinks he is smart enough to not be affected by the ubiquitous corporate MSM western propaganda.

        • Kiwiri 9.1.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 10:44 am

          “There can be no cooperation between the US and Russia over Syria, because the two government’s goals are entirely different. Russia wants to defeat ISIS, and the US wants to use ISIS to overthrow Assad. This should be clear to the Russians. Yet they still enter into “agreements” that Washington has no intention of keeping. Washington breaks the agreements and blames Russia, thus creating more opportunities to paint Russia as untrustworthy. Without Russia’s cooperation in setting themselves up for blame, Russia’s portrait would not be so black.

          “On September 28, 2016, the New York Times gave us a good example of how Washington’s propaganda system works. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/world/middleeast/russias-brutal-bombing-of-aleppo-may-be-calculated-and-it-may-be-working.html?_r=0 ”

          Paul Craig Roberts
          (oh dear, former United States Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under President Reagan, 1981)

          http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/09/30/bring-back-the-cold-war-paul-craig-roberts/

          • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 10:48 am

            PCR gets it. So does Col Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Sec State Colin Powell, and many other former establishment players who are horrified at what has been happening over the last decade.

            • Kiwiri 9.1.1.1.1.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:51 am

              wah wah wah, Russian propoganda, Western readers being duped …

              “Perhaps everyone has already forgotten that when Washington’s plan to invade Syria was blocked by the UK Parliament and Russian diplomacy, Washington sent the forces used against Gaddafi in Libya to overthrow Assad in Syria where they emerged as ISIS and commit extraordinary atrocities.

              “As ISIS was serving Washington’s purpose, Washington took no action against them. After a couple of years of death and destruction suffered by Syrians, the Russian government lost its patience and backed the Syrian Army with air power. Soon ISIS was defeated and on the run.

              “Washington was caught in a bind. In Iraq Washington was fighting ISIS, because ISIS was overthrowing Washington’s puppet in Iraq. However, in Syria Washington was supporting ISIS, often characterizing ISIS as “moderates” fighting to bring democracy to Syria. Now that ISIS is on the verge of total defeat in Syria, Washington’s whores among the “experts” want Russia punished for blocking Washington’s overthrow of Syria.

              …

              “Real experts have integrity, and these experts want the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes tried for their war crimes. I think David Satter should be in the dock with them.”

              PCR
              http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/08/10/the-stench-of-raw-propaganda-paul-craig-roberts/

              • Colonial Viper …
                9 October 2016 at 11:18 am

                I guess former US establishment types like Roberts, Wilkerson, Flynn, Binnie, McGovern and others are all Russian agents now…

              • Psycho Milt …
                9 October 2016 at 3:07 pm

                This guy was part of the Reagan administration in 1981? He certainly will know a lot about shitty activities by the US government, but the fact is the current US government isn’t even in the same league of shitty activities as the one he was involved with. Who would take his word for anything?

                This alone identifies him as either an idiot or part of Putin’s troll army:

                …Washington sent the forces used against Gaddafi in Libya to overthrow Assad in Syria…

                Stuff about chemtrails or the lizard people would be less embarrassing than that.

                • Stuart Munro …
                  9 October 2016 at 3:10 pm

                  Might be better to point out the role of France in Libya. Not everything originates in Washington.

        • Sanctuary 9.1.1.2
          9 October 2016 at 11:24 am

          You are such an awesome arse clown. Honestly, do you have to try to be so willfully idiotic? It’s like talking to a stupider than normal brick wall.

          [I agree with Red. Please stick to the politics and debate, and tone down the abuse. CV’s comment looks like a deliberate windup, don’t take the bait – weka]

          • RedLogix 9.1.1.2.1
            9 October 2016 at 12:16 pm

            With respect Sanctuary, that comment above is pretty much just “pointless abuse”. If I felt like wearing a moderators hat right now (and most times I don’t) it would likely attract a warning or more.

            • weka 9.1.1.2.1.1
              9 October 2016 at 12:40 pm

              was already logged in 🙂

            • Sanctuary 9.1.1.2.1.2
              9 October 2016 at 7:54 pm

              There is such a thing as pointed abuse, which is exactly what CV deserves.

              [there is a general acceptance of rudeness here when it’s part of making a political point. Abuse for the sake of it is not acceptable. Abusing someone personally and not making a political point is not acceptable. No more warnings – weka]

              • Colonial Viper …
                9 October 2016 at 7:58 pm

                Fuck, you inclusive self enlightened diversity loving safe space promoting lefty liberal types make me laugh when your true colours fly. Maybe check out a mirror some time?

                • Muttonbird …
                  9 October 2016 at 8:03 pm

                  Yawn. You simply cannot take criticism of your massive ego, can you?

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    9 October 2016 at 8:36 pm

                    I always like to remind people of what the Labour Party did to conscientious objectors and pacifists within their ranks during WWII. Expelled them, black listed them, got them fired from their jobs, made life miserable for them.

                    Those traits still exist in the Left.

      • Paul 9.1.2
        9 October 2016 at 11:52 am

        I cannot believe how so many people accept the lines of the Us government and its sockpuppets in the media.

        After all, if they had being paying attention, they will know about the lies about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. If there was an ounce of critical thinking going on, they would see that we were also lied to about 9/11.

        And yet they believe the spin doctors and repeaters within the media.

        I source Pilger, Cockburn, Fisk and other reputable independent journalists.
        Who are their sources?

        102 years ago too many people willfully believed the propaganda sold to them and World War 1 eventuated. Will they ever learn?

    • Colonial Viper 9.2
      9 October 2016 at 10:18 am

      and brings delighted smiles to the kleptocracy running the Russian mafia state.

      As opposed to the kleptocracy running the US corporate mafia state?

      It is hardly my problem if you cannot recognise the geopolitical argey bargey between conflicting groups of kleptocrats and conflicting sets of kleptocratic objectives on opposite sides of the world.

      The only problem for us is how the risks of a confrontation between nuclear super powers is growing by the day.

      • Psycho Milt 9.2.1
        9 October 2016 at 10:24 am

        As opposed to the kleptocracy running the US corporate mafia state?

        If they ever introduce a world championship for false equivalence, you’re a dead cert for NZ rep.

        • Colonial Viper 9.2.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 10:27 am

          How is exact equivalence “false equivalence”?

          Look at the multi-hundred million dollar-aires and billionaires running for the Oval Office. Putin is also said to have a vast fortune.

          What else do you need for the definition of kleptocracy?

          • Red 9.2.1.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 10:34 am

            To degree there’s is bad as each other the Us does not excuse Russia or vice versa, likewise Hillary does not excuse trump or vice versa, to argue otherwise is BS

            • Colonial Viper 9.2.1.1.1.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:40 am

              What exactly is it that you think Russia needs “excuses” for in Syria? And what is it that you think the US needs “excuses” for in Syria?

              • Red …
                9 October 2016 at 1:03 pm

                My point is that most of the argument here on trump and Hillary or US vs Russia is predicated on idealigical bais that one is better than the other based on the sins of the other ( Paul more so parroting his washed up love child JP and his superior synthesis of non bias media from his wacky world of his lounge and his PC ) if you look at each in isolation none comes up smelling of roses

                • Colonial Viper …
                  9 October 2016 at 1:56 pm

                  I would have said that its more predicated on the worlds pre-eminent military and economic power by far wanting to exercise its right of regime change and total financial and economic control over any nation on the planet that it disagrees with.

                  • Red …
                    9 October 2016 at 2:07 pm

                    still does not let Russia off the hook

                    • Paul …
                      9 October 2016 at 2:09 pm

                      But you do accept that the US is not a paragon of virtue in this area?

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 2:26 pm

                      still does not let Russia off the hook

                      What is it exactly in Syria do you think that Russia is “on the hook” for?

                    • Red []
                      9 October 2016 at 4:04 pm

                      Just got the odd civilian death here and there, including kids, nothing major

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 5:10 pm

                      Plenty more civilians are going to die in Eastern Aleppo unless the Jihadis take up the offer of amnesty and leave, or unless the west stops arming/funding/supplying those Jihadis so they can no longer hold the territory.

              • Paul …
                9 October 2016 at 2:12 pm

                Marty Mars claims you have “has spurned the left” and that you are “no leftie.”
                Or have you just spurned the New Zealand Labour Party?
                Able or wish to comment?

                • marty mars …
                  9 October 2016 at 4:19 pm

                  prepare to be disappointed paul – I haven’t made anything up

                • Colonial Viper …
                  9 October 2016 at 5:57 pm

                  Marty Mars claims you have “has spurned the left” and that you are “no leftie.”

                  Hi Paul, I no longer count myself as a member of the traditional left wing (jobs, industrial growth, organised labour, social democracy), or the establishment left wing (centrist market model Labour/Greens), or the liberal identity politics left wing (take your pick).

                  Not because there aren’t useful elements within there, but because they are completely unsuitable and inadequate for what is coming down the pike in the next 10 to 20 years.

                  • weka …
                    9 October 2016 at 6:10 pm

                    And you support Trump and Peters/NZF, who are both completely inadequate for dealing with the approaching crises. There is something disingenuous about your explanation.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:39 pm

                      Yes they are completely inadequate but that’s the menu we have in front of us.

              • Stuart Munro …
                9 October 2016 at 3:06 pm

                Russia needs excuses for the bombing of civilians in Syria.

                One hegemonic player in a region is no damned good – but two is infinitely worse for the civilian population.

                Syrians are dying to support Russia’s military expansion.

                No amount of conspiracy theory legitimises this.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  9 October 2016 at 3:21 pm

                  Russia needs excuses for the bombing of civilians in Syria.

                  Russia is assisting the Syrian Government destroy jihadist units entrenched in Eastern Aleppo. It is ugly, brutal urban warfare.

                  The jihadists have been offered safe passage out of Aleppo, if they wish to spare the local population the hardship.

                  Syrians are dying to support Russia’s military expansion.

                  Russia is present in Syria at discretion of the Syrian Government, and to support the warfighting efforts against the terrorist jihadists. Russia is not there as part of a “military expansion.”

                • Paul …
                  9 October 2016 at 3:28 pm

                  Are you guys able to make an argument without recourse to terms like ‘conspiracy theory’. You know it weakens your argument.

                  https://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-Theory-America-Discovering/dp/0292757697
                  http://www.naturalnews.com/053452_conspiracy_theories_Kennedy_assassination_CIA.html

                  • Stuart Munro …
                    9 October 2016 at 7:46 pm

                    It doesn’t as it happens – outside conspiracy theories proof that the US created ISIS is less than convincing – and if you understand anything about the politics of the region these neat wraps that CV produces that put all the anti-Russian forces into one jihadist box are utter bullshit.

                    Even the jihadists are multifarious.

                    Russia is doing what it always does – bombing any opposition and innocent bystanders to death.

                    Neither US nor Russian bombing of civilians is ever permissable.

                    THERE IS NO EXCUSE.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      9 October 2016 at 8:48 pm

                      The USA/NATO did not “create ISIS” in so much as it facilitated and indirectly funded ISIS as a strategic asset in the wider goal of taking down Assad. Most of this help went via Turkey, key NATO member and US ally.

                      Russia is doing what it always does – bombing any opposition and innocent bystanders to death.

                      Neither US nor Russian bombing of civilians is ever permissable.

                      The US could have chosen to separate out the “moderate opposition” from the head chopping pilot burning minority enslaving jihadists and promoted a peaceful political process in Syria to move Assad on.

                      Instead, the US continues to use the head chopping pilot burning minority enslaving jihadists jihadists as a proxy force to try and oust Assad with.

                      And now, if these jihadists don’t take the opportunity to leave Aleppo using the Syrian Government amnesty, then Russia and Syria are going to eliminate that proxy force through military means.

                      Yes, that means nasty block by block urban combat through old East Aleppo where the remaining couple of thousand jihadist terrorists are holed up.

              • McFlock …
                9 October 2016 at 4:54 pm

                dropping cluster bombs and bombing hospitals is what Russia can start producing excuses for.

                Shit. Got muddled about replying to another comment.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  9 October 2016 at 5:14 pm

                  Lavrov has said that they are using only legal munitions in Aleppo. Perhaps someone at the Security Council can initiate an independent investigation into the possible use of cluster bombs.

                  As for bombing hospitals – again, independent investigations are required. The reliability of the reports bears examining. I saw suggestions that Quds hospital in Aleppo had just been destroyed/bombed to collapse for the second or third time and was still accepting patients.

                  • TheExtremist …
                    9 October 2016 at 5:22 pm

                    “Lavrov has said that they are using only legal munitions in Aleppo.”

                    Of course he said that. In other news, Powell said that Iraq absolutely had WMD.

    • TheExtremist66 9.3
      9 October 2016 at 10:27 am

      +1

      CV long since gave up any pretense of being easonable and considered. Now he just prefers to spout whatever comes into his head no matter laughable

      • Paul 9.3.1
        9 October 2016 at 11:53 am

        Who are your sources for your opinions about the Syrian civil war?

        • TheExtremist66 9.3.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 12:13 pm

          Pretty you have asked me this before and I gave you an exhaustive list of sources I regularly read/watch

    • Paul 9.4
      9 October 2016 at 11:47 am

      “Pilger’s best days were a quarter of a century ago, today he tiptoes along the line between journalist and crank.”

      Evidence for this?

      Here is some evidence supporting the fact he is still a fearless and independent journalist.

      • Red 9.4.1
        9 October 2016 at 1:10 pm

        note Paul is chairman of the New Zealand John Pilger fan club while he is not making tinfoil hats and seeking banning of chem trails

        • Paul 9.4.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 1:11 pm

          Do you have a point to make or are you limited to ad hominems?
          Dull.
          Very dull……
          I would expect better debating technique from a child.

          • TheExtremist 9.4.1.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 1:26 pm

            “I would expect better debating technique from a child.”

            Wow, really?
            Says the guy who responds to criticism with “You must be a Killary/US/Neo-con supporter”

            You have no sense of irony I suspect

            • Paul 9.4.1.1.1.1
              9 October 2016 at 1:32 pm

              Utopia is a film that looks at racism in Australia.
              I recommend you watch it.

              • TheExtremist66 …
                9 October 2016 at 1:44 pm

                Not a big Pilger fan (I prefer Chomsky) but have read Secret Country

                • Paul …
                  9 October 2016 at 1:53 pm

                  Did you watch the video I posted on ‘ A World War 3 Has Begun Break The Silence.’
                  Please keep an open mind on the Syrian crisis.

                  • Paul …
                    9 October 2016 at 2:45 pm

                    According to red, he’s to be associated with chemtrails and tin foil hats.
                    The ignorance of these rwnjs is just unbelievable.

      • Chooky 9.4.2
        9 October 2016 at 2:41 pm

        +100 Paul…Pilger at his best is a great journalist and documentary film maker

      • Stuart Munro 9.4.3
        9 October 2016 at 7:52 pm

        Pilger’s pretty good in fact – but I wouldn’t assert his infallibility.

        I recall Tariq Ali’ Bush in Baylon https://www.amazon.com/Bush-Babylon-Recolinisation-Tariq-Ali/dp/1844675122 A great read from someone with a deep knowledge of the country and the issues. But then he wrote some truly awful piffle about North Korea.

        If Pilger’s backing Putin he’s been seriously misinformed.

  10. alwyn 10
    9 October 2016 at 10:43 am

    I have seen, over the last few years, quite a number of people on this blog complaining that the current Government has no mandate to do anything because they did not get a majority of the voting age population having voted for them in the last General Election.
    They usually take the line that everyone who didn’t enrol, or didn’t vote was actually completely opposed to the Government.
    I wonder when one of these individuals will announce that Goff is a liar when he claims to have a “mandate” from Auckland voters?

    I have done the calculation for them.
    I am assuming that 80% of the voting-age population were enrolled.
    There was a turnout of about 38%
    Goff got 47.6% of the votes.
    Hence his support was 0.476 * 0.38 * .80 * 100 percent.
    That comes to about 15% and therefore, by the wild reasoning lots of people here have applied to the National Government, we must argue that a massive 85% of the population of Auckland don’t want Goff to promote ANY of the things he campaigned on.

    Where are all the people who think that their peculiar reasoning about National is correct? Why are they not claiming that Goff has no mandate to do anything?

    • Bearded Git 10.1
      9 October 2016 at 11:02 am

      @Alwyn

      It may be true that only 15% voted for Goff. However, I think it is generally accepted that it is the old and/or well off that tend to vote. The young and/or poor tend not to be registered or organised or motivated to vote-this is an increasing trend*. This group tends to vote for the left. If more of them had voted Goff would have done even better.

      The lesson for the Lab/Gr bloc is to launch a registration drive for the upcoming election, making this easy to do online through the Labour and Green websites. And to include policies that young people will be motivated to vote for. A 12 month period overseas before student loans have to be begun to be paid back (the 6 month period is too short for a decent OE) and affordable houses for first-time buyers (here I mean $350,000 not $650,000) and 100% subsidised Uni and Poly tuition fees come to mind.

      *the Brexit vote was lost for the same reason

      On a completely different election, Clinton is now 4.6% ahead and is ahead in 11/14 battleground states. This is before Trump’s latest idiotic remarks were revealed.

    • xanthe 10.2
      9 October 2016 at 11:03 am

      Simple answer …. every poll should have a “no confidence in any of the candidates” tick box

      • alwyn 10.2.1
        9 October 2016 at 12:04 pm

        I seem to remember that some Students Associations had such an option in their elections.
        I not sure of that though but it seems like a good idea. I’m not sure what happened if “none of the above” won though.

        • Craig H 10.2.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 1:34 pm

          In my day, it meant another election, but the previous candidates couldn’t stand again.

          • alwyn 10.2.1.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 2:22 pm

            My memory was accurate, apparently. At least that the option had existed.
            I wonder if there were ever any elections where the rejections went on and on and nobody ended up being elected before the next years elections came around?
            Remembering my own student days I am sure some of us would have been tempted to try and arrange such an event.

    • Garibaldi 10.3
      9 October 2016 at 11:05 am

      Fair comment alwyn.
      I would have thought you’d be happy to have a neolib mayor, one could go so far as to say he was the lesser of two right wing evils!

      • alwyn 10.3.1
        9 October 2016 at 12:12 pm

        I don’t live in Auckland so I don’t much care who won the Mayoral election.

        I am not happy about the Wellington result though. The “way past it” people like Andy Foster seem to have survived. Name recognition I guess.

        And no, I don’t think that a claim that 85% oppose Goff is sensible. He can, just like John Key, claim to have a mandate for his election policies. Whether he can get them through the Council is another matter.

    • Draco T Bastard 10.4
      9 October 2016 at 12:27 pm

      That comes to about 15% and therefore, by the wild reasoning lots of people here have applied to the National Government, we must argue that a massive 85% of the population of Auckland don’t want Goff to promote ANY of the things he campaigned on.

      Correct which is the main reason why we implemented MMP and why we need to now implement preferential voting for mayors.

      We also need to change to mandatory voting and setting policies by referenda so that such arguments don’t happen again.

      • alwyn 10.4.1
        9 October 2016 at 2:18 pm

        “implement preferential voting for mayors”.
        That bit I agree with, even though it led to the election of our last, green leaning, unsuccessful Mayor. The incumbent in 2010 led easily in the first round but as more and more candidates were eliminated the final round gave a small majority to Wade-Brown
        In a FPP election Prendergast would have got 41% and Wade-Brown about 34%.
        STV is a much fairer system though.
        The odd part about it is though that a single vote can decide the final winner. If you make up a fantasy voting pattern you can get a circumstance where switching a single vote could lead to the first person eliminated changing to being the one who finally triumphs. I don’t suggest it is likely. I just say it is possible.

        I am not in favour of binding referenda though. It is almost impossible to get a question where a yes/no vote makes sense and also avoids getting totally contradictory conclusions between different referenda results.
        I’m sure you could pass several results like.
        1. Reduce income taxes by 20%
        2. Increase the health budget by 20%.
        3. Increase National Super by 20%
        4. Reduce GST to zero
        Now, how would you implement al of those?

        • RedBaronCV 10.4.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 6:28 pm

          I actually thought that Wade- Brown was a good mayor. Didn’t get sucked into a lot of “corporate high spending I want council to subsidize me crap”. ( Can’t say the same for council officers!?? ). Nor did she want to concrete everything in sight! What’s wrong with rates going on basic boring water rubbish sewage stuff.

          • alwyn 10.4.1.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 7:12 pm

            “A good mayor”? She is a very pleasant person who was way out of her depth in the job in my opinion. Still, to each his own.
            You approve of a runway extension at the Airport? Just where do you think any airline is going to fly?
            Apart from subsidising Singapore to the tune of a million or so a year of course. And don’t tell me that she didn’t have anything to do with it.
            Or the farce on the Parade in Island Bay where the cycleway made a wide, safe street into an accident zone?
            At least she gave up, most unhappily on “light rail”.
            No progress on such a basic, boring thing like a water supply for the hospital if we have an earthquake of course.
            And just how much money did we waste on “recycling” plastic bags only to find they end up being dumped anyway

        • Draco T Bastard 10.4.1.2
          9 October 2016 at 8:05 pm

          The odd part about it is though that a single vote can decide the final winner. If you make up a fantasy voting pattern you can get a circumstance where switching a single vote could lead to the first person eliminated changing to being the one who finally triumphs.

          Do you recall a few years ago when we had the Waitakere Electorate change hands two or three times on recounts? That was 11 votes.

          So, yes, a single vote can change the outcome but that doesn’t apply solely to STV.

          I am not in favour of binding referenda though. It is almost impossible to get a question where a yes/no vote makes sense and also avoids getting totally contradictory conclusions between different referenda results.
          I’m sure you could pass several results like.
          1. Reduce income taxes by 20%
          2. Increase the health budget by 20%.
          3. Increase National Super by 20%
          4. Reduce GST to zero
          Now, how would you implement al of those?

          I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t ask those questions and I’d have rules in place preventing them.

          Instead you have people vote on what type of taxes that they think should be implemented with the understanding that the taxes will be adjusted to ensure that everything passed by referenda is fully funded thus an increase in the health budget gets an increase in taxes.

          Of course, I also happen to think that we need to get away from money. Start practising economics from reality rather than the delusion that we have now. Everything that needs to be done is costed not in money but in the actual resources needed to do it including labour with instant feedback to the people voting showing how that will affect the available resources and other programs.

        • Nic the NZer 10.4.1.3
          9 October 2016 at 9:43 pm

          “Now how would you implement all of those?”

          By making all those changes in the next budget (something the government does every year).

          Your welcome.

    • alwyn 10.5
      9 October 2016 at 7:16 pm

      What a shame. Nobody who was in the legion who attacks the current Government because less than half the population voted for them came forward to apply the same standard to Phil Goff.
      Oh well I shouldn’t really be surprised. What is that “not-Star Wars” quote?
      “The hypocrisy is strong in that one”

      • Muttonbird 10.5.1
        9 October 2016 at 7:25 pm

        No-one taking notice of your dim-witted posts? Diddums.

      • Chuck 10.5.2
        9 October 2016 at 7:47 pm

        Phil Goff is kind of left leaning so it’s all right…nothing to see here type of thing.

        • Draco T Bastard 10.5.2.1
          9 October 2016 at 8:09 pm

          Actually, I’m pretty sure that most of the Left-leaning people here recognise that Phil Goff is almost as right-wing as John Key.

          They also recognise that alwyn is simply bating.

    • Nic the NZer 10.6
      9 October 2016 at 9:36 pm

      I would have assumed Auckland was on STV by now (which they are not). I mean thats why Leister has a mandate right?

  11. joe90 11
    9 October 2016 at 11:12 am

    Why Silver is right.

    Deplorable @scottienhughes in typical fashion attacks Trump's victims for not coming forward sooner. #trumptapes @smerconish pic.twitter.com/d1TYOYkRZm— Dr. Matt (@DrMatthew) October 8, 2016

    Exclusive @FiveThirtyEight projection on what the Electoral College would look like if women refuse to vote Trump. pic.twitter.com/kmjxmjnY1l— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) March 24, 2016

  12. lprent 12
    9 October 2016 at 11:52 am

    Test the OpenMike feature

    [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.]

    • Lanthanide 12.1
      9 October 2016 at 12:28 pm

      Eh, not sure have an auto-mod addition like that is a good idea, if it’s entirely automatic. If it’s optional and applied by default it’s probably fine.

      There have been cases in the past where entire threads of comments have been moved to Open Mike, sometimes 20-30+ comments at once. Adding that little blurb to every single comment would amount to spam.

  13. adam 13
    9 October 2016 at 2:49 pm

    I’m totally confused. This just sends mix messages about the state of masculinity.

    Warning it’s an add for a video game.

    • weka 13.1
      9 October 2016 at 3:29 pm

      I don’t know, seems reasonably clear. Forget that namby pamby bonding creative stuff, destroying things is so much better. That message works on lots of levels.

    • Colonial Viper 13.2
      9 October 2016 at 6:03 pm

      Fun game that one

    • Chooky 14.1
      9 October 2016 at 3:39 pm

      ….i dare not look after the other salacious naughty thing you posted of Trump with a toad in a hole in his pants!

      (…i will leave the viewing of this to others more brave than me…and await their reports)

  15. joe90 15
    9 October 2016 at 3:52 pm

    why I love twitter.

    "Feminists are terrible because they think every man is a mysoginist!""Trump is just doing what EVERY guy does."Pick one, chuckleheads— Eaton (@eaton) October 8, 2016

  16. TVLKINGHEVDS 16
    9 October 2016 at 4:00 pm

    Trump would win if he knew how to deflect these attacks and stick to policy. Instead he engages with them and digs himself a hole. At tomorrow’s debate I fully expect him to deliver absolutely crude insults and stories to Hillary Clinton regarding her husbands history of misconduct towards women.

  17. mosa 17
    9 October 2016 at 4:22 pm

    Looks like Hillary will have her own explaining to do.
    It will be an interesting second debate and i hope the public ask the real questions and forget about Trump.

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/emails-clinton-wall-street-private/

    • joe90 17.1
      9 October 2016 at 4:31 pm

      Yeah, lots of explaining…..
      /

      What is this?#PodestaEmails from Apollo🚀Astronaut talking about Peaceful👽Extra-Terrestrials & their non-tolerance 4 war on Earth & in🛰Orbit pic.twitter.com/SWPB87Eb1W— DeplorableRevolution (@avanconia) October 9, 2016

      #PodestaEmails

    • Andre 17.2
      9 October 2016 at 4:43 pm

      Some more context, with links to the actual e-mails.

      http://www.vox.com/2016/10/7/13207286/clinton-speech-transcripts-wikileaks-email

      http://www.vox.com/2016/10/7/13206882/hillary-clinton-wikileaks-speeches-goldman

      Basically they’re not as bad as what she’s already been tried, convicted and sentenced for in liberal minds. She probably would have been better off just releasing them, like most things it’s trying to hide or cover it that’s more damaging than just coming clean.

      • joe90 17.2.1
        9 October 2016 at 4:47 pm

        Long time analyst reckons lots won’t stand forensic scrutiny.

        Official Warning: #PodestaEmails are already proving to be riddled with obvious forgeries & #blackpropaganda not even professionally done. https://t.co/UuJZrurHAA— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) October 7, 2016

      • Colonial Viper 17.2.2
        9 October 2016 at 6:05 pm

        Basically they’re not as bad as what she’s already been tried, convicted and sentenced for in liberal minds.

        When’s her actual trial?

        Or does she too have immunity from prosecution like all her key staffers?

        • Kiwiri 17.2.2.1
          9 October 2016 at 7:37 pm

          When she is POTUS, which is not that far away as it is only days away, she will be pretty much immune from prosecution 🙂

          ‘Pretty much’ given there is the two-step impeachment process which may not happen until she gets many of the things underway that she will compliantly do as a willing piggy bank.

          As for Trump, he is not that reliable and can be unpredictably disruptive, hence the bet is on the other one.

          • Colonial Viper 17.2.2.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 7:54 pm

            Understand what you are saying about Trump, and good on you.

            In my view some “disruption” is exactly what we need, and urgently. Yes disruption might entail a bit of risk in making things somewhat worse than expected, but it might also disrupt things making things head in a substantially better way than expected.

            With Clinton, we simply get more of the predictable status quo agenda, on a mild dose of steroids.

            Which means that drawing a straight line prediction over the last ten or so years and extending the line into the future, with Hillary we will get things more or less exactly as worse as expected.

  18. joe90 18
    9 October 2016 at 6:33 pm

    Huge, if true.

    Florida: 488K new registration forms submitted by Dems; 60K by GOP. – Democratic Underground https://t.co/wwXxLaUpCB via @demunderground— Wally Callahan (@Wally_Callahan) October 8, 2016

  19. Chooky 19
    9 October 2016 at 6:42 pm

    (Bill Posted on this recently…msm kowtowing to official lines )

    Mainstream media under fire again…for dereliction of duty ? disinformation?

    …Is a sinister shadow State being surreptitiously erected in Syria?

    Are the supposed humanitarian ‘White Helmets’ (with $100 million dollar funding from UK, USA, Europe) actually selling regime change against the wishes of the Syrian people ?

    …and by stealth eradicating the Syrian State?

    ….This propagandising organisation is not recognised by the UN and like a parasite blood sucker is taking over the real Syrian Civil Defence.

    For a good discussion outside the msm on this issue:

    ‘White helmets, really?’

    https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/361887-white-helmets-aid-pr/

    “The White Helmets: a heartfelt humanitarian NGO or an elaborate and cynical Western PR stunt promoting illegal regime change in Syria? Does wearing white helmets mean they are the good guys supporting a just cause?

    CrossTalking with Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlett, and Patrick Henningsen.”

  20. Muttonbird 20
    9 October 2016 at 6:47 pm

    The NZ ambassador to the UN, Gerard von Bohemen, puts the boot into his own organisation. He’s another in a long list of western elites eroding confidence in the UN, giving them toothpicks to fight 21st century battles.

    His own prime minister’s solution to the crisis in Syria was for everyone to hold hands.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11725642

  21. Colonial Viper 21
    9 October 2016 at 6:52 pm

    Russia deploys nuclear capable Iskander mobile missile system to Kaliningrad

    The latest versions of the system are thought to be capable of hitting Berlin from Kaliningrad.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-08/russia-deploys-nuclear-capable-missiles-kaliningrad-near-polish-border

    • McFlock 21.1
      9 October 2016 at 7:09 pm

      What, no outrage and condemnation at this reckless escalation and nuclear intimidation tactic?

      • Colonial Viper 21.1.1
        9 October 2016 at 9:51 pm

        Russia is now matching NATO’s moves over the last 12+ months to place thousands of European troops, heavy weapons and ABM systems closer and closer to its borders.

        Russia has already based its most advanced ground to air weapon systems in Kaliningrad.

  22. Andre 22
    9 October 2016 at 9:22 pm

    Oh jeez, my ribs hurt…

  23. joe90 23
    9 October 2016 at 9:37 pm

    Always a pig of a man.

    Chilling: Trump in 1993 previewing the full-blown racism that will later become the hallmark of his presidential campaign @rabiasquared pic.twitter.com/0SorJIPZQi— Adam Khan (@Khanoisseur) October 7, 2016

    https://twitter.com/Khanoisseur/status/784401554480566272

    • Colonial Viper 23.1
      9 October 2016 at 9:46 pm

      Child rape victim comes forward for the first time in 40 years to call Hillary Clinton a ‘liar’ who defended her rapist by smearing her, blocking evidence and callously laughing that she knew he was guilty

      ‘Hillary Clinton is not for women and children,’ says Kathy Shelton, 54, who was 12 years old when she was raped by Thomas Alfred Taylor in Arkansas

      – Clinton was the rapist’s defense lawyer, pleading him down to ‘unlawful fondling of a minor’
      – The 41-year-old drifter served less than a year in prison
      – The plea came after Clinton was able to block the admission of forensic evidence that linked her client to the crime
      – Shelton says she’s furious that Clinton has been portraying herself as a lifelong advocate of women and girls on the campaign trail
      – Clinton accused Shelton of ‘seeking out older men’ in the case and demanded that she undergo a grueling court-ordered psychiatric examination
      – The presidential candidate later laughed while discussing aspects of the case in a recently-unearthed audiotaped interview from the 1980s

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3729466/Child-rape-victim-comes-forward-time-40-years-call-Hillary-Clinton-liar-defended-rapist-smearing-blocking-evidence-callously-laughing-knew-guilty.html

      • TheExtremist 23.1.1
        9 October 2016 at 9:57 pm

        Always check snopes, guy

        http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/

        Edit: I feel this disclaimer should always be added when replying to CV or his cohorts –
        *This in no way an endorsement of Clinton, more it is an attempt to counter the festering bullshit that dwells in CV’s rabid alt-right brain

        • marty mars 23.1.1.1
          9 October 2016 at 10:03 pm

          amazing – it is pretty well totally debunked – why would someone put up that when it has been proven to be false – I just don’t get why someone would do that and expect to be taken seriously.

          • joe90 23.1.1.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 10:05 pm

            Because they’re fucking knob ends with google.

          • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.1.2
            9 October 2016 at 10:07 pm

            Debunked? Then you better read below about the impact that Clinton’s disgusting legal attacks had on the then 12 year old victim.

            • weka 23.1.1.1.2.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:39 pm

              Ok, so now you’re a champion for the rights of rape victims? Thought not.

              The US has an adversarial justice system that is incredibly hard on victims of sexual assault. Afaik, unless the accused admits guilt to their lawyer then the lawyer has a legal obligation to defend them as no guilty to the extent that the law allows, and that includes being hard on victims. That’s how the system is designed.

              Even if Clinton did push hard in her defence case and the child was further traumatised, in what ways is that relevant to her running for president now? Be specific, I’d really like to know what point you are actually trying to make here. I can think of some I would make about it, but I doubt they’re the same as what you are trying to do.

              Using child rape for political ends is about as sick as it gets. Doing so while at the same time supporting and advocating for the politics of a man known to sexually harass and assault women is even worse.

              And let’s not forget that your original comment is in response to Joe90’s link to early Trump racism. Because somehow in your mind if Clinton is evil then we can excuse Trump’s evilness? Or was it just a straight out reactionary diversion?

              • Colonial Viper …
                9 October 2016 at 10:52 pm

                Even if Clinton did push hard in her defence case and the child was further traumatised, in what ways is that relevant to her running for president now? Be specific, I’d really like to know what point you are actually trying to make here.

                Simple: if the Clinton apologising left think that the things Trump has said 10, 20, 30 years ago is relevant to his fitness to be President, then the things that Clinton has done 10, 20, 30 years ago is definitely relevant to her fitness to be President.

                What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, don’t you know.

                Afaik, unless the accused admits guilt to their lawyer then the lawyer has a legal obligation to defend them as no guilty to the extent that the law allows, and that includes being hard on victims. That’s how the system is designed.

                And that’s what I call being a Clinton apologist. So now Clinton was only acting within the confines of a bad legal system that is hard on victims, and she simply had to fit in within how “the system is designed” so she is OK to run for President?

                Take this for a contrast: Trump takes a totally legal $900M business tax deduction, acting within the confines of a bad tax system, operating within how “the system is designed” – but he’s not OK to run for President?

                It seems that what is good for the goose is not good for the gander.

                Liberal lefty hypocrisy ratchets up to a new volume.

                • McFlock …
                  9 October 2016 at 11:03 pm

                  Shit, dude – if you must equate a defense lawyer doing their job with a tax write-off, you might want to remember that Clinton tried to get recused from defending the rapist. Trump actively claimed the tax write off, nobody forced him to do it.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    9 October 2016 at 11:08 pm

                    Bullshit. Investors in his companies and projects could sue him if they uncovered that he acted financially negligently and gave away hundreds of millions of dollars of legitimate tax deductions as allowed by law.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 October 2016 at 11:27 pm

                      investors force him to take a writeoff on his personal tax liabilities?
                      That’s nice of them.

                    • joe90 …
                      9 October 2016 at 11:27 pm

                      Investors in his companies and projects could sue him if they uncovered that he acted financially negligently and gave away hundreds of millions of dollars of legitimate tax deductions

                      Nope.

                      Yet even in public companies, experts say that there is no enforceable legal duty to “maximize shareholder value”—the business judgment rule protects independent directors’ decisions about the best way to serve the interests of the corporation and its shareholders, including decisions that reduce share price or profits in the foreseeable future.

                      http://time.com/4516100/donald-trump-taxes-fiduciary-duty/

                • weka …
                  9 October 2016 at 11:09 pm

                  “Simple: if the Clinton apologising left think that the things Trump has said 10, 20, 30 years ago is relevant to his fitness to be President, then the things that Clinton has done 10, 20, 30 years ago is definitely relevant to her fitness to be President.”

                  Well duh. Of course. But that’s not what’s going on here. Further, Trump is accused of being a serial sexual assaulter, racist etc. Clinton is accused of doing her job in the way that her peers did at the time, and still do. Like I said, I could critique Clinton on this, but you, someone with a long online history of opposing rape culture analysis and promoting rape apology, you have an entirely different agenda here. A pretty fucked up one I might add. If you had a different history, say one of political analysis of rape trials and what happens in them and how that impacts on victims, then you might have some credibility here. As it stands you have less than none.

                  “And that’s what I call being a Clinton apologist.”

                  yes, I know you do. but that’s because you are using child rape to further your own political agenda and this either stops you from seeing that I don’t support Clinton, or you simply don’t care that you lie by implication and projection.

                  eg,

                  So now Clinton was only acting within the confines of a bad legal system that is hard on victims, and she simply had to fit in within how “the system is designed” so she is OK to run for President?

                  I neither said that nor believe it. You just made all that running shit up in your own head and projected it on to me. I’ll just keep saying it again and again, I could make my own criticisms of Clinton here, but you are basically incapable of engaging in that conversation because of your own politics around the US election and your politics around rape culture.

                  Take this for a contrast: Trump takes a totally legal $900M business tax deduction, acting within the confines of a bad tax system, operating within how “the system is designed” – but he’s not OK to run for President?

                  Stop and think about what you just did there CV. Because I’m pretty sure even you know that I’ve never made that argument. This is your bigotry supreme. You appear now to be incapable of seeing people with left wing or progressive views as anything other an amorphous lump who you despise, and this renders you incapable of seeing the actual arguments being made.

                  Don’t lie about my views CV. Don’t quote me out of context. And don’t conflate other arguments that other people have made with mine.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    9 October 2016 at 11:19 pm

                    I neither said that nor believe it.

                    Oh yeah? Then tell me what alternative meaning you had in mind when you wrote the following in your comment defending Clinton:

                    The US has an adversarial justice system that is incredibly hard on victims of sexual assault. Afaik, unless the accused admits guilt to their lawyer then the lawyer has a legal obligation to defend them as no guilty to the extent that the law allows, and that includes being hard on victims. That’s how the system is designed.

                    And now about this other comment of yours:

                    Don’t lie about my views CV. Don’t quote me out of context. And don’t conflate other arguments that other people have made with mine.

                    Get over yourself weka. When I write a comment doing just what you ask – that is, you wanted me to explain my perspective and meaning – then I am explaining MY perspective, not YOUR perspective, unless I specifically say so.

                    If you don’t want to hear MY perspective then don’t waste both my time and your time by fucking asking for it, and we will both have a happier life.

                    • weka …
                      9 October 2016 at 11:45 pm

                      Ok, so now you want to be spoon fed right? (for the readers, that’s a reference to CV refusing to be clear in his own comments at times and when challenged on it he makes out that requests for clarity are requests to be spoon fed)

                      Then tell me what alternative meaning you had in mind when you wrote the following in your comment defending Clinton:

                      “The US has an adversarial justice system that is incredibly hard on victims of sexual assault. Afaik, unless the accused admits guilt to their lawyer then the lawyer has a legal obligation to defend them as no guilty to the extent that the law allows, and that includes being hard on victims. That’s how the system is designed.”

                      I’m not defending Clinton you numpty, I’m critiquing you and what you are doing in this thread.

                      The reason you can’t understand that paragraph (one of the reasons), is because you’re taking it out of context. It follows directly on from a comment about your politics

                      Ok, so now you’re a champion for the rights of rape victims? Thought not.

                      The US has an adversarial justice system that is incredibly hard on victims of sexual assault. Afaik, unless the accused admits guilt to their lawyer then the lawyer has a legal obligation to defend them as no guilty to the extent that the law allows, and that includes being hard on victims. That’s how the system is designed.

                      My point there is that in order to have credibility in commenting on this issue (about Clinton), one needs to understand how the system is designed. It’s designed to privilege the accused at the expense of rape victims. It’s not possible to legitimately critique Clinton unless one has that context. You of course take that to be an excuse for Clinton or an outright defence of her, but that says more about you than anything else.

                      And of course you will use what is in the Daily Mirror and ignore what is in Snopes because it suits your political agenda, which is not aligned with the rights, needs or safety of rape victims in court. Quite the opposite, you want a man who sexually assaults women to be President.

                      Get over yourself weka. When I write a comment doing just what you ask – that is, you wanted me to explain my perspective and meaning – then I am explaining MY perspective, not YOUR perspective, unless I specifically say so.

                      When I said don’t lie about my views, I was specially referring to where you lied about my views. In your comment. I’ve critiqued YOUR perspective as well, but at the end of my comment I just said don’t lie about what I think. If you insist on wilfully misinterpreting what I say and the arguments I make, then of course I am going to tell you to stop.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      10 October 2016 at 12:11 am

                      Oh I see, so you were explaining the constraints and harshness of the legal system that Clinton had to act within but you weren’t defending Clinton by doing so.

                      [RL: Deleted. This entire conversation is like watching two people juggling an unpinned grenade. You have a choice, progress this respectfully, or have it end in ugliness and hurt.]

                      As I said, if you don’t want to hear my perspective then don’t fucking ask for it and you won’t be wasting both our time.

                      for the readers, that’s a reference to CV refusing to be clear in his own comments at times and when challenged on it he makes out that requests for clarity are requests to be spoon fed)

                      Not everyone has the well studied blindness that you put on, weka. Learn to read between the lines instead of being spoonfed.

                    • weka …
                      10 October 2016 at 1:49 am

                      Oh I see, so you were explaining the constraints and harshness of the legal system that Clinton had to act within but you weren’t defending Clinton by doing so.

                      That’s right CV. It’s called context, and it allows us to make sense of situations. I can see that you wouldn’t want to do that, because it would lessen you ability to push your anti-Clinton agenda. And that’s what’s important, right? It’s not understanding a complex situation about rape, it’s about bringing down Clinton because someone has pointed to Trump being racist.

                      And no, don’t start with some bullshit about how I support Clinton, I don’t.

                      For the umpteenth time, I could make my own critiques about Clinton in this situation, but I’m not because (a) you are incapable of engaging in that kind of conversation, and (b) my comments in this thread are about your politics. Go on, read them again. I actually say bugger all about Clinton and the case.

                      As I said, if you don’t want to hear my perspective then don’t fucking ask for it and you won’t be wasting both our time.

                      I don’t know what you are on about there to be honest. I’ve responded to your perspective, what is wrong with that? I’ve also pointed out that I have zero tolerance for my own views being misrepresented, and if you like, that includes when you express your views about them. You’re entitled to your opinion, I’m entitled to point out when you’re misrepresenting mine. It’s taken how many comments thus far for you to even begin to understand that I’m not defending Clinton here. I’m calling you on your bullshit.

                      “for the readers, that’s a reference to CV refusing to be clear in his own comments at times and when challenged on it he makes out that requests for clarity are requests to be spoon fed)”

                      Not everyone has the well studied blindness that you put on, weka. Learn to read between the lines instead of being spoon fed.

                      In other words you’ve got nothing. You wander around the site making backhanded and snide smears and then when people ask for clarification you make out there is something deficient with them. That’s the action of someone who can’t argue their corner.

        • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.2
          9 October 2016 at 10:04 pm

          While Shelton [was was the 12 year old rape victim] gave an anonymous interview to the Daily Beast in 2014, she said wants to start speaking out publicly, in part because ‘I think a lot of people would look at [Clinton] in a different way’ after hearing her story directly.

          ‘I want to speak to the world. Out there at the White House, so everyone can hear me,’ said Shelton. ‘That’s always been my thing since the anger’s built up. I want to speak out like [Clinton] does, and let the whole world hear it.’

          For decades, Shelton said she had no idea that Clinton was the same woman as the lawyer who defended her rapist in 1975.

          During the case, Clinton accused the 12-year-old of ‘seek[ing] out older men’ and ‘engag[ing] in fantasizing’ in court affidavits, and later laughed while discussing aspects of the case in a recently-unearthed audiotape from the 1980s.

          (bold mine)

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3729466/Child-rape-victim-comes-forward-time-40-years-call-Hillary-Clinton-liar-defended-rapist-smearing-blocking-evidence-callously-laughing-knew-guilty.html

          • TheExtremist 23.1.1.2.1
            9 October 2016 at 10:12 pm

            Ummm – as per the link which you obviously didn’t read:

            “Documents from the 1975 case include an affidavit (p. 34) sworn by Clinton, from which the “in court, Hillary told the judge that I made up the rape story” portion of the claims was derived. That affidavit doesn’t show, as claimed, that Hillary Clinton asserted the defendant “made up the rape story because [she] enjoyed fantasizing about men”; rather, it shows that other people, including an expert in child psychology, had said that the complainant was “emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing about persons, claiming they had attacked her body,” and that “children in early adolescence tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences.”

            [RL: Deleted. Make your case without the abuse.]

      • joe90 23.1.2
        9 October 2016 at 10:04 pm

        Of course, she should’ve ignored the long standing notion of the right to a competent defence. It’s not as if there’s any sort of historical precedent.
        /

        http://www.john-adams-heritage.com/boston-massacre-trials/

        • Colonial Viper 23.1.2.1
          9 October 2016 at 10:10 pm

          An ambitious Clinton was very early in her trial career, and her future career was on the line if she didn’t smash away at a 12 year old girl on the stand through fair means and foul.

          • TheExtremist 23.1.2.1.1
            9 October 2016 at 10:14 pm

            Did you not read the court papers? You know, the fucking link I posted where Clinton asked to be taken off the case?

            Jesus fucking Christ, you’re hopeless man

            • Colonial Viper 23.1.2.1.1.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:18 pm

              Clinton asked to be taken off the case? And that justifies how she treated the victim, and how later on she laughed about how she got an expert witness to win a point on a technicality?

              • TheExtremist …
                9 October 2016 at 10:20 pm

                No, no, no.

                Jesus man, I mean really. This is like shooting fish in a barrell

                • Colonial Viper …
                  9 October 2016 at 10:24 pm

                  It’s amazing how Clinton trashed the life of a 12 year old female victim, and now that the victim has come forward to tell her story, you’re going to trash her life again on behalf of Clinton.

                  Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the modern liberal left.

              • Macro …
                9 October 2016 at 10:39 pm

                If you read the Snopes article which is very heavily cross referenced – it would appear that Hillary Rodham as she was at that time did indeed ask not to be on the case. However when it was pointed out to her that she could not refuse the request of the judge she did act as any responsible lawyer would do and worked in the defence of her client. There was evidence from child psychologists to the effect that the young person involved could have exaggerated the matter, and in the end the result was a plea bargain for a lesser sentence. As for the allegation that she laughed at the outcome, again this does not seem to actually represent the true nature of the facts. The Daily Mail article you reference is shown to be a gross exaggeration of the facts – not an unusual tactic for this “rag” which is usually more interested in “readership” than actual truth.

            • McFlock 23.1.2.1.1.2
              9 October 2016 at 10:23 pm

              Most awful for the kid.

              But a lawyer who has to defend someone they’re pretty sure did it but the crime lab threw out the physical evidence and the judge didn’t want to discuss the details of the case with a female lawyer? The guy could complain that she didn’t get him off competely, rather than just settling for time served. Farcical.

          • TheExtremist 23.1.2.1.2
            9 October 2016 at 10:17 pm

            And her future career? When this case came across the table she was volunteering at a legal aid type organisation and she was drafted into the case. She was in fucking law school at the time. She had no “legal career”.

            For fucks sake….

          • joe90 23.1.2.1.3
            9 October 2016 at 10:17 pm

            You really don’t seem to understand just how things work in the real world.

            (hint, it’s an adversarial system and there’s probably not a judge on the bench who hasn’t done much the same thing)

            • marty mars 23.1.2.1.3.1
              9 October 2016 at 10:26 pm

              he’s just trying to smear – can’t defend don the dim so always has to pull it back to the lowtide mark of attack memes on clinton and then watch dejectedly as the sandcastles of hate get washed away by the tides of (mostly) truth.

              • Colonial Viper …
                9 October 2016 at 10:34 pm

                I’m glad that the child rape victim finally, all these years later, decided to come forward and explain to the world what Hillary Clinton did to her.

                And Hillary should own it, instead of the likes of you minimising the statements of the now adult victim.

                • marty mars …
                  9 October 2016 at 10:38 pm

                  “minimising the statements of the now adult victim.”

                  where did I do that?

                  • weka …
                    9 October 2016 at 10:45 pm

                    You didn’t. And CV is at his manipulative best right now. Not only using child rape to push a political agenda and divert attention away from Trump’s racism, but also using people’s reactions to what he linked to try and paint his hated left as minimisers of sexual assault. This would be laughable if it weren’t for all those arguments over the years where he has been dismissive of rape culture or the issues raised by women about rape. I didn’t think CV could go much lower, but I’m starting to see there probably is a whole slew of paths he could take now and none of them are pretty.

                    btw, we have choices here. We don’t have to buy into the agenda he is clearly setting.

                    • Leftie …
                      9 October 2016 at 10:48 pm

                      +1 Weka.

                    • marty mars …
                      9 October 2016 at 10:50 pm

                      I didn’t think I had and yep time for bed methinks. I can’t stand this misappropriation but par for the course it seems as desperate supporters get desperate and more despicable I have to say.

                    • One Two …
                      10 October 2016 at 12:16 am

                      The agendas being pushed are in various forms, from various quarters…

                      Quite certain you can see that, including your own!

                      These forums have decended into farce regarding the US election, which is makes it all the more shambolic that such energy and bluster would be wasted on human filth like The Clintons and The Trump

                      The puppet masters are laughing

                    • weka …
                      10 October 2016 at 1:55 am

                      Of course I want the conversation to go a certain way, that’s why I’m involved in this one. The question then becomes are all agendas valid? I think they’re not.

                      These forums have decended into farce regarding the US election, which is makes it all the more shambolic that such energy and bluster would be wasted on human filth like The Clintons and The Trump

                      I haven’t been following them for a while, but that wouldn’t surprise me. I’m not actually arguing about the US election though. I’m talking about something else.

                    • Karen …
                      10 October 2016 at 10:05 am

                      +1 Weka.

                      I have come to despise CV over the past few months.

                • Chooky …
                  9 October 2016 at 10:42 pm

                  +100 CV…great the child victim has become an avenging woman…stating fearlessly what happened to her on Hillary Clinton’s watch!

                  …and it is easy to tell who the real feminists/humanitarians are around here

          • Chooky 23.1.2.1.4
            9 October 2016 at 10:28 pm

            @ CV…that is pretty terrible!!!!

            …lets hope this (yet another Clinton story) reaches all the American voters BEFORE they vote !

            …and I wonder what the American feminist supporters of Clinton will say?!…in all conscience they must withdraw their support and condemn her

            Trump looks like a “choir boy” in comparison to Clinton ( as someone said over on the Daily Blog)

  24. millsy 24
    9 October 2016 at 10:31 pm

    With regards to NATO v Russia, given that the UK government has just given their troops effective immnity from procecution over atrocities in Iraq, I would imagine Putin doing the same with the Red Army. And look what happened last time Red Army troops occupied Berlin.