Open mike 10/02/2013

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 10th, 2013 - 165 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

165 comments on “Open mike 10/02/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tom 1
    10 February 2013 at 7:23 am

    It’s really bugging me. Is John Key our Richard III ?

    He seems weighed down by the cares of office, his hair
    increasingly tinted white at the temples.

    I saw no hint of his goofy ‘youf’ persona around Julia Gillard.

    Like Ric, he might find his own troops deserting him.

    Would the real John Key please stand up ?

    • bad12 1.1
      10 February 2013 at 10:24 am

      He does, all the time, the whole 4 or 5 of Him, depending upon the scene that is set Slippery can transform Himself from Dances with transvestites to discussing issues upon the world stage with international leaders in the blink of an eye,

      He is after all Slippery…

    • Dr Terry 1.2
      10 February 2013 at 10:52 am

      Richard III is a bag of bones – true, there may be some similarity there!

    • Coronial Typer 1.3
      10 February 2013 at 11:56 am

      The reshuffle was one such rare moment.
      No-one saw the knives go in, everyone was surprised, the new order settled in seconds.
      “I can smile, and murder while I smile.”

      • QoT 1.3.1
        10 February 2013 at 1:09 pm

        Interestingly, that line is only in the McKellen movie adaptation of Richard III, not the play – it’s originally from Henry VI Part 3.

  2. GeoffC 2
    10 February 2013 at 8:01 am

    Interesting and valid article on the demise or dismantling of democracy and the rise of authoritarian..
    http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13998-the-new-extremism-and-politics-of-distraction-in-the-age-of-austerity

    • karol 2.1
      10 February 2013 at 8:23 am

      Thanks. Read the first bit. Will read the rest after work today.

      This quote from Arundhati Roy, is very relevant at home and abroad:

      This theft of language, this technique of usurping words and deploying them like weapons, of using them to mask intent and to mean exactly the opposite of what they have traditionally meant, has been one of the most brilliant strategic victories of the czars of the new dispensation. It has allowed them to marginalize their detractors, deprive them of a language to voice their critique and dismiss them as being “anti-progress,” “anti-development,” “anti-reform,” and of course “anti-national” – negativists of the worst sort. To reclaim these stolen words requires explanations that are too tedious for a world with a short attention span, and too expensive in an era when Free Speech has become unaffordable for the poor. This language heist may prove to be the keystone of our undoing.

      • kiwi_prometheus 2.1.1
        10 February 2013 at 9:57 am

        But according to you Karol as a Deconstructionist, language is meaningless anyway, so what does it matter, language and words are only good for “deploying…like weapons”?

        According to Deconstructionism, isn’t Roy’s world view, just that, a purely subjective experience, there is no objective reality out there for it to attache to, its no more truthful or valid or evil than Hitler’s world view?

        • QoT 2.1.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 10:17 am

          Still pigeonholing people, k_p? Interesting.

          • kiwi_prometheus 2.1.1.1.1
            10 February 2013 at 10:38 am

            Can’t Karol stick up for herself?

            Does she really need her girl pal QofT to rush in snarling and biting?

            QofT, you repeatedly avoids stating what intellectual school she subscribes to.

            What are you afraid of?

            For the record, QofT, your girl pal has admitted she is a Deconstructionist, with a small qualification interestingly enough – ‘for the most part’ was it if I remember correctly – a failed attempt to hedge her bet I think.

            • fatty 2.1.1.1.1.1
              10 February 2013 at 10:57 am

              What are you afraid of?

              Some of us get bored with your fixation.
              You tried this ages ago, then never replied to Karol when she explained herself.
              It was either sniper shots at Karol, or sniper shots at those troublemakers born on another patch of dirt. Got stats yet?

              • kiwi_prometheus …
                10 February 2013 at 11:37 am

                I remember Karol saying she was a bit of this a bit of that.

                It’s BS of course.

                Acting like you are scouring a rubbish tip of discarded and broken ideologies you don’t actually have a clue about, picking up fragments that you think are ‘useful’ to your vested interests is called creating propaganda.

                Marxism, neo or whatever, Deconstructionism/Postmodernism or whatever those flaky followers like to call it, are ideologies which make truth claims about the way the world is. Claims that are easily disprovable.

                You build your world view/argument on these failed ideologies as Feminists do, then you are exposed to the same failures.

                Wailing that you are being “pigeon holed” doesn’t change that.

                Ditto for neo-liberalism/neo conservatism and those scrambling to defend it in the wake of 2008.

                • QoT …
                  10 February 2013 at 11:41 am

                  Oh my god, k_p, do you mean you don’t actually get why people keep using the word “pigeonholed”?

                  I’ve only linked to the reason a few dozen hilarious times now.

                • lprent …
                  10 February 2013 at 11:48 am

                  Acting like you are scouring a rubbish tip of discarded and broken ideologies you don’t actually have a clue about, picking up fragments that you think are ‘useful’ to your vested interests is called creating propaganda.

                  Just because you do it doesn’t mean that everyone does. Karol certainly doesn’t share your attitude toward “thinking”. Perhaps if you gave the rather pathetic misogynist stroking a rest some time, maybe the blood will flood back to the organ that is responsible for actual thought.

                  In case that was too subtle for you…

                  Most people think about things before they spew it out on the rest of us… You just seem to wank a lot when you get excited. Your keyboard must have a sticky problem whenever you reply to a female commentator.

                • Pascal's bookie …
                  10 February 2013 at 12:35 pm

                  Lol, I’ll leave the rest of your ignorant absurdities to others, but seeing you are so hung up on labels, please enlighten me on what happened with regard to neo-Conservatism in 2008.

                  Pretty strong suggestion in that comment that you don’t know anything about Neo-Conservatism.

                • karol …
                  10 February 2013 at 6:38 pm

                  k_p: I remember Karol saying she was a bit of this a bit of that.

                  It’s BS of course.

                  Acting like you are scouring a rubbish tip of discarded and broken ideologies you don’t actually have a clue about, picking up fragments that you think are ‘useful’ to your vested interests is called creating propaganda.

                  Gee, you sure do show your superficial understanding of the umbrella terms you are referring to. I assume you mean that comment fatty helpfully linked to, of which I associated myself with bits of poststructuralism and neo-Marxism, etc. Do you understand the meaning of “heterogeneous” as used at the link?

                  Note in the second line the reference to “critical theorists” as being included in the general collection of post-structuralists theories. Click on the link and you will see that neo-Marxism is included there.

                  ie I was referring to an eclectic mix of related theories all included under very general terms that you don’t really seem to understand.

                  I don’t know how anyone can do anything but pick out various bits of each, as ones they most agree with.

                • Huginn …
                  11 February 2013 at 5:07 am

                  Scouring rubbish tips for discarded and broken ideologies about and picking up fragments that you think are ‘useful’.
                  That’s not creating propaganda.
                  That’s bricolage!

            • QoT 2.1.1.1.1.2
              10 February 2013 at 11:08 am

              I don’t have any subscriptions, it’s just too difficult keeping my address and direct debits up-to-date.

            • veutoviper 2.1.1.1.1.3
              10 February 2013 at 11:34 am

              I am sure that Karol can and will reply to you in due course.

              Perhaps you need to read her comment at 2.1 again – in particular the first line.

              “Thanks. Read the first bit. Will read the rest after work today.”

              Note the bit about “‘after work today”.

              • Colonial Weka …
                10 February 2013 at 1:02 pm

                Come on, you don’t really expect k_p to read what people actually write do you?

                • QoT …
                  10 February 2013 at 1:20 pm

                  Especially when it’s women writing, because our ladybrains can’t come up with awesome arguments about deconstructionist marxist neo-anarcho-eco-feminism like k_p’s.

              • veutoviper …
                10 February 2013 at 3:05 pm

                Edit – reply to CW

                LOL – no!

                Just could not help myself – I usually try to ignore idiots.

            • karol 2.1.1.1.1.4
              10 February 2013 at 6:54 pm

              k_p: your girl pal has admitted she is a Deconstructionist, [citation please.

        • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.2
          10 February 2013 at 11:45 am

          Why do you continue to insist that people are what they’re not?

        • karol 2.1.1.3
          10 February 2013 at 6:29 pm

          k_p: But according to you Karol as a Deconstructionist, [citation needed] language is meaningless [citation needed] anyway, so what does it matter, language and words are only good for “deploying…like weapons”? [citation needed]

          For an objectivist, you make a lot of loose claims based on little evidence.

          Do you have anything to contribute about the significant article GeoffC linked to, or are you just trying to divert his thread?

      • Jenny 2.1.2
        10 February 2013 at 10:26 am

        This “theft of language” is being most effectively deployed by the coal industry to hide the dirty nature of their business, using words to mask intent and to mean exactly the opposite of what they have traditionally meant. For example Fonterra say they plan to excavate a major “Escarpment Mine” Just south of Auckland, that looks likely to become the ground zero in the fight against climate change in the Auckland area. Fonterra facing unexpectedly stiff opposition from local residents and Auckland based environmentalists, hoped an “Escarpment Mine” wouldn’t get the same emotional response from Aucklanders that “Open Cast Mine” might.

        Everyone knows what an open cast mine looks like, from unpleasant pictures seen on television and in books.
        “Escarpment” in geology means a natural feature of the landscape, either a very steep natural slope, or slanting cliff face. The coal mining industry have subverted the original meaning of this word, for their own uses. Using the word ‘Escarpment’ avoids the unpleasant mental pictures that automatically form in people’s minds on hearing the words ‘Open Cast Mine’. ‘Escarpment Mine’, much more pleasant.

        <blockquote.Dairy juggernaut Fonterra is planning a major new coal mine in north Waikato, saying that will be cheaper than buying coal from Solid Energy, the state-owned enterprise axing 120 jobs at Huntly, blaming falling prices.

        Fonterra's coal mining company Glencoal is about to apply for resource consents to develop an open cast coalmine on 30ha of farmland it has owned for 10 years between Mangatawhiri Rd and the new State Highway 2 at Maramarua.

        ANDREA FOX AND MATT BOWEN http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/business/7759938/Coal-costs-force-Fonterras-hand

        The name Mangatangi is more familiar to Aucklanders as being the location of the Mangatangi Dam, Auckland’s largest water-storage dam. With a capacity of 39 million cubic metres, it supplies nearly a quarter of the city’s bulk water.

        Aucklanders are not too happy to learn that it will also be the location of the regions biggest opencast coal mine. Oops, pardon me ‘escarpment mine’.

        • Jenny 2.1.2.1
          10 February 2013 at 10:34 am

          PS. This proposed mine was originally going to be publicy notified with a chance for public submissions. But on meeting unexpectedly stiff resistance from locals and environmentalitst, this is now in doubt with Fonterra considering seeking fast track permission. (Maybe the language trick didn’t work).

    • North 2.2
      10 February 2013 at 9:17 am

      The Truth-Out.Org article – the politics of disconnect. And we wonder why the polls read as they do. “Mr Key’s a ‘nice man’……..honourably doing all he can in the circumstances. Very well. Kia Ora……”

      Deliberate is what it is………brought here to do the business.

    • Slartibartfast 2.3
      10 February 2013 at 10:33 am

      Not an easy article to read being so very very American, but quite unnerving with a clear echo with what’s happening here in NZ. Makes one wonder where the brief is coming from?

    • Saarbo 2.4
      10 February 2013 at 4:02 pm

      Thanks GeoffC, very interesting. A lot of parallels between US and NZ.

  3. mickysavage 3
    10 February 2013 at 8:28 am

    There is an interview with John Tamihere in the SST this morning (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8279775/Tamihere-wants-to-return-to-politics/). The headline says it all, he wants to get back into Parliament.

    He is his usual aggressive obnoxious self but amongst the abuse and self obsessed diatribe are a couple of pearlers. About Paula Bennett he says “I can’t stand what she is doing to beneficiaries, I just won’t tolerate taking a stick to the most vulnerable, who, by and large, don’t want to be there.”

    And about the distribution of wealth he says “[i]n this government, the few get rich in the name of the many. That just can’t continue.” So government, he says, has to become far more involved.

    If only he learned to be more civilised and circumspect he could become a very good politician.

    • karol 3.1
      10 February 2013 at 8:32 am

      Yes. I read it and thought he was very good on the class/beneficiaries/anti-wealthy elites stuff. But his prejudices against people/qualities outside of various socially constructed “norms” undo all the good stuff he says.

      • kiwi_prometheus 3.1.1
        10 February 2013 at 10:16 am

        There you go with that Deconstructionist nonsense again, Karol.

        “various socially constructed “norms””

        What about your socially constructed feminist ideas, values, attitudes? Can’t they be deconstructed as well, aren’t they also just another set of self serving formulae, Karol?

        It’s like that nonsensewith gay “marriage’, you were banging on about “binary opposites” – that’s just pure academic pedantry.

        Ditto with the “essentialism” cry that goes up around here to dismiss any opinion you lot don’t like. It’s a bit of jargon made up by the Academic Left, premised on the same old flaky, 1970’s French philosophy, Deconstructionist/Feminist nonsense.

        • QoT 3.1.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 10:19 am

          Oh, k_p. It’s seriously cute how you keep popping up whenever a woman has an opinion to try and score some pseudoacademic point about what you think the term “social construct” means.

          • kiwi_prometheus 3.1.1.1.1
            10 February 2013 at 11:15 am

            Do you not know what Deconstructionism is?

            • QoT 3.1.1.1.1.1
              10 February 2013 at 11:35 am

              Ooooh, yeah, k_p, educate the feminist, that’ll show her, oooooh you’re such a master debater!!! *orgasm*

              • Copperhead …
                10 February 2013 at 3:25 pm

                hahaha K_P needs some aloe vera for that burn! It would seem he lets the dictionary do the thinking for him.

            • blue leopard 3.1.1.1.1.2
              10 February 2013 at 11:48 am

              @Kiwi Prometheus
              Having looked it up, it appears that Deconstructionism is about finding meaning in texts by uncovering underlying assumptions. The Basics of
              Philosophy               pages. point out that it is “notoriously difficult to define” and that some critics have “gone so far as to claim it is a dangerous form of Nihilism”.

              Nihilism appears to be where K.P is pushing it.

              You can push any philosophy or analytical approach to extremes and it will be…well…extreme. Keeping an eye on a wider perspective, therefore is required with any philosophy or analytical approach.

              With regard to deconstructionism, it appears useful; if we don’t check up on our basic assumptions from time to time we really will deviate from our aims and ideals. I believe doing this “checking” is part of what is commonly called “thinking”.

              I can imagine that those who are “winning” under the basic assumptions going by unquestioned would not like this form of analytical approach.

              I would question those who think they are “winning” under basic assumptions going by unquestioned. I really don’t think there are many people at all who are currently “winning” at present. That is, not unless you thrive in living in a divided, unhappy and stressed society that is heading for financial, social and environmental meltdown.

              • Pascal's bookie …
                10 February 2013 at 12:37 pm

                Yeah, as I understand it deconstructionism of more of an analytic tool than a philosophy.

                • blue leopard …
                  10 February 2013 at 1:28 pm

                  Interesting that there is no reply from K.P. One could be forgiven for thinking that this “deconstructionism” argument was a poorly thought out faux intellectual comment that was in actuality simply trying to get someone to STFU.

                  • QoT …
                    10 February 2013 at 2:23 pm

                    My money’s on copy-pasta/reworking of something k_p saw on a men’s rights forum, probably Reddit-based.

                  • karol …
                    10 February 2013 at 7:07 pm

                    Good points there, bl @1.28pm. And after a day at work, I am not that interested in untangling all of k_p’s off-target claims, unsubstantiated and loose assumptions, and poor understanding of theory/ies. I have other more useful things I’d rather be doing.

            • Huginn 3.1.1.1.1.3
              11 February 2013 at 5:10 am

              kiwi_prometheus – do you know what ‘stalking’ is?

        • karol 3.1.1.2
          10 February 2013 at 6:59 pm

          k_p: There you go with that Deconstructionist nonsense again, Karol. How did you decide that I was deconstructing and not doing an older form of semiotic (structuralist) analysis, or some discourse analysis, or applying critical theory, or just doing what most folks do here when they critically read a newspaper article?

          Where did I mention “binary opposites” on open mike today?

      • Murray Olsen 3.1.2
        10 February 2013 at 7:38 pm

        Tamihere has an image in his head of the good deserving worker (generally male) that Labour should go into bat for. It’s a cloth cap vision that was not even entirely relevant in the 1930s. As far as I’m concerned, he’s far too much like Shane Jones, and can shove his political aspirations up his back pussy. In today’s world he would do far more harm than good.
        The fact that he can say something that sounds militant and left wing only serves to show how far to the right Shearer and the ABC have remained. Instead of complaining about a male beneficiary on a roof, Tamihere would complain if they weren’t driving a ute. I thought the left in general had moved well past his sort of blokiness, but maybe not.

    • millsy 3.2
      10 February 2013 at 9:02 am

      What a hypocrite. He was waving his own stick around years before Paula even thought about picking hers up.

      And it is all well and good saying “So government, he says, has to become far more involved”, he really needs to spell out that policies he would adopt.

      And didn’t he take the side of the POA against their workers in that dispute?

    • tc 3.3
      10 February 2013 at 9:23 am

      Well he’s got the right level of arrogance and double standards to be back in parliament amongst like minded characters and he’d know all about diversion of public monies for personal gain.

      What DS needs to realise is he’d stab him in the back given half the chance and is not a team player so it’s a major judgement call, if JT can take a seat off the nat’s why not I say as they’ve got plenty of candidates who can’t do that so far.

    • redbaron77 3.4
      10 February 2013 at 9:59 am

      Agreed. The Labour caucus would be benefit from his energy and passion. However JT’s unrestrained “bull in the china shop” manner during his previous term as a MP lost him a lot of friends on his own side (and continues to alienate to this day). Without wise mentoring I suspect JT would stumble back into his familiar form and serve as a liability rather than an asset to the caucus.

    • kiwi_prometheus 3.5
      10 February 2013 at 10:06 am

      So he gets your cooing approval if its an enemy target he hits, but squeal in outrage when you come under friendly fire, LOL.

      • karol 3.5.1
        10 February 2013 at 7:03 pm

        Duh!? What a pointless comment, k_p@10.06am. When you strip way your emotive, subjective sneer, all you are doing is outlining my comment in general terms: i.e. I agree with some things Tamihere says and not others. And that is unusual or wrong,…. how?

        Why not try engaging with the substance of my or others comments, instead of such pointless general sneers?

      • McFlock 3.5.2
        10 February 2013 at 7:55 pm

        lol
        Even if the military analogy stood, why would that be wrong?
        Or do you believe that the appropriate response to being struck by so-called “friendly” fire is “thank you, sir, may I have another”?

    • QoT 3.6
      10 February 2013 at 10:21 am

      If only he learned to be more civilised and circumspect he could become a very good politician.

      Yeah, unlikely, micky, given he says:

      “Tamihere reckons it’s not what he says, but how he says it that gets him into trouble. He reckons people know he’s saying the right thing, “but they might be far more genteel or academic [how they say it]. I’m not”.”

      Because you know, he’s clearly just saying what we’re all thinking, he just doesn’t sugar-coat it, man. Just like Paul Henry.

    • Olwyn 3.7
      10 February 2013 at 11:11 am

      I greet this new “positioning” from a man who is interested in charter schools with some caution. It looks as if he is shaping himself up for one of the West Auckland seats; either Carmel’s, or if they take Hooton’s advice, New Lynn. Hooton, who seems to take “left” and “sinister” as across the board synonyms, was earlier this week suggesting that they metaphorically “cut Cunliffe’s throat,” as well as making oblique remarks about his family.

      • JK 3.7.1
        10 February 2013 at 12:59 pm

        I agree with you, Olwyn. I’ve just read the story in SST re Tamihere, and I don’t think he’s changed one little bit. What I find interesting is that Shearer has endorsed his re-entry into Labour membership, and it sounds as if he (Tamihere) is going after the Waitakere seat. Which, after the hard yards put in by Carmel Sepuloni to get in behind with only nine votes to win it, is cheeky to say the least. I hope the Waitakere Labour people can see behind the cheeky grin and charm to the self-interested, egotistical rightwing boy who wants another “go” at Parliament.

        • Olwyn 3.7.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 1:41 pm

          It is hard to tell just how much influence Hooton has, but it seems as if there are certain quarters that are not content to bury the hatchet now that Shearer has been endorsed by his colleagues, but instead want to continue to sideline the centre-left of the party while tacking rightwards. Not only that, they seem to favour right wingers on that ground alone, with competence, hard work and even the ability to win seats coming a distant second. I will be interested to see what shape the reshuffle takes.

        • mickysavage 3.7.1.2
          10 February 2013 at 5:39 pm

          There is no way he would succeed in Waitakere and New Lynn would revolt rather than support him. We have a perfectly good electorate MP right now …

          • JK 3.7.1.2.1
            10 February 2013 at 6:04 pm

            Yeah but ….. Mickey …. (in reply 37) you know as well as I do sometimes those selections can be “rigged” by certain members of caucus/HO – and Tamihere WAS endorsed by Shearer – which speaks spades to me !

            What I also found fascinating in the SST story is that Tamihere is going to ask Maori to change from their Maori vote ie Te Tai Tokerau – to a General vote. That’s pretty cheeky on his part.

            “… it seems more likely Tamihere wil persuade Labour Maori members to swtich electoral rolls into the Waitakere seat, giving him enough clout to win selection and he hops, beat Bennett”

            However, the story also mentions he’s popular out South Auckland way, so maybe he’ll have a tilt at Ross Robertson’s seat if RR decides he’s had enough !

          • Olwyn 3.7.1.2.2
            10 February 2013 at 6:23 pm

            I agree that you have a perfectly good MP Micky, I just do not trust the decision makers, and do not think I have good reason to trust them, to be honest.

            • Anne 3.7.1.2.2.1
              10 February 2013 at 6:59 pm

              I think the revolt would go beyond New Lynn Olwyn. In fact the party would be decimated and it would take years (if ever) for them to get back to it’s present state. They could kiss goodbye to the next election or failing that, they would be a one term govt. and that would be the end of Labour for a long time.

              That’s why Hooton et al are working their butts off fomenting as much mischief as they can.

              There are none so blind as those who will not see.

              • Anne …
                13 February 2013 at 7:30 pm

                Oops Olwyn. I was grazing over my recent comments and I came across this one. My last sentence. I wasn’t referring to you when I said that. Rather the ABC club…

                • Olwyn …
                  13 February 2013 at 7:52 pm

                  It’s OK Anne – I got what you meant. I notice that they never seem to distance themselves from Hooton’s comments. The fact that he supports Shearer appears to licence him to say what he likes. That headline in the NBR last week was simply outrageous.

          • tc 3.7.1.2.3
            10 February 2013 at 6:29 pm

            I’d like to see JT take back a seat, none of this safe seat comfy stuff, he has to earn it.

            Mangakiekie is winnable and has an ordinary and lazy candidate who got walked over in debates by slimy smiley Sam. Win that and you deserve a go, not as a minister just an MP.

        • karol 3.7.1.3
          10 February 2013 at 7:17 pm

          Tamihere already stood for mayor of Waitakere City and he lost. What makes him think the Waitakere electorate would be any more keen on him?

    • KhandallaViper 3.8
      10 February 2013 at 2:56 pm

      It does not matter what Tamihere says under any circumstances.

      There have been too many examples of his lack of judgement for him to e treated with any respect.

      The count of sins commences at the figure 192,000 and goes upwards rapidly.

      When he last ran in Tamaki he never once thanked the electorate workers who canvassed and erected signs for him.

      I’ve never met a west Auckland labour volunteer worker who would piss on him if they found him on fire.

      • Visubversaviper 3.8.1
        10 February 2013 at 8:06 pm

        Yep. I put up billboards for him once. You could tell my ones, they were the ones with two extra staples – one through each of his nasty piggy eyes.

    • GregJ 3.9
      10 February 2013 at 6:13 pm

      You know JT would make a great heir apparent to lead New Zealand First – if his ego and Winston’s could work with the other’s!

  4. marty mars 4
    10 February 2013 at 9:13 am

    Interesting to read 3 columns about Waitangi Day especially relating to Titewhai Harawira.

    Matt notes the pathos

    When Key slunk back to the local flash hotel among his own, he huffed in a speech that he’d had enough of protesters ruining our national day.

    In fact, the only protest at Waitangi this year was a peaceful march of several hundred against domestic violence.

    But then Key’s also the man who can’t remember what he thought as a young man about protests against apartheid or nuclear ships – although he’s happy to take credit on the international stage for the reputation New Zealand now enjoys because of those stands.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10864403

    Rodney Hide – that sad wanker reminds us all of why we can be thankful he’s out of parliament – he is so subtle not

    The day could work if there was something big happening that would lift us and give us pause for thought. Like New Year’s Eve fireworks, only bigger, or Concert in the Park.

    Instead, our political leaders all sweep up to the Bledisloe-gifted grounds, far away from most of us

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10864396

    And a very nice article from Simon Day

    A conversation with Titewhai Harawira doubles as a lesson in how to speak to women, how to conduct an interview and how to do better research.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8283238/A-tete-a-tete-with-Titewhai

    It is very hard to argue against the line that Titewhai uses that, “We get benefits as a Treaty partner because we fight for them.” It seems to me to be very true and one of the major reasons that the fight will continue – because equality has not arrived in this country yet.

    And these lines are exceptional from the Day interview

    She resents the governments’ (past and current) financially based solutions to the issues of the Maori underclass.

    Although Key says Treaty stimulants are the “biggest stimulus on the horizon” that will “financially empower iwi”, Harawira believes the approach neglects the real problems faced by Maori and the real obligations of the Treaty of Waitangi.

    “The Treaty has been reduced to a document that we’ve got to give those Maoris a dollar for then it will all disappear. Well it won’t. The injustice continues.”

    Money will not solve an education system, health statistics and housing situations that continue to be disastrous for Maori, Harawira said.

    Oh dear that buggers up the bullshit memes put forward against tangata whenua.

    The only way imo to sort these issues out is for some humbleness – and not from tangata whenua.

    • North 4.1
      10 February 2013 at 9:40 am

      Titewhai hit the nail on the head when she said about Key – “he’s just talking to Pakeha……”.

      Muttering conceived by spin doctors and calculated for throw-away line delivery at Waitangi.

      The rationale – to tap the subliminal anti-Maori racism rampant in this country. And like the seasoned real estate agent talking heads (“we are part of the story”) Gower et al close on Key’s behalf.

  5. Foreign Waka 5
    10 February 2013 at 9:46 am

    These contributions encapsulates the situation of NZ quite well. Geoff and Karol’s : “the new extremism…” and a quote from Arundhati Roy vis a vis the statements from Titwhai Harawira. Given the landscape and situation of NZ – is was never so important to be “one people” and yet there is constant work on creating two nations. One wonders to whose benefit.

    • Colonial Weka 5.1
      10 February 2013 at 10:37 am

      One people, eh? How about we all become Maori, or Polynesian. That would solve the perceived problem would it not? Or are you suggesting that the only option is for us all to be Pakeha?

      • OneTrackViper 5.1.1
        10 February 2013 at 12:40 pm

        Just all New Zealanders would be a good start.

        • Jenny 5.1.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 1:45 pm

          So we should all accept being part of a political entity imposed by Europeans, and named after a mainland European Dutch province. Can’t help thinking that this is a little bit exclusionary. Why does this group get naming rights above anyone else? Are they more cleverer than everyone else? Are they more moral than everyone else? Are they more superior than everyone else? Two things are certain: They are more whiter, and they are more racist than everyone else.

        • Colonial Weka 5.1.1.2
          10 February 2013 at 4:54 pm

          “Just all New Zealanders would be a good start.”

          Yeah, like I said, the only option is for us all to be one with the dominant culture ie Pakeha.

          Of course we are already all NZers, all that is required for that is to either be born here or to jump certain citizenship hoops. Once you have a NZ passport or entitlement to one then you are a NZer. What you really mean is you want one people culturally. Which takes me back to my first point – which culture do you want us all to be? And why should Maori be assimilated into that when they have equal rights to their own sovereignty under Te Tiriti?

          • blue leopard 5.1.1.2.1
            10 February 2013 at 5:18 pm

            @ Colonial Weka
            I think Foreign Waka was referring to something a whole lot wider than creating one dominant paradigm, rather seemed to be referring to asking NZers to unite and strengthen themselves against this (failing) dominant paradigm. I read FW’s comment as speaking to the need for the people of NZ to become less easily divided on important issues.

            • Colonial Weka 5.1.1.2.1.1
              10 February 2013 at 6:04 pm

              I don’t really follow that blue leopard. I feel solidarity with many Maori re the dominant paradigm. I also recognise that they have been thinking about this, and working hard, for generations in ways that my people haven’t. That counts for something. I don’t need to be ‘one’ with Maori in order to work with them against oppression. All we need to common ground and common purpose, and that exists to varying degrees, but I don’t beleive that we have to be the same or of one mind. In fact I think that lessens us in many ways.

              FW specifically refers to two nations, and I took that to be about Maori and Pakeha. FW states it as a bad thing. I don’t see this divide you talk about. I see Maori issues continually being sidelined, or ignored, or not even recognised by the dominant culture. Hence Titewhai’s comment that they have to fight for their treaty rights. And when they do, they get accused of creating divisions. Sorry, but IMO it ain’t Maori that are causing this problem. It’s Pakeha unwillingness to deal with reality and other ways of understanding the world than their own that creates the problems. We WANT Maori to assimilate into Pakeha culture. They can keep their groovy cultural things that we like (haka, art, some te reo), but we will not tolerate them existing as a people in their own right and self-determination. Hence the fight and what you see as division (I think).

              I used to think that Pakeha needed to change, but I don’t hold that hope so much any more, although I will still work for that. I think in reality
              time will resolve the problem – eventually Polynesians will outnumber European descendants and NZ will become a Pacific Island once again instead of an outpost of the Queen of England.

              • Colonial Weka …
                10 February 2013 at 6:09 pm

                btw, I find the notion of ‘one people’ pretty offensive. It takes me immediately to people like Pauline Hanson. I’m not sure that is where you are, but if you are going to use those terms then please understand the political context they exist within. Hanson’s ‘One Nation’ ideas are racist and exclusionary and in complete denial of the reality of Aboriginal people. She would get on well with John Ansell. These are not people who will join use in the fight against oppression.

              • blue leopard …
                10 February 2013 at 6:17 pm

                @ Colonial Weka
                Well perhaps I was misunderstanding Foreign Waka’s comment. I understood the message to be similar to what you write here. Waka’s comment referenced not only Titewhai’s comment, also Geoff’s, link, which I only had a quick scan of, however believed it to be about the divide and rule and distraction techniques being used on us nearly constantly. Therefore not specifically about race; that is only one division being used, there are many, low waged vs unemployed, middle income earners vs lower income earners, employers vs employees, gay vs straight the list is endless.

                I understood the “two nations” to be simply “dividedness”; not as in race. It depends on what particular issue is being presented as in which way our nation is being split in two in any particular moment.

                Your btw links in as an example of what Karol quoted Arundhati Roy as saying. (comment 2.1 above). Are you saying that we can’t use the word “one nation” anymore without bringing up the spin of exclusionary and racism that some bigot in Australia sold? Thats very sad. She doesn’t have exclusive rights to the concept of people uniting.

                • Colonial Weka …
                  10 February 2013 at 7:02 pm

                  Yes, it’s possible that I have misunderstood FW too. Perhaps they can clarify.

                  “Are you saying that we can’t use the word “one nation” anymore without bringing up the spin of exclusionary and racism that some bigot in Australia sold? Thats very sad. She doesn’t have exclusive rights to the concept of people uniting.”

                  It’s not about the words so much as the concept. The words could be reclaimed. I just don’t agree with the basic premise of ‘one people’. We are NOT one people. We are a nation of many peoples, and the reasons we don’t have as much unity as we might want is because of lack of cultural awareness. Trying to merge all cultures won’t solve that.

                  Where the right or whoever are creating division as a way of gaining political power, then I agree this is a problem. I just don’t believe the ‘one people’ meme is the solution. Worse, it plays directly into their hands. Have you seen John Ansell’s rhetoric?

                  • blue leopard …
                    10 February 2013 at 7:24 pm

                    “Have you seen John Ansell’s rhetoric”?
                    Lol, no thank goodness!! Yet I can imagine….

                    Yes, I think there is not really any argument here. It ends up being what we associate words with. I have no problem with “One” being a concept involving uniting whilst still retaining diversity; yet I can see how you associate it with a concept involving a merging cultures.
                    I agree that merging cultures is not a positive way to go. Acknowledging and appreciating differences, to me is far less “ist”. We can’t all be exactly the same, and how horrid if we were!.

        • trickle down 5.1.1.3
          10 February 2013 at 5:25 pm

          very quaint and naive otv

      • Foreign Waka 5.1.2
        10 February 2013 at 3:53 pm

        Seems that you have not cottoned on that these constant divisions amongst the races is giving advantage to someone. You figure out who that is and you might just see what the real game here is. It does not matter what race you are (really!) but it does matter whether the homophobic tendencies on anyone’s part is being used to undermine NZ as a whole.

        • Colonial Weka 5.1.2.1
          10 February 2013 at 4:50 pm

          Foreign Waka, there is no such thing as race. We are all one species. It’s the belief in race that is one of the causes of racism.

          • Foreign Waka 5.1.2.1.1
            10 February 2013 at 5:20 pm

            OK – are you making the comment BECAUSE my synonym says FOREIGN or do you want to reinvent biology? You can replace the term if you want to with “ethnic group” or “different people”. Don’t politicize the word race, its perfectly legitimate in a scientific sense. Besides, you comment just shows exactly what my point was and thank you for demonstrating so vividly the issue at hand.

            • Colonial Weka 5.1.2.1.1.1
              10 February 2013 at 7:11 pm

              No, nothing to do with your name.

              Not sure what you mean otherwise. Biologically, there is ONE human race (Homo sapiens). NZer is not a race. We are all the same species.

              I think you are talking about ethnicity and culture. I don’t understand why you want that to be ‘one’. But as blue leopard and I were mentioning, perhaps you have been misunderstood. Would you care to clarify your point?

      • David H 5.1.3
        10 February 2013 at 4:45 pm

        We are supposed to ALL be New Zealanders.

    • blue leopard 5.2
      10 February 2013 at 1:58 pm

      +1 Foreign Waka,

      Pretty absurd responses to your accurate comment. I, too, would like to know to whose benefit actively dividing us is for? I sure as hell wish the majority would realize that its not to their benefit.

      “One people” is an attitude of inclusiveness, the responses from CW & Jenny omit to acknowledge this. There can still be diversity and an attitude of “we’re all in this together”. We don’t have to become one colour, or clones. How foolish to even suggest that.

      Britain after Stonehenge program on Choice TV relayed how the Romans gave a hoard of silver and gold to a “friendly” Scottish tribe to keep them onside and try and divide the clan loyalties. This was over 1000 years ago. Do we not learn anything

      Please people, try and engage and see what games are being played on you. This is getting really serious. Look at what is going on overseas. Our paradigm is not working. We need collective force to shift toward a more positive direction.

      • fatty 5.2.1
        10 February 2013 at 2:29 pm

        Our paradigm is not working.

        I agree…Our biculturalism is Pakeha defined biculturalism and it is not working.
        But I don’t see the problem as being that we are not “one people”. Biculturalism would work better if it was not within a neoliberal paradigm – that is the problem.
        There would be nothing wrong if we had two cultural norms, so long as they were both given equal opportunity to exist. Currently, we have token Maori culture that gets further subjugated by our racist economic system.
        We need to redefine biculturalism so that both cultures can exist. Promoting only eurocentric ideals failed us before, during the 1970s, and this was after 2 decades of an equity based economic system.
        To ditch biculturalism now, we would be left with the worst possible combination of economic and cultural systems. – neoliberalism and mono-culturalism. Yuk.

        • blue leopard 5.2.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 2:50 pm

          I think you miss the point here, Fatty.

          An attitude of “we are all in it together” has nothing to do with colour, bi-culturalism, gender or any of these other ways of dividing us up.

          Our dominant paradigm has been referred to as the “white male paradigm” by some. I will use this term to get my point across.

          My observation is that the closer you are to a white male mentality the more likely you are to be “successful” in that hierarchy, I emphasize “mentality” because those who are “winning”, recieving accolades and value in the hierarchy and whom support and promulgate this dominant paradigm are not solely white nor male; we all know examples where some of the worst offenders are quite other than that physically. and those losing are not solely brown, pink, yellow, red. They are also white. And they are also white and male.

          The more people who realize this the more we realize we are all in this together and the less prone we will be to being distracted and divided and ruled.

          • blue leopard 5.2.1.1.1
            10 February 2013 at 3:28 pm

            I need to add that I don’t believe many people are “winning” at all currently. Some might think they are, however there has to be some denial involved when the trends overseas are taken into account. It doesn’t matter whether you are “middle class” (what ever that means) and/or “non-political” and fairly “comfortable”; these groups of people are being affected by the state of chaos that our Western society has become. It doesn’t matter whether you are brown, black, white. It doesn’t matter what your gender is. Most peoples interests are being adversely affected.

            There are problems that need to be dealt with and aren’t being, and one thing that would help is that we realize our similarities; we breathe, we love, we hurt, we all want what is best for ourselves.. If we could realize what unites us, we would start respecting one another, and one anothers’ different interests and start ensuring we were moving toward a better direction. This is not what is occurring at present. We are being more and more pitted against one another.

            • fatty 5.2.1.1.1.1
              10 February 2013 at 4:11 pm

              I think you miss the point here, Fatty.

              Yes, when I read those last two comments, and the one that I replied to, I have no idea what your point is…but I am interested
              The problem is that the term ‘one people’ or ‘we are all in this together’ is usually a call to end biculturalism…that is how I read it.

              There are problems that need to be dealt with

              Can you be more specific? I am confused

              • blue leopard …
                10 February 2013 at 4:43 pm

                Yes, I wondered whether that was the case re you referring to biculturalism, which wasn’t what I was talking about.
                Basically I’m commenting on getting NZ people in a state of mind where they are not so damned dividable! (My comment was in response to Foreign Waka’s comment at (5) and the response FW got to that comment.)

                If people see what they have in common with one another, they are more likely to work together and be less easily divided.

                re There are problems that need to be dealt with
                I guess I am being deliberately vague because I’m not in the mood for searching for links to substantiate my point!

                I’m referring to the type of problems illustrated out of the global financial crisis; how we are witnessing less and less morality and integrity from those in the upper echelons of our society (Western, not solely NZ), where people still appear to be giving our superiors credit for “knowing what they are doing” where its no longer due. I mean, these people such as bankers and politicians have been caught red-handed again and again and again, yet no real response or change to anything; not rectifying regulations, not the way things are reported and not how people vote. Just denial.

                When a movement began that would have started getting the problems addressed, (Occupy Wall Street) here in NZ, it appeared people were more concerned over the state of our public lawns?? Our media, along with our lawn-valuing population, appear to have entirely checked out; I live amongst people of many different nationalities and I am constantly hearing how particularly dreadful New Zealand media is and how uninformed the people are (not surprising really).

                I’ll make a short mention of the entirely illegal wars our Western society are involving themselves in, ones where there are war crimes committed and the initiators of which simply go on to get another, probably higher paid jobs, rather than be done for their crimes

                Despite all these issues our media continues to push the lowest common denominator in attitudes. For what? Ratings? And in the meantime, it appears that people are still merely supporting a government because the main frontsperson “seems like a nice guy” despite oodles of dodgy, dodgy behaviour, incompetence and fiascos. And do I even bother to mention the approach our largest opposition party…is…taking…nah, I think you’ll probably get my point…

                These are the types of problems I was referring to needed to be dealt with.

                • fatty …
                  10 February 2013 at 6:08 pm

                  well said, I get your point and agree with you.

                  The issue with our media is a big one. We tend to have a bland and predictable media who perpetuate ignorance, but I think that is partly to do with the size of our population.
                  Mainstream sources of media – TV/newspapers/radio have such a limited amount of people to aim at, as a result they all sit in the middle and offer nothing. Compared with the UK – they have enough people to support left wing and right wing papers, as a result there are contrasting views and an environment is created where debate will occur…overcoming this is difficult.
                  This is compounded by the general agreement of most of our political parties. In a way, the demise of ACT has almost been a burden for the left…without them contrasting opinions also disappear. Nothing promotes true left policies more than an ACT supporter opening their mouth.

                  • Pascal's bookie …
                    10 February 2013 at 6:17 pm

                    The population issue is a real one. But it pays to remember that in the UK you get the tabloids as well as the Times, The Gaurdian, and the Independent. While you do get more top notch stuff, you also get a lot more crap.

                  • blue leopard …
                    10 February 2013 at 6:33 pm

                    Thanks Fatty,

                    Hmm interesting . That gives me some insight thanks.

                    It is rather strange though, I was just considering how that we are a small nation, one might hope that spinning bigoted type attitudes wouldn’t “work” because we are only a few degrees separated and most of us must know plenty of others from different walks of life, therefore understand how different people’s needs and the issues they face are. This has certainly been what has caused me to open my attitudes up and pull my horns in and learn to consider a matter from different angles before drawing conclusions.. I would think we would be more understanding (and thus tolerant) toward one another’s different needs and issues for this reason. This does not appear to be the way it is working though.

  6. Te Reo Putake 6
    10 February 2013 at 10:15 am

    Your Conspiracies Today Breaking News!

    No. 94: Christpher Dorner.

    http://www.scpr.org/blogs/news/2013/02/08/12476/lapd-manhunt-some-cheer-on-fugitive-christopher-do/

    • Colonial Weka 6.1
      10 February 2013 at 10:40 am

      How is that a conspiracy?

      • Te Reo Putake 6.1.1
        10 February 2013 at 11:13 am

        It’s not, but that won’t stop the wackjobs. The first facebook link:

        We Are All Chris Dorner

        Christopher John Dorner is the victim of a manhunt and smear campaign. 5 years ago he was fired…

    • joe90 6.2
      10 February 2013 at 11:29 am

      For many his allegations about police conduct ring true hence the support.

  7. kiwi_prometheus 7
    10 February 2013 at 10:25 am

    Great Bernard Hickey interview with the guy who spent a decade trying to get peoples attention about Madoff’s ponzi scheme.

    He even got a couple of guns and sent his wife to shooting school, it was getting that hairy.

    He reckons Madoff was burning through the world markets and clients and would have reached NZ eventually if it hadn’t crashed.

    Now he makes a fortune detecting and alerting US authorities about ponzi schemes.

    He describes the clues that give a ponzi schemer away.

    http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/63049/double-shot-interview-harry-markopolos-how-i-found-worlds-biggest-ponzi-scheme-8-years

    • bad12 7.1
      10 February 2013 at 11:30 am

      Madoff would have arrived here in the nick of time to see the whole s**t-pile collapse as the likes of Sir Doug et al beat him by a long nose to suck all the cash out of the bloated upper-middle class with finance schemes that bore a remarkable resemblance to Madoff’s very own little money spinner…

  8. VivaciousViper 8
    10 February 2013 at 10:26 am

    2014, once again, will see politicians from all sides promising much,smiling and waving,
    speeches that convince some, that’s the trickery,the hoodwinking of the political game,
    once elected the hammer comes down,all bets are off,they are in office,why should
    they care, or even stand by the words they uttered, prior to gaining office.

    ‘Democracy means government by discussion,but it is only effective if you can stop
    people talking’ By Clement Atlee.

    ‘Democracy is the name we give the people, whenever we need them. By Robert,
    Marquis de Flers and Arman de Caillavet L’habit vert.

    Above quotes sourced from the Collins Thesaurus.

  9. joe90 9
    10 February 2013 at 10:33 am

    Record snow in a warming world: The science is clear.

  10. VivaciousViper 10
    10 February 2013 at 11:06 am

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8283594/King-find-recalls-Savage-mystery

    Hi Anne, success, i hope the above link works,
    thanks for your help. 🙂
    Savage was one of our ‘truly great’ PM’s

    • Anne 10.1
      10 February 2013 at 12:17 pm

      He was indeed.

      Yes it works. Now for someone to explain to me – in laywoman’s language – how you create a link using your own words like “this” or “have a look at this” etc.

        • Rosie 10.1.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 5:34 pm

          Thanks joe90…. Mystery solved, I’m a bit ashamed to say.

          • Anne 10.1.1.1.1
            10 February 2013 at 6:33 pm

            Umm… not layman enough for me. I will print a copy and find someone to explain what it all means and how it translates into practice. Thanks anyway joe90. It’s a start. 🙂

            • felixviper 10.1.1.1.1.1
              10 February 2013 at 8:02 pm

              I can try in lay-person 🙂 In this example I’ll use square brackets [ ] so we can see what’s going on, but when you do it for real you’ll use angle brackets .

              There are three bits to remember. The opening tag (which includes the address), the clickable text, and the closing tag.

              ————————-

              The opening tag starts with a bracket, the letter a, and the phrase href=

              Like so:
              [a href=

              That bit will always be the same for every link you make. The “a” means “this is a link”, and the href= means “this is the address the link takes us to”

              The next bit of the opening tag is the address you want the link take us to. In this example it’s a youtube video address: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHRPmPn8pCY

              We put quote marks around the address which mean “this is the beginning and end of the address”, and then a bracket, and that’s the end of the opening tag.

              Like so:
              [a href=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHRPmPn8pCY”]

              ————————-

              Next is the text that you want to be able to click. This can be anything at all. It doesn’t need quote marks or anything, whatever you put here is exactly what you’ll see.

              Like so:
              [a href=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHRPmPn8pCY”]felix’s new band

              ————————–

              The last bit is the closing tag. It’s just a bracket, a slash, another a, and another bracket. It means “this is the end of the link”.

              Like so:
              [a href=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHRPmPn8pCY”]felix’s new band[/a]

              ————————–

              And that’s it! Replace the square brackets in the example with angle brackets and this is what you’ll get: felix’s new band

              Your turn…

    • Jenny 10.2
      10 February 2013 at 2:24 pm

      “It is popularly believed he is in the sarcophagus in the memorial but he isn’t,” Sutton said.

      “The coffin is deep down in a vertical shaft beneath the sarcophagus.

      Probably drilled by him spinning in his grave.

  11. Virginia Linton 11
    10 February 2013 at 11:30 am

    I was disappointed to hear that Phil Goff, Phil Twyford and others apparently supported John Tamihere’s return to the party; perhaps they could share their reasoning here at The Standard. In today’s newspaper article John sneers about ‘the sisterhood’, and his comments about Paula Bennett’s appearance are an absurd sideshow, a circus he would bring to Parliament should Labour be foolish enough to let him swan back. He asks whether instead of calling Paula fat he should describe her as morbidly obese. Why does he make any negative comment about a woman’s appearance? What does this say about his character, about him as a man, and about those who overlook his ugly proclivities to renew his footing in Labour? In light of recent party tensions, I find myself wondering what sort of government Labour would make with its current team; not, perhaps, one that ordinary party members might feel proud of, or part of. I find myself hanging back from this party, which wears the cloak of Labour, but whose heart may no longer be truly Labour. I watch with interest the jostling for list positions as we approach the next election. Shane Jones, like John Tamihere, has an overworked ego but has achieved little in Parliament; he flaps his lips at media moments but is not the thoughtful leader we hoped for (and thus does not warrant in my view a high list position). Other list MPs have accepted positions, or taken stances, for rewards that may be as illusory as their list rankings in the months to come. I do not personally care who is the leader of the Labour party. But I care very much about the heart of the Labour party, as one little cog that has kept it beating in the provinces. Attention seeking opportunists like John Tamihere and Shane Jones come and go. But I thought more of Phil; as a woman member of the party, I can’t overlook sexism which, like any other kind of ism, can only exist if good people condone it.

    • blue leopard 11.1
      10 February 2013 at 11:59 am

      Well said, Virginia Linton.

      It would be good to read a response from a member of caucus to what you write here. When people express doubts about a party on The Standard, it would be interesting to know how many they represent. In this case, a lot I’m sure, which makes me view it a worthwhile activity for caucus members to respond.

      • Anne 11.1.1
        10 February 2013 at 12:36 pm

        +1 to Virginia Linton.

        I know Phil Twyford and it puzzles me too. I can only assume he was approached and he agreed to let him have another chance. I presume Tamihere’s negative personal comments re Paula Bennett is tied up with his desire to win the candidacy for the Waitakere seat. (I know he says he’s not interested but who believes a politician even a past one).

        I suspect it’s an attempt to attract the red-neck, anti-female politicians brigade to support him in his cause. Remember the previous candidate was Carmel Sepuloni and she indicated her intention to run for the candidacy again some time ago.

        • gobsmacked 11.1.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 1:19 pm

          Virginia +1.

          As a happily hetero sport-loving beer-drinking bloke, I find Tamihere’s attitude infantile at best, offensive at worst. Worse still is this patronising notion that people like him and Shane Jones speak for a large chunk of society, and voters will return to Labour in droves if only Tamihere and Jones could be to the fore.

          If these two “blokes” are such vote-magnets, how come they keep losing elections?

          • Pascal's bookie 11.1.1.1.1
            10 February 2013 at 1:54 pm

            If these two “blokes” are such vote-magnets, how come they keep losing elections?

            Because bitches, that’s why.

            • blue leopard 11.1.1.1.1.1
              10 February 2013 at 6:39 pm

              @Pascal’s Bookie
              I don’t understand?

              Are you meaning that these bloke-types are to appeal to the female vote?

              Or that these bloke-types are bitches?

              I guess I personally would agree with the second option, however, if you are meaning the first, I wonder whether this is true? Or is it that blokes don’t vote for chicks? I have wondered how the genders are split with regards to political views; whether there is a distinct trend amongst the genders. It was certainly mentioned during election-time that Act has a hard time appealing to the female voter.

              • Anne …
                10 February 2013 at 8:14 pm

                From memory, I think he called certain women (was it women Labour MPs including Helen Clark?) bitches earlier in the 2000 decade when he was given the push. Something along those lines anyway. Someone will correct me if I’m wrong.

    • JK 11.2
      10 February 2013 at 1:03 pm

      Yes, Virginia Linton, I – too – am seeing a much more sexist Labour caucus re-appearing with John Tamihere’s endorsement by so many of the rightwing blokes and their takeover of the caucus.
      And I regret to say that I think we’ll see the so-called re-shuffle of front positions due to be announced
      soon by the Leader reinforce this blokey-bent.

    • tc 11.3
      10 February 2013 at 1:51 pm

      Twyford and Goff are all part of the Mallfaria, see where this is going out west. They just can’t help themselves.

      Watch that space and DC and CS better watch their backs, even more so now.

      watch Labour do it all in public whereas the NACT do the deals, sort out the spin and everyone then gets on with it.

    • Puddleglum 11.4
      10 February 2013 at 9:20 pm

      A really well-composed comment, Virginia.

  12. lprent 12
    10 February 2013 at 11:51 am

    Sorry about that brief outage. Didn’t notice a mysql update amongst the security fixes.

    • blue leopard 12.1
      10 February 2013 at 12:14 pm

      Hi lprent,
      I posted a query a few Open Mikes ago, not realising you were away.

      Its simply about the “notify me via email” function, which no longer works. Its no biggy really, yet I was wondering if there was some way to get this function back? If there was any setting I could change from my side? I am on Safari 5.something and gmail email.

      I will go back and find my last query because there were a few others commenting in response.

      http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-06022013/#comments

      (There was also another query to you at post 19 on the same Open Mike.

      Thank you

      • lprent 12.1.1
        10 February 2013 at 12:52 pm

        Ah. Thanks for reminding me. I’m just fixing one of the backups that isn’t working too well. I’ll reconnect and start the mail server after that. It was simply an oversight when I shifted the server in Jan. Ummm people may get a pile of banked emails when that happens.

        It was more that my brain was elsewhere. The code I was trying to build/fix was complicated and I had to kind of stretch to make it work at all well in the target platform.

        As well as The Standard I was somewhat vague about really important things like sleep, Lyn, bills and taking pills.

        • blue leopard 12.1.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 1:21 pm

          Oh cool! Thanks lprent, and thanks for the work you do, its most appreciated.
          (Hopefully you’ll address the really important things first, I’m sure none of us would begrudge you that 😯 )

        • David H 12.1.1.2
          10 February 2013 at 5:35 pm

          Lynn,You have to take your medication, and get some sleep. The days of SysOp’s surviving on 4 hrs, and umpteen cups of corrosively strong coffee are long gone now lol. And never forget the better half! Mental note to self, don’t forget your pills!

        • Murray Olsen 12.1.1.3
          10 February 2013 at 8:24 pm

          Thank you, and thanks for the work you put in. It lets us write and perhaps even be heard now and then.

  13. Morrissey 13
    10 February 2013 at 11:58 am

    Chris Laidlaw’s lame quip trivializes and undermines a serious point
    Radio New Zealand National, Sunday 10 February 2013, 11:10 a.m.

    Chris Laidlaw interviewed Seyed Majid Tafreshi Khameneh, the Iranian Ambassador to New Zealand.

    LAIDLAW: Iran has supported Hezbollah, hasn’t it.

    TAFRESHI: Hezbollah has not invaded any other territory. They are
    defending their land. They are freedom fighters.

    LAIDLAW: [guffaws nervously] Well, one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist.

    Disappointed in Laidlaw’s lapse into hard right propaganda, I sent him the following e-mail….

    Dear Chris,
    After the Iranian ambassador had pointed out that Hezbollah is an indigenous self-defence organization, and had never sent troops to invade any territory, you quipped that “one man’s freedom-fighter is another man’s terrorist.” That was not only a banal observation, it served to trivialize and undermine the point that the Ambassador had just made.

    Your interview was otherwise fair and thorough.

    Yours sincerely,
    Morrissey Breen
    Northcote Point

    • blue leopard 13.1
      10 February 2013 at 12:21 pm

      @Morrissey
      I find this sort of thing really shameful. How rude and uninformed we can be.

      It is probably beyond any “middle” NZ to grasp the concept that the word “freedom fighter” isn’t synonymous with terrorist The word “terrorist” can, thus be effectively used to stamp out any opposition to the status quo, and noone seems to mind that the status quo way of doing things is leading us to hell in a handbasket.

      Its just shameful to be lumped in with this type of mentality (if you can even call it that).

  14. Johninsg 14
    10 February 2013 at 2:27 pm

    NZ must not change as there is no alternative.
    Meanwhile –
    The Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC) has made it official: After its latest two day meeting, it announced its goal to devalue the dollar by 33% over the next 20 years.

  15. jimgreen 15
    10 February 2013 at 3:07 pm

    If you have even the remotest interest in public broadcasting, I cannot recommend the following link enough. Truly inspiring!

  17. Tim 17
    10 February 2013 at 5:07 pm

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch…
    If Key and Gillard in Queenstown are supposed to signify the ‘ANZAC Spurrut’ at play, then I want no part of it.
    Yet another Key venture in self-aggrandisement, sucking up and selling out.

    It’s interesting when you look at the definition of a psychopath available on the internet. I think it’s Wikipaedia that has some interesting characteristics. You could provide a match with the various categories more precisely than you coud with the likes of Bainimarama or Mugabe.
    Yet – still the populace worships! – aided and abetted by an uncritical MSM.

    As they say though – the harder they rise, the harder they fall!
    (and if EVER there was a travesty to an OZ Labor Party it would be Joolya – I keep wondering if NZ’s equivalent are an ABC club and a Shearer).

    Hey! – btw (as they say amongst the connected) – what’s happened to that noice little boi FanClub, or FanBoi – or whatever the fuck he pops up as? AND – WHERE lately is the Hataitai pacifier that not only now wants to review the ‘used by’ label expiry date, but also the ‘RRP’ [or recommended retail price]. Bugger! I forget her name just at the moment – hold on – for the benefit of precision, I’ll just Google her shall I? ………
    Oh fuck – it seems she’s become irrelevant to GOOGLE too!
    Anyway – you fellas should know who I mean – she’s a foreskin in the ABC club along with the Mallardy bovver boy and a host of other amusements

  18. David H 18
    10 February 2013 at 5:38 pm

    Just saw Key on the News playing a drinking game, and sculling a glass of beer. Nice to see he supports safe drinking habits.

    • QoT 18.1
      10 February 2013 at 5:45 pm

      Didn’t you get the memo? Drinking to excess is only bad when it’s Yoof (i.e. anyone who looks “young” to a Campbell Live producer) doing it. Grown-ups can do whatever they like, it’s not like they set examples or contribute to drinking culture or anything.

  19. joe90 19
    10 February 2013 at 6:59 pm

    Charlie Stross on the beige dictatorship. …sigh…

    http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/02/political-failure-modes-and-th.html

    So the future isn’t a boot stamping on a human face, forever. It’s a person in a beige business outfit advocating beige policies that nobody wants (but nobody can quite articulate a coherent alternative to) with a false mandate obtained by performing rituals of representative democracy that offer as much actual choice as a Stalinist one-party state. And resistance is futile, because if you succeed in overthrowing the beige dictatorship, you will become that which you opposed.

    Thoughts?

  20. The Al1en 20
    10 February 2013 at 7:14 pm

    “a Campbell Live producer”

    Despite being hypocritical and increasingly a parody of shit sensationalism and faux community concern, it looks like the Campbell live team just keep getting lucky breaks.
    Someone at TVNZ made something much much worse.
    It’s called lose lose for those who watch rather than ‘make’ TV.

    “it’s not like they set examples or contribute ”

    Not one reply, not even a nibble.
    Someone get me a two headed tortoise and JC’s extension number.

  21. bad12 21
    10 February 2013 at 7:35 pm

    Someone should tell David Shearer to stop listening to what He is saying when speaking in front of a camera,

    Shearer i noticed on the news tonight has a bad habit of self editing in the middle of making a comment, this also brings in the aaah as He searches for the words He wants to use as a clarification in the middle of a comment to the media…

    • The Al1en 21.1
      10 February 2013 at 7:43 pm

      I think I might have mentioned it before, but I doubt very much it’s searching for words, just making sure he remembers to use the ones he’s been told to.
      Speak from the same sleeve you wear your heart on, or learn to fake it better.

      I pity the Hansard editor.

    • Murray Olsen 21.2
      10 February 2013 at 8:23 pm

      He should just stop speaking and get someone competent doing it. If I were fixing my car and reached the limit of my incompetence, I’d get hold of someone who knew what they were doing. I wouldn’t burn down the closest workshop and carry on.

      • bad12 21.2.1
        10 February 2013 at 9:24 pm

        Labour voter??? Labour Party member???, rather have Slippery leading the National Party to victory in 2014???,

        The vote has been had, is there another in February 2014???, if not such denigration of those the Labour Caucus voted for as Leader is pretty pointless and it’s only possible out-come is to increase the chances of Slippery being the Prime Minister until 2017,

        Myself, i would rather work toward not having the worst case scenario occur and would suggest that if you are a Labour Party member your energies would better be spent ensuring the Party Members have the ability to ‘trigger’ the scheduled leadership votes under the ‘new’ rules into the future,

        Shearer may have made that abhorrent bene-bashing speech and His ‘worker in the pub’ one wasn’t something to cheer about either,

        Compare this tho to another Labour Leader as Prime Minister, ”Beneficiaries will not be included in Working for Families as this will encourage them to get a job”-Helen Clark,

        Who was Prime Minister when income tax was applied to welfare benefits,none other than David Lange,

        Or is every one still imbibing sour grapes about the other Dave’s failure to topple Shearer…

        • The Al1en 21.2.1.1
          10 February 2013 at 10:21 pm

          “Labour voter???” – Nope. Not any more.
          “Labour Party member???” – Nope. Never joined any political party.
          “rather have Slippery leading the National Party to victory in 2014???” – Nope. that doesn’t sound like me at all. Besides, I reckon you’ll need many more than just my vote for that not to occur. Good luck, best get your lucky red socks out of the bottom drawer, bless.

          And none of those answers above discredit or give less validity to me stating opinion in any way shape or form, Comrade. Do feel free to prove they do if you’re bothered.

          As for the rest of your post, all I can give you is a bit of a shrug, apart from

          “Or is every one still imbibing sour grapes about the other Dave’s failure to topple Shearer…”

          As opposed to you sipping the dregs of the sweet nectar of success dripping off the bottom of Mallard’s poisoned chalice.

          • bad12 21.2.1.1.1
            10 February 2013 at 11:33 pm

            You were doing alright until the spurious final comment, my feelings on Mallard are pretty plain in the comments on the post on that subject,

            Spoze the likes of Trev and Shane with their open attacks on the Green Party are a bit like the anti-Shearer crew here on the Standard, Trev might have caught it by being entangled with McCully’s ex and Shane well wanker’s never really stop themselves from gushing,

            Lolz i should really just scroll past the ‘i hate Shearer comments’ but even that’s damn hard as i found out today reading one interesting comment on an entirely unrelated subject that ended with a ‘i hate Shearer’,

            Hate on, but, unless there is a vote in February 2014 and a willingness of caucus to put that vote to the wider Party which considering everything is a small flight of fancy then Shearer we are all stuck with and no amount of venting will change that,

            Nah not red socks, my feet are Green from having roamed my patch to often without any on…

  22. karol 22
    10 February 2013 at 9:16 pm

    John key got a mixed reception at the Big Gay Out today, according to Stuff:\\

    Today at the Big Gay Out he donned a yellow polo shirt and chatted convivially with drag queens, gay men and women and almost nude couples painted in tiger stripes. But when he took to the stage at the invitation of Miss Ribena, a drag queen with a penchant for purple, there was a slight shift in mood.

    “F*** you John Key,” several voices in the crowd called.

    “Don’t worry they must be from West Auckland,” Miss Ribena said.

    “That’s alright,” Key replied. …

    And then, Auckland local Andy Lawrie attempted to reinforce the point that Key might not be as progressive as he purported. Lawrie was seen lowering a coat hanger affixed to a bamboo pole over the head of the Prime Minister.

    “It’s just a little reminder,” he said.

    On the coat hanger was a “gay” red shirt.

    “It’s just to make people remember.”

    The Greens seemed to be more in tune with the event. Loiusa Wall got various mentions because of her marriage equality amendment bill. But the rest of Labour MPs seem to have been MIA.

    Meanwhile, Lucy Lawless turned up to do a little Community Service, and probably mingled today:

    Lucy Lawless will be among the thousands at today’s Big Gay Out in Auckland.

    “BigGayOut this weekend. Could life be more colourful? Hooray for everything!” she has tweeted.

    GayNZ.com Daily News hears the actress, who has a global following, particularly among lesbians, even helped out by pitching in to erect tents yesterday.

    • bad12 22.1
      10 February 2013 at 9:34 pm

      Lolz dances with transvestites, Slippery gets the first comment of the day and maybe the last of the night,

      Imagine the Gordon Brown type comments that must flow from the mouth of that chameleon as the limo whisks Him off from such events…

  23. ianmac 23
    10 February 2013 at 11:03 pm

    Long term plan for NZ’s move to Charter or Partnership Schools might go like this.

    The full extent of Michael Gove’s (UK Sec Education) plans to revolutionise education are revealed today in a secret memo showing he is considering outright privatisation of academies and free schools. All academies and free schools in England, which are the Education Secretary’s personal obsession, would be free to become profit-making for the first time, and be entirely decoupled from Whitehall control. ……Mr Gove is considering the radical step because massive expansion of academies and free schools is costing government too much money.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/secret-memo-shows-michael-goves-plan-for-privatisation-of-academies-8488552.html