Open mike 12/07/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, July 12th, 2016 - 101 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 …

101 comments on “Open mike 12/07/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    12 July 2016 at 8:37 am

    NATO meets in Warsaw and raises tensions with Russia.
    They are militarising the Baltic countries and preparing for war.
    We are returning to the Cold War.
    Why is this not news in this country ?!!

    http://www.thecanary.co/2016/07/11/natos-new-agenda-frighteningly-clear-prepare-war-russia/

    • Ad 1.1
      12 July 2016 at 8:59 am

      About time NATO put some wellie about.

      • Paul 1.1.1
        12 July 2016 at 9:06 am

        You’re kidding, right?

        • Ad 1.1.1.1
          12 July 2016 at 10:10 am

          It really does matter that Russia invaded the Ukraine.
          Europe is not in a post-military-invasion world.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#Enlargement

          NATO has 28 member states and an additional 22 countries in its Partnership for Peace Programme. Defending them from invasion is most of its scope and remit.

          Preparing not to be invaded is a very good idea.

          • One Two 1.1.1.1.1
            12 July 2016 at 10:53 am

            Partnership for peace…

            Defending them from invasion…

            Good grief some people are thick headed

            • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1.1.1
              12 July 2016 at 11:10 am

              The 4,000 NATO troops now stationed on Russia’s doorstep have basically been put there by western countries as sacrificial trip wires.

              In a shooting war with Russia, all 4,000 NATO troops would be dead in the first two hours of fighting as Russia rolls 90,000 men across the Baltics.

              The real issue that Russia has is with the “missile defence shield” which has been based in Romania. Within the next few years, that system will be upgradeable to nuclear tipped NATO warheads able to reach Moscow and St Petersburg within minutes of launch.

              NATO is actively destabilising the security of its own member states. That is not the purpose of its existence. But apparently selling more arms to more countries is.

          • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1.2
            12 July 2016 at 11:05 am

            That’s utter fucking bullshit Ad.

            NATO’s mandate is to protect the security and military integrity of its member states.

            Not to take actions which destroy the strategic balance in Europe. Nor to undermine the security of its core members and station offensive nuclear weapons on Russia’s doorstep.

            And this is what NATO has been doing by expanding right up to Russia’s borders.

            Frankly, if NATO does not accept that Russia has legitimate national security and foreign policy interests in Europe that need to be taken into account, then a war will be inevitable.

            And a war in Europe is going to hurt everyone except the United States who are conveniently far away across the Atlantic moat.

            In reality Europe and Russia are natural political, economic and trading partners.

            But a military alliance, NATO has acted to undermine all this natural political and economic partnership in favour of what the German foreign minister calls “loud sabre rattling and warmongering” against Russia.

            Not surprised that with your attitude, you’re a Clinton supporter.

            • Peter Swift 1.1.1.1.2.1
              12 July 2016 at 11:13 am

              Says Putin’s predictable pussy lol

              • Sabine …
                12 July 2016 at 11:19 am

                please leave pussies out of this.
                prick would be the better word.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  12 July 2016 at 11:22 am

                  What are your thoughts? Russia would far prefer to be economic, political and security partners with western Europe instead of China.

                  Culturally, economically, and in terms of trade and energy, good relations with Russia would benefit both Europe and Russia immensely.

                  But no, let’s just destabilise the borderlands of Russia, encourage Muslim militancy on its doorstep, and push NATO bases right next to the Russian border.

                  • Peter Swift …
                    12 July 2016 at 11:39 am

                    Across the caucuses, from South Ossestia to Crimea, Georgia to Ukraine, Russian aggression is common knowledge.

                    If independent sovereign nation states want or need the protection of Nato, then there is no issue. Those nations have the right to be protected from Putin’s little war games.

                    If you don’t accept free nations have the right to be protected from a larger aggressor, then you’ve just shown a nasty little chink in your armour.

                • Peter Swift …
                  12 July 2016 at 11:23 am

                  “please leave pussies out of this.
                  prick would be the better word.”

                  http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j355/OutCider2/pussy_zps8qxdz1kb.jpg

                  • marty mars …
                    12 July 2016 at 12:37 pm

                    Wow Peter – you are taking it up or down a level with that shit – hard to tell when using the creepy scale

                    • Peter Swift …
                      12 July 2016 at 1:02 pm

                      Creativity and humour make for great social commentary. Up or down is all relative to the beholder, but the satire stands all the same.

                      You seem like such a man wimp lol

                    • marty mars …
                      12 July 2016 at 1:57 pm

                      A wee hint cos you’re posting like some out of date lab mp – putting lol after everything you say is silly – use it fleetingly for effect.

                    • McFlock …
                      12 July 2016 at 2:04 pm

                      lolololol

                    • Peter Swift …
                      12 July 2016 at 3:38 pm

                      “putting lol after everything you say is silly – use it fleetingly for effect.”

                      Looking at how you get rattled and cry off in arguments almost every time you’re challenged, I’ll take your hint under advisement.

                      lol

              • One Two …
                12 July 2016 at 11:24 am

                Another insightful contribution from Peter Stalker Smith

                Do you forsee a time when you might post a purposeful comment, or is it the stalking which lifts your skirt?

                • Peter Swift …
                  12 July 2016 at 11:28 am

                  That’s twice you’ve followed one of my posts, and though I don’t consider it stalking, you may wish to practice what you preach, or not. lol

                  If responding to cv’s negative bullshit dogma is so upsetting, ask cv to stop writing negative bullshit dogma.

                  • Sabine …
                    12 July 2016 at 11:44 am

                    look i don’t much care about CV, he does his shtick and that it is.
                    But frankly please leave gendered insults out of it. Call him a prick if you must, it would suit him. But this stupid flaming of the both of you is getting very very boring.
                    Now we not only have to scroll by the Nat bots , but by you two guys as well. Just boring.

                    • Ad …
                      12 July 2016 at 11:59 am

                      You use gendered insults regularly.
                      Stop it yourself before you ask it of others.

                    • Peter Swift …
                      12 July 2016 at 12:12 pm

                      For the record, Putin’s pussy isn’t a gendered insult, but refers to CV being a pet/tool of Putin as in the picture link, so not an inferred/implied slang word for vagina.

                      Of course I could altogether avoid upsetting the fragile sensibilities of others and just use Comrade kitty or Catkinski instead.

                    • Sabine …
                      12 July 2016 at 4:49 pm

                      @Ad – no reply button
                      i don’t think i call people a pussy, interfering a lower being i.e. female or in this case a play thing of putin or ‘sextoy’ of putin.

                      Calling someone a prick cause they are? Guilty as charged. But again, i hardly call women pricks. 🙂

                    • Peter Swift …
                      12 July 2016 at 5:26 pm

                      “i don’t think i call people a pussy, interfering a lower being i.e. female or in this case a play thing of putin or ‘sextoy’ of putin.”

                      Where the F did you get sex toy from?
                      That’s bizarre. 🙂

            • Ad 1.1.1.1.2.2
              12 July 2016 at 11:58 am

              I thought you’d love that one.

              I was contemplating an entire post defending the US and NATO. Maybe another time.

              But a related, further tweak for you:

              Plenty on the left and right have heralded a great U.S. imperial collapse for over a decade. But the reality when decline is in your face is scary. That’s why those post-Soviet countries went running to NATO in the first place. Unlike the Soviets, no-one was holding a gun to their heads. Quite the contrary, which is the point.

              Let’s start imagining the Britain dissolves into four states, held together with duct tape. Less and less to defend, less and less to be defended with. Less and less for the US to bother defending.

              Starts getting pretty cold out there doesn’t it? Starts feeling just a little like what the Baltic states are feeling after Azerbaijan and Georgia and Ukraine essentially fell.

              The parallels inside a post-Brexit Britain compared to the original purpose of the EU, also remind us of why NATO was formed in the first place in 1949 as the Cold War was getting going. Russia in particular needs constant reminders that there will be no rolling troops and tanks over anything.

              • Colonial Viper …
                12 July 2016 at 2:05 pm

                That’s why those post-Soviet countries went running to NATO in the first place. Unlike the Soviets, no-one was holding a gun to their heads. Quite the contrary, which is the point.

                Get your facts right Ad.

                These countries wanted closer economic ties with the EU and greater prosperity for their peoples.

                And they were told, if you want closer ties with EU, the precondition is that you join our military alliance NATO first.

                Not only that, but you also have to start to sever your ties with Russia.

                This was a deliberate western strategy to destabilise the military strategic status quo on Russia’s door step.

                Now I ask again – how has it become NATO’s mandate and mission to destabilise the security of its own member states while chasing new members right up to the Russian border?

                Also, the US operates plenty of regime changing NGOs in eastern europe, just like it does in central and south america.

                • Stuart Munro …
                  12 July 2016 at 10:21 pm

                  Poland is an interesting case though – strong historical reasons to not want Russian influence. Many of the eastern bloc have equally developed antipathy – irregardless of US aims. I don’t think a forcible reabsorbtion up to the borders of Germany can be considered benign. Putin needs to hear the waspish voice of one of the NPC nations in my old videogames “Learn to be content with what you have…”

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    12 July 2016 at 10:31 pm

                    Russia does not want poor rundown Poland. But it especially does not want Poland turned into a staging post for antagonistic military forces and US nuclear weapons pointed at it.

                    The be satisfied with what you have line is a good one – but NATO didn’t listen to it 20 years ago and they aren’t listening to it now.

            • swordfish 1.1.1.1.2.3
              12 July 2016 at 1:43 pm

              Through some kind of bizarre rupture in the space-time continuum, this thread seems to have been transported back to the Red Scare of the late 40s/early 50s.

              Aggressive Godless Communism destroying all we Americans hold dear. God-Damn filthy Ruskies !!! Is there no end to their Evil ways ??? Thank God for those moral exemplars – US Elites (and in Ad’s case, the Vatican) – riding selflessly to the rescue and stopping this dangerous virus from spreading and infecting innocent God-fearing men and women throughout this great Country of ours. USA !, USA !, USA !

              You might ask: “Say, what can we do about this Evil Red virus ?”
              Why, Mister, the answer is clear – surround those God-Damn Ruskies with a whole heap’n help’n of Nukes right on their God-Damn doorstep. That’ll stop their aggression in its tracks and halt the dangerous Domino Effect real good.

              Or … as Monty Python put it …

              Voice Over “So Miss Johnson returned to her typing and dreamed her little dreamy dreams, unaware as she was of the cruel trick fate had in store for her. For Miss Johnson was about to fall victim of the dreaded international Chinese Communist Conspiracy. (lots of little yellow men pour into the office) Yes, these fanatical thieves under the leadership of the so-called Mao Tse-tung (who appears in the animation) had caught Miss Johnson off guard for one brief but fatal moment and destroyed her. (Miss Johnson is submerged in a tide of yellow men) Just as they are ready to do anytime free men anywhere waver in their defence of democracy.

              (A sailing ship with American flag sails in over yellow men. Zoom in on the flag: Uncle Sam appears in front of it)

              Uncle Sam Yes, once again American defence proves its effectiveness against international communism. Using this diagram of a tooth to represent any small country, we can see how international communism works by eroding away form the inside (diagram of tooth rotting from inside and collapsing) When one country or tooth falls victim to international communism, its neighbours soon follow. (the remaining teeth fall sideways into the gap) In dentistry, this is known as Domino Theory. but with american defence the decay is stopped before it starts and that’s why nine out of ten small countries choose American defense … ”

              [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGv2wqJJmbc&w=640&h=360%5D

              • Colonial Viper …
                12 July 2016 at 3:20 pm

                The west is so incredibly propagandised.

                America apparently cares so much about the people of Georgia and Crimea and the Donbass that it is now NATO’s duty to: destabilise Russia’s borderlands, place nuclear capable missile systems pointed right at Russia, and move in extra destroyers and aircraft carriers to further militarise the region.

                Because turning up with more weapon systems shows that we care, apparently. The neocon doctrine.

                • Peter Swift …
                  12 July 2016 at 3:51 pm

                  Spoken like a true believer, comradeski.
                  Ever thought of crowd funding for a one way ticket to moscow?

                  And to think, in an alternate universe, you could have been a labour mp.
                  No wonder they got shot of you.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    12 July 2016 at 4:13 pm

                    I love the fact you are using my former Labour Party candidacy against me. Formerly Labour is one of the biggest political parties in NZ.

                • Ad …
                  12 July 2016 at 4:18 pm

                  Just in a meeting but will come back and really really tweak you all shortly.

                  • Ad …
                    12 July 2016 at 5:08 pm

                    One of the few things I like about Brexit is how it’s giving a shake to all kinds of old postwar institutions, including NATO. Those late-joining EU nations will be recalculating exactly why they signed up in the first place.

                    I think we all needed that recalibration.

                    A decade ago we were expecting that, together with the collapse of Imperial U.S., the BRICS would rise in power and start to replace the old Western dominance in diplomatic, military, and economic terms.

                    Not so fast, it turned out.

                    Those old post Cold-War dynamics have got a long way to run. In South Africa, Brazil, and Russia, corruption and governance failures have proved catastrophic. China’s growth is trending rapidly downwards from 6%. The U.S. retains its power, and remains the driving force behind NATO. The EU and the old-power relationships have quite some endurance left.

                    In fact, Further Tweak Alert, when it comes to catalyzing global action and providing the decisive voice in whether any problem gets addressed at a global level – Russian invasion, Islamic State, Climate Change, Ebola, etc etc – no other country’s say comes close to Washington’s.

                    Brexit + Russia + EU radicalization across Europe’s borders has been a stark reminder to Obama’s administration that the pivot to Asia was very poorly framed.

                    Rather than a series of rotating pivots that seem to rapidly cancel each other out, Washington needs to perfect a 360-degree model of leadership. It’s not impossible for a really experienced new President to achieve. After all, if US diplomats can balance negotiations about a freed-up Cuba, a nuclear-free Iran, a carbon-reduced climate, and free trade agreements, then they can parallel that kind of working spectrum in their regional defence overtures as well.

                    And now, I’ll see you tomorrow.

                    I must invent an Adbusters persona.

  2. lprent 2
    12 July 2016 at 8:38 am

    There was a hard disk failure this morning. The rebuild was somewhat aggressive because the spare disk was somewhat slow and it effectively stopped the site.

    I’ve tuned it down so it takes longer, but has less disruption. However the site will remain a bit sluggish for a while.

    I’ll probably wind up fixing that array in the next few days so that rebuilds aren’t that much of a problem.

  3. Andre 3
    12 July 2016 at 8:42 am

    Interesting view of Hillary the working politician as different to Hillary the campaigner. A long read but worth getting through.

    http://www.vox.com/a/hillary-clinton-interview/the-gap-listener-leadership-quality

  4. Ad 4
    12 July 2016 at 8:56 am

    Does Bernie Sanders represent the future of the Democratic Party?

    FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver does the breakdown on whether this really is a 1968 moment. Do Sanders’ supporters really represent a strong leftwards drift within the Democratic Party, or are they are in majority more dissatisfied with the other candidates?

    He has an interesting statistical breakdown on where this is going, here:

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/does-bernie-sanders-represent-the-future-of-the-democratic-party/

    • aerobubble 4.1
      12 July 2016 at 9:50 am

      10% own 50% but pay only 37%? Is this true, coz thats dynamite, that means not only that progressive taxation has be done away with but that we over incentivize wealth. Wealth just gets wealthier while everyone else carries them by paying some of their taxes. aka slavery, aka serfdom, aka K.Marx and das capital. Amd you wonder why our kids cant get into housing, wealth is buying it up and cutting our wages coz we dont pay mortgages. This is not what the right or left stand for, yet both parties are incapable of speaking the truth, no representation without taxation, we should not be representing the needs of wealth while they are not paying their way.

  5. b waghorn 5
    12 July 2016 at 10:11 am

    If only the nats promises that they would lift wages for all had of hadn’t of been bullshit, more of us wouldn’t need the employers wage subsidy programme that working for families is.

    • b waghorn 5.1
      12 July 2016 at 3:31 pm

      odd not sure how this reply to lost sheep ended up all alone, i wasn’t ranting to myself , honest.

  6. Greg 6
    12 July 2016 at 10:32 am

    here’s something some of you might find interesting:

    The Employment Court had found that:

    a) any evidence of systemic undervaluation of the work in question derived from current or historical or structural gender discrimination must be taken into account; and

    b) evidence of wages paid by other employers or in other industries could be taken into account if wages paid by the defendant employer or other employers in the same industry would be an inappropriate comparator

    http://www.humanrights.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/e-bulletins/2015cases.html#21d0b719f24091a427ded1d7539a9fd7

  7. aerobubble 7
    12 July 2016 at 10:32 am

    Neo-lib neo-cons, are not capitalists, not pure capitalists ideologues, no as we are now seeing, they want to reintroduce aristocracy. Superior rights for wealthier individuals. Sure while we were seeing ongoing cheaper energy, they could look like market egalitarians, but was just show, they were shifting the tax burden onto the plebs. Lord Key, Lord Little, Lord Peter, paid lordly salaries and aren’t interesyed in talking about the real crisis, sure they have to articulate the stressed areas, but big picture the trnds are not being talked about. in energy costs, in taxation rises on the plebs, on how lower standards and rorting are a consequence of Thatcherite hands off approaches to governance.

  9. save nz 9
    12 July 2016 at 11:22 am

    +++major implications about public and the police here, technology assassination on domestic soil using military weapons +++

    A frightening precedent: Can we talk about the Dallas police using a bomb robot to kill a man?
    The Dallas PD using a bomb robot to kill gunman Micah Johnson has opened the door to a new world of policing

    http://www.salon.com/2016/07/11/a_frightening_precedent_can_we_talk_about_the_dallas_police_using_a_bomb_robot_to_kill_a_man/

    • Puckish Rogue 9.1
      12 July 2016 at 11:45 am

      This is a good thing, it kept other police from potential harm. If you don’t like this are you ok with police using pistols, using rifles, snipers?

      All kill at a distance, all require a human to pull the trigger, push the button, make the decision to kill etc

      • save nz 9.1.1
        12 July 2016 at 12:44 pm

        Isreal/ Palestine here we come. Likewise Egypt and the muslim brothers.

        Really good idea to flame race tensions in the US! It will really work for them to abandon the legal system and just start blowing guilty black people up with robots. sarc.

        • Puckish Rogue 9.1.1.1
          12 July 2016 at 1:18 pm

          What is the difference between sending in a robot with a bomb, controlled by a policeman on the other end, to the police shooting someone from 300 meters away?

          • adam 9.1.1.1.1
            12 July 2016 at 2:23 pm

            “What is the difference between sending in a robot with a bomb, controlled by a policeman on the other end, to the police shooting someone from 300 meters away?

            Both are wrong.

            That why you should support pesky little things like trials. And getting to the truth of the matter, rather than the usual knee jerk revenge killing that sucks us all further and further down the rabbit hole.

            The cause of this was because police have become too cavalier in their killing of people. Just to remind you. As you seemed to have forgotten.

            • Puckish Rogue 9.1.1.1.1.1
              12 July 2016 at 2:56 pm

              You are wrong and here’s why you’re wrong. There are times when police have to kill someone, when they’re given no other option but to take someone’s life.

              So to say the police shouldn’t kill anyone ever is just naïve.

              Yes taking someone alive is always preferable but it isn’t always possible. So yes if a life has to be taken by the police then if it can be taken without harm to the police then that would be the best option.

              This man showed how well prepared he was, how well trained he was so until anymore information is known I have no issues with the police taking the man down and that they managed it without harming themselves or anyone else is a good thing, a very good thing.

              • Colonial Viper …
                12 July 2016 at 6:17 pm

                The police may have conducted a paramilitary assassination in a civilian setting.

                Let’s see if there is a full investigation into the decision made to use a remote controlled vehicle borne IED to kill this man.

                This technique is an anti-insurgency technique used in Iraq by American soldiers to kill Islamic fighters.

                • gsays …
                  12 July 2016 at 6:34 pm

                  This discussion is more evidence of the propaganda peddled so much in the west.

                  The PTB control the framing of how we are to see the issue.

                  ‘The police had no choice’.

                  ‘He was well prepared..’.
                  Only coz that is what we are told.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    12 July 2016 at 6:43 pm

                    At that point in the night, who was the perp posing an imminent threat to, is one question.

                    If the answer was no one – then why was he killed?

                    They say that police negotiators had been talking to him. Had they been genuinely negotiating with him – or had they actually just been stalling so that this IED bearing robot could be put together and used on the perp.

                    BTW apparently we aren’t propagandised in the west, that only happens in poor brown countries with dictators.

              • adam …
                12 July 2016 at 6:44 pm

                You Sir can’t see the woods for the trees.

                Ignoring a escalation and ignoring the revenge nature of the killing is the problem.

                I was talking specifically about this case, but also to the revenge killings that the cops currently have a filthy peachement.

                So again Puckish Rouge you refuse to look at this slow destruction of society by a police force unable to do the job without murder.

              • North …
                12 July 2016 at 10:02 pm

                Patently unfair there PR…….Adam said police have become “too cavalier” in their killing of people. Your comment completely ignores what he actually said and puts words into his mouth, to satisfy your strange self.

                Have you watched the Baton Rouge execution ? The man is on the ground, completely contained, under two cops. The one nearest the camera pulls his gun from its holster, he places it about an inch above the man’s heart, waits, and then fires. He intended to execute the man. He acted in leisurely, beastly, deliberation. I would not weep, indeed I would rejoice were someone to execute him !

              • North …
                12 July 2016 at 10:02 pm

                Patently unfair there PR…….Adam said police have become “too cavalier” in their killing of people. Your comment completely ignores what he actually said and puts words into his mouth, to satisfy your strange self.

                Have you watched the Baton Rouge execution ? The man is on the ground, completely contained, under two cops. The one nearest the camera pulls his gun from its holster, he places it about an inch above the man’s heart, waits, and then fires. He intended to execute the man. He acted in leisurely, beastly, deliberation. I would not weep, indeed I would rejoice were someone to execute him in equally summary fashion !

      • Stuart Munro 9.1.2
        12 July 2016 at 10:30 pm

        The least the cops could’ve done is stun bombed him first. Plenty of time to use HE if that fails.

        US cops have a different legal framework to NZ, here we still have some of the doctrine of equivalent force. No, I don’t want armed police, though Korea manages it without them going psycho. Guns for AO squad only – they have the training and the maturity.

  10. Puckish Rogue 10
    12 July 2016 at 11:34 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11673027

    I’d like to take this seriously but I really can’t

  11. Puckish Rogue 11
    12 July 2016 at 11:39 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11672797

    Now be honest, does anyone here think this guy might, you know, be not completely wrong in some of his theories?

  12. Redbaiter 12
    12 July 2016 at 12:04 pm

    Donald Trump is as popular in the US today as Hillary Clinton. Some polls say he may even be more popular.

    Both Trump and Clinton are Democrats. They differ from each other only because Clinton is politically correct and Trump is not.

    Trump’s relative success is down to his rejection of political correctness, and this is a move that is not only bringing support to Trump but also to many other politicians around the western world. The voters are fed up with political correctness.

    Shame the NZ Labour party is too reactionary to adapt to this mood. If they could, it would increase their voter appeal substantially.

    • Sacha 12.1
      12 July 2016 at 5:58 pm

      Curse all people who believe in respect for others, I say. They have no place in geriatric Tauranga society. And Winston is a socialist.

    • Colonial Viper 12.2
      12 July 2016 at 6:11 pm

      RCP average of polls has Clinton 4.5 points ahead of Trump.

      I am still picking an easy Trump win in November.

      • ropata 12.2.1
        12 July 2016 at 7:10 pm

        Trump is a more extreme version of John Key, there’s not much to like there. The only thing I like is his rejection of Wall Street and advocacy for Main Street, and strengthening the middle-class. Unfortunately his actual policies (lower taxes, repealing ObamaCare) will probably kill the middle class.

        Hillary is a cold, calculating villain in the vein of Tony Blair but without the charisma, a total puppet of the Establishment elite. She makes Trump look left wing.

        I guess Americans say “In God we trust” because their politicians are so terrible.

      • North 12.2.2
        12 July 2016 at 10:10 pm

        Picking ? You mean ‘hoping’ don’t you CV…….shitty little anarchist don’t have a fucking clue where your home is anymore, you. Ever wondered about how boringly unintelligible is your Big Fat Can of Bitter Feelings ?

    • ropata 12.3
      12 July 2016 at 7:38 pm

      Almost right RB. What the masses across the western world seem to be fed up with is the whole political process. (PC is just a subset of that).

      For at least the last 35 years since Reagan/Thatcher (and arguably longer) western governments have pillaged their public treasuries and public assets in the name of neoliberalism, and all of the gains in productivity from others hard work has accrued to the accounts of the top 1%

      Despite attempting to elect governments that work for the people, we just have a revolving door that perpetuates the same economic shit.

      The NZ Labour party needs to do the opposite of what you say.

      Sticking to their founding social-democratic principles, Labour will restore its appeal to people who actually care about NZ, and have a conscience.
      (see also the movements around Sanders, Corbyn, (early) Obama)

    • Rodel 12.4
      12 July 2016 at 8:39 pm

      Doncha love it when the right pretends to instruct the left about what the lefties should do to win votes?…and people who still use obsolete language..’political correctness’ is sooo 20th century.’.

  13. Draco T Bastard 13
    12 July 2016 at 12:40 pm

    The political logic of desire

    There has been no shortage of opportunities to puncture this image, with breathtaking scandals revealing the ‘true nature’ of Key’s post-politics. Nevertheless, in the face of hypocrisy, cynical manipulation and character failings, the public have defied rational civic expectations either in their disinterest or in their rallying around Key. As enjoyment and desire become central to sustaining Key’s base, his popularity should force the left to question some of its rational humanist conceptions.

    That article makes so many hits it’s hard to know which bit to quote.

  14. Fair Dup 14
    12 July 2016 at 1:49 pm

    Keep up the good work CV.
    To all you American loving, neolib ( third way ) labourites – two things….
    1) The USA lost its way in 1944 when FDR died and has been an horrific military machine ever since both overtly and covertly. Their model of capitalism has failed their own country and the rest of the world.
    2) Give up pretensions that neoliberalism is working for the people the Labour Party is meant to represent – its not. Period. Get back to your founding principles.

    • North 14.1
      12 July 2016 at 10:18 pm

      CV’s ‘work’ is bitterness. And bated breath masochistic anticipation of a Trump presidency. Fucking mad !

  15. adam 15
    12 July 2016 at 1:54 pm

    Interesting times. Black Lives matters keep protesting, and the police keep over reacting. This is going to get out of hand again.

  16. Puckish Rogue 16
    12 July 2016 at 3:50 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/82021018/keep-our-assets-run-john-minto-as-christchurch-mayoral-candidate

    One way to guarantee Lianne Dalziel getting back in I suppose but good on him for giving it a go

  18. Sacha 18
    12 July 2016 at 5:55 pm

    Auckland mayoral candidate loses latest court case, is offered standard deal to defer rates payments until sale or death: http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/penny-bright-loses-appeal-over-34k-in-unpaid-rates-2016071215

  19. Chooky 19
    12 July 2016 at 6:23 pm

    Maybe Brexit was a shrewd economic move:

    ”Europe is extremely sick’, says Deutsche Bank chief economist’

    https://www.rt.com/business/350622-european-banks-crisis-deutsche-bank/

    “Brussels urgently needs a €150 billion bailout to begin a major recapitalization program for its banks, according to Deutsche Bank’s David Folkerts-Landau.

    In the aftermath of UK’s Brexit vote, the focus of attention has switched to Italy’s banking sector, which has accumulated €360 billion in bad loans, and growing.

    A former member of the ECB executive board Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, and now chairman at Societe Generale, has warned the banking crisis in Italy could spread to the entire EU.

    “Europe is extremely sick and must start dealing with its problems extremely quickly, or else there may be an accident. I’m no doomsday prophet, I am a realist,” he said in an interview to Welt am Sonntag.

    According to Folkerts-Landau, Brussels should follow Washington’s steps that helped US banks with a $475 billion bailout.

    “In Europe, the bailout does not need to be so large. A €150 billion program should be enough to help European banks recapitalize,” he said.

    The decline in bank stocks is only the symptom of a much larger problem, which is low growth, high debt and dangerous deflation, Folkerts-Landau added…

  20. Jenny 20
    13 July 2016 at 3:44 am

    Yes it is true, even John Key* disagrees with Donald Trump when it comes to climate change.

    http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-vs-the-world-on-the-climate-crisis-1917224058.html

    *(Not that he will do anything about it. Making it hard to determine which type of leader is more morally corrupt.
    One who persists in denying the reality in spite of all the evidence, or one who admits the reality and then knowingly and willingly oversees a huge increases in his country’s greenhouse gas emissions, in spite of all the evidence. And in spite of commitments he gave to the Pacific Nations at Majuro.)

    http://www.21stcentech.com/climate-change-update-majuro-declaration-climate-leadership/

  21. Jenny 21
    13 July 2016 at 4:10 am

    What did John Key sign our country up to in Majuro in 2013?

    Clauses H and I

    We commit to be Climate Leaders.

    To lead is to act. In supporting this Declaration, a government, economic entity, company, civil society organization or individual commits to demonstrate climate leadership through action that contributes to the urgent reduction and phase down of greenhouse gas pollution.

    http://www.21stcentech.com/climate-change-update-majuro-declaration-climate-leadership/

    Perfidy

    pəːfɪdi

    noun literary

    The state of being deceitful and untrustworthy.
    “it was an example of his perfidy”
    synonyms: treachery, duplicity, deceit, perfidiousness, deceitfulness, disloyalty, infidelity, faithlessness, unfaithfulness, betrayal, treason, falseness, falsity, double-dealing, dishonesty, two-facedness, untrustworthiness, breach of trust; More

    https://www.google.co.nz/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=perfidy%20definition

  22. Jenny 22
    13 July 2016 at 5:13 am

    From Wikipedia; Climate Change New Zealand page.

    A survey carried out in 2007 on climate change gave the following responses:
    [115]

    Not really a problem 8%

    A problem for the future 13%

    A problem now 42%

    An urgent and immediate problem 35%

    Don’t know 2%

    In August 2012, a Horizons poll showed that 64.4 per cent of respondents wanted Parliament to do more to respond to global warming. 67.5 per cent of respondents wanted business to do more to address global warming. Horizons commented that the poll “makes a strong case for more political action”.
    [116]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_in_New_Zealand

    In the 2007 poll if you add, “A problem now” to “An urgent and immediate problem” you get 77% of those polled. Since that poll, and the 2012 poll that found that over 60% wanted parliament and business to do more on climate change, climate change has become much more apparent, and the future for humanity and life on this planet is looking decidedly dire to anyone who cares to see.

    I imagine that the figures are much higher now, than the 70 or 60 percent published figures of a few years ago.

    These are the sort of figures that political gurus and advisors should be noting. They are much higher than the winning margins enjoyed by either the government or the opposition.

    But what have we seen?

    In the 2011 and 2014 elections climate change was virtually universally ignored as an election issue, and it looks likely that this will be repeated again in the 2017 elections.

    Climate change is the government’s worst performing portfolio. with the possible exception of housing. It is an issue where the government could take some real hits from the opposition parties.
    Unlike housing insecurity, climate change is a problem for all people, even more conservative and well off voters. This reality has been reflected in the recent conversion of the Right Wing ACT Party from being the last hold out of climate deniers in parliament to, in the words of David Seymour the ACT Leader, “Lukewarmist”. Meaning (I presume), that like John Key and the National Government, ACT accepts the reality of climate change, but opposes doing anything about it.

    This opens up real possibilities for the opposition parties.

    (So far), instead we have seen virtual silence

    Will the opposition parties accept the challenge?

    Or are they also so deeply enmeshed and tangled up with the fossil fuel lobby that they will again let this opportunity go by?

    What will it take?

    The alarms are deafening and we are trapped in a burning house.

    Will it take a major disaster for our parliamentary leaders to untangle themselves from the fossil fuel lobby?

    Let us hope that real action on climate change does not have to wait to be paid for in blood (by which time it may be too late), and that the opposition parties will take this fight to the government.

    • gsays 22.1
      13 July 2016 at 8:39 am

      Hi jenny, the big problem is the public say they want the government to do something, however any meaningful change would render the party unelectable.

      The public didn’t want asset sales and voted for a party that campaigned on selling them.

      The public thought a CGT was needed but rejected it at the polling booth.

      The way I see it I the change must come from the flax roots. From those of us with spare time and other resources.

      For an few years now I have been adjusting for a societal change.
      I heard and agree it is easier to fall from the footpath to the gutter than from the penthouse.

      It’s the folks in the penthouse and the upper floors who will be resisting any meaningful change.
      All the government

      • Jenny 22.1.1
        13 July 2016 at 11:19 pm

        “…. the big problem is the public say they want the government to do something, however any meaningful change would render the party unelectable.”
        gsays

        Hi gsays, the big problem is the public have never been given the chance to make that decision.

        People have never had the chance to vote on climate change issues.

        You never know they might surprise you.

        It is what is called leadership.

        On every major policy aspect of the climate issue National and Labour are in agreement. And the Green Party people have told me, in no uncertain terms, that they will not be embarrassing the Labour Party over this, especially now that the MoU has been signed.

        http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-climate-change-policy-a-vote-winner-for-majority-of-australians-20160513-gouwbf.html

        http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/04/27/3773105/climate-change-wedge-issue-2016/

        https://citizensclimatelobby.org/laser-talks/politicians-can-win-climate/

        https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/26/our-democracy-has-been-bought-to-win-on-climate-we-have-to-take-it-back

        It is my opinion that the first political party that finds the courage needed to stand up to the fossil fuel lobby and run on this issue will do well, and probably better than they normally would.

        The demands should be simple and clear.

        ‘No new coal mines’

        ‘End deep sea oil drilling and all other extreme fossil fuel technologies’

        ‘End all subsidies for fossil fuel companies’
        Instead plough that money into providing a just transition for the workforces of these industries to jobs that don’t fry the planet.

        ‘Scrap the plans for a multi-lane motorway tunnel under the Waitemata’

        ‘Swap the $11 billion set aside for more motorways into public transport instead’

        ‘Ratify the Majuro Declaration on Climate Change in parliament’

        http://www.21stcentech.com/climate-change-update-majuro-declaration-climate-leadership/

        • Jenny 22.1.1.1
          14 July 2016 at 6:42 am

          It amazes me really all the reasons and excuses that are given that our political representatives cannot champion the fight against climate change.

          gsays “unelectable” claim, (not backed up with any evidence) is the same claim that is made for Corbyn or Sanders. The real fear is that these people and the causes they champion are very electable.

          And so all measures fair and foul must be used to keep them off the ballot.

          The same with climate change.

          My fear is that the 2017 election will be the same as 2014 election, and the 2011 election, and by the time our political classes finally wake up to the threat and start to campaign on doing something about it, it will be too late.

        • gsays 22.1.1.2
          14 July 2016 at 9:04 am

          i agree with all the suggestions made:
          no new coal mines or oil wells, no new roads and invest in public transport etc.

          you are right, it is called leadership and wellington is woefully short of leaders.

          more like a bunch of managers, administraters and toughers, all with an eye on the latest polling to see what their opinions are this week.

          meanwhile i will keep doing the little red hen antics: who will help plant this seed, who will help harvest this food ?