Open mike 12/10/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, October 12th, 2015 - 113 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 …

113 comments on “Open mike 12/10/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. The Chairman 1
    12 October 2015 at 7:01 am

    Can we expect to see Little come under fire from the media this week for his comments (opposing the TPP) on Q&A?

    • David H 1.1
      12 October 2015 at 10:07 am

      It’s already started, our esteem liar in chief on TVNZ’s brekkie channel having a go. but sounding a little hysterical in my book.

      • maui 1.1.1
        12 October 2015 at 10:33 am

        Oh yes, I forgot it was propaganda monday on our glorious state television. There will be tales from the vacation of our leader taking on a hundred infidels at once, on his own of course.

      • The Chairman 1.1.2
        12 October 2015 at 11:06 am

        It’s an attempt to paint Labour as radicals, turning off the mainstream as seen with Corbyn in the UK.

        Moreover, it’s an attempt to get Labour to tow the neoliberal line.

        Although National don’t require it, they would prefer Labour’s support.

  3. Manuka AOR 3
    12 October 2015 at 7:12 am

    “Almost four tonnes of oil has spilled into New Zealand’s harbours and oceans since the Rena disaster.” http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/72344235/death-by-a-thousand-cuts-nzs-oil-spill-record-revealed (Why is the media so quiet about this?)

  4. miravox 4
    12 October 2015 at 7:23 am

    A good day – despite the refugee crisis, anti-immigrant fear-mongering, uncertain economic times and a State election that was supposedly too close to call – ‘red’ Vienna remains red (infused with a little green).

  5. keepLeft 5
    12 October 2015 at 7:44 am

    A common-sense solution to Auckland’s housing!!!

    Socialise housing! Let’s bulldoze all the rich pricks mansions and replace them with standard houses built by the State! Replace all housing with standard state houses! No more rich in mansions while the rest of us are cramped in hovels! This is why we need to revolt now! The rich better watch their back when the revolution comes! I pick they they won’t of course. But the day will come I guarantee!

    • les 5.1
      12 October 2015 at 7:49 am

      if thats what you regard as common sense …see a doctor.Your unrealistic ‘solutions ‘ will find no favour right or left…or is that your intention!

    • adam 5.2
      12 October 2015 at 12:47 pm

      I have a problem bulldozing them.

      Keep them standing, just move families into them.

      • Once was Tim 5.2.1
        12 October 2015 at 5:55 pm

        Alternatively, buy up a bit of land in Remmers and Khandallah and elsewhere (Papanui, etc.) and build a few PUBLICLY owned houses on it (PUBLIC as opposed to ‘state’).
        The residents in those ‘burbs can hardly complain can they since we’re told just what an egalitarian soity we are, AND we jiss dunno hear lucky we are.
        I won’t hold my breath though – there’d be a cacophony of pig like squeeling before that ever happens.
        Stroke me a pony tail will ya Adam!

  6. Sirenia 6
    12 October 2015 at 9:01 am

    Where are the ‘democracy is under attack’ headlines for this news of gross environmental degradation by a regional council?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/opinion/72886964/backtracking-regional-council-must-be-taken-to-task–rachel-stewart

    • weka 6.1
      12 October 2015 at 9:32 am

      very good piece from Stewart.

      Everyone enrolled to vote is allowed to vote in regional council elections. So why are regional councils still stacked with pro-industrial farming, pro-pollution types instead of with people who give a shit about the region beyond how much mon is to be made?

      • Puddleglum 6.1.1
        12 October 2015 at 9:51 am

        “Everyone enrolled to vote is allowed to vote in regional council elections”

        Where regional council elections are held, of course 🙂

        Where such councils are not “stacked with pro-industrial farming” types elections tend not to be held. A case where democracy is apparently too dangerous for the national interest by far.

        Which is an interesting insight into how some people, at least, come to define the ‘national interest’.

        • weka 6.1.1.1
          12 October 2015 at 10:44 am

          Ah yes, of course. Although I think that the situation was more complex than the election of the pro-environment councillors, wasn’t it?

          • Puddleglum 6.1.1.1.1
            12 October 2015 at 1:14 pm

            Things are always ‘more complex’ so I tend to focus on ‘necessary and sufficient’ conditions.

            From that perspective, ECAN councillors would not have been replaced, I suspect, if there wasn’t concern that such councillors were a threat to the exploitation of Canterbury’s water.

            The government has said as much in defending its original decision and subsequent extensions of Commissioner-led governance.

    • savenz 6.2
      12 October 2015 at 11:50 am

      + 1 Sirenia – excellent link.

      That is another way our democracy is under attack through litigation at local body level. Think how much more frightening it will be under TPP.

      Public groups spend a lot of money to take a public issue to court, win and then the losers and council collaborate to make the court order meaningless by ignoring it.

      The planning officers at councils are out of control. They are stupid and have too much power and not enough oversight.

      The farmers are being encouraged by the council to break the district plan against the environment court ruling.

      Lets see how ports of Auckland play out. Similar thing – councils and planners are working against the public to give corporate welfare against the rules at the cost to ratepayers.

    • John Shears 6.3
      12 October 2015 at 11:50 am

      Sirenia, Thanks for that important reference to the disgusting pollution that has been allowed to occur in that area.
      Aucklands Upper Harbour was to be the overflow receiver for the North Shore Rosedale Treatment Plant but a number of concerned residents stood their ground and that danger is no longer a possibilty.

  7. greywarshark 7
    12 October 2015 at 9:05 am

    A good message to be writ large on a placard where Turnbull can see it.

    Hello, hello
    AUSTRALIA
    our
    GOOD FRIEND.
    And the R in friend would have a backward slash – so it reads fiend.

  8. Draco T Bastard 8
    12 October 2015 at 9:31 am

    • ianmac 8.1
      12 October 2015 at 10:50 am

      Bilateral Investment Treaties not decided by democratically elected people like our Government, but by International Lawyers. But it is binding on the Government. And “hidden” inside so-called “Trade Deals.”
      Like the TPP. Bastards.
      Thanks Draco but more sleepless nights!

      • ianmac 8.1.1
        12 October 2015 at 10:58 am

        So when politicians promise to bring in a new tax or a new law once the Treaty is signed, they cannot carry out the promise because they could be sent to Arbitration at huge cost. No choice. No appeal.
        Hell’s Bells!

        • ianmac 8.1.1.1
          12 October 2015 at 11:07 am

          And Arbitration is actioned by just 15 lawyers (55%) who are sometimes for and sometimes against the issue. Obviously our own Courts are rubbish. Really?

        • The Chairman 8.1.1.2
          12 October 2015 at 12:44 pm

          Alternatively, ianmac, Governments may avoid legislating in a certain manner (or promising too) to avert the possibility of arbitration.

          • Bill 8.1.1.2.1
            12 October 2015 at 1:16 pm

            So whatever thin shadow of democracy we have to be hog-tied and bound by the threat of binding arbitration carried out by three of a select group of corporate law firm lawyers? Jolly good.

            • The Chairman 8.1.1.2.1.1
              12 October 2015 at 3:22 pm

              That’s correct. The possibility of arbitration will be in the minds of policy creators (with potential challenges hanging overhead) putting them off selecting certain policies.

    • Bill 8.2
      12 October 2015 at 12:33 pm

      That was very long, but very, very good.

      Clear, concise…no jargon. Hugely accessible. Thanks.

  9. Draco T Bastard 9
    12 October 2015 at 9:42 am

    The world economic order is collapsing and this time there seems no way out

    Yet there is a parallel collapse in the economic order that is less conspicuous: the hundreds of billions of dollars fleeing emerging economies, from Brazil to China, don’t come with images of women and children on capsizing boats. Nor do banks that have lent trillions that will never be repaid post gruesome videos. However, this collapse threatens our liberal universe as much as certain responses to the refugees. Capital flight and bank fragility are profound dysfunctions in the way the global economy is now organised that will surface as real-world economic dislocation.

    To put it succinctly: Our economic system is delusional.

  10. Puckish Rogue 10
    12 October 2015 at 9:47 am

    Have I been banned again or in moderation?

    [ I’ll go check if you’ve been banned, will I? This and your previous comment were in moderation. Don’t be feeling special there though, it’s randomly happening to a few folks this morning] – Bill

  11. NZSage 11
    12 October 2015 at 9:58 am

    I see Avaaz.org has targeted New Zealand as the country to stop the TPPA.

    https://secure.avaaz.org/en/tpp_2015_loc_nz/?tIkRubb

    This is a global petition and at the time of writing had attracted almost 300,000 signatures.

    Admirable piece of work by Avaaz but given our PM ignores the result of official referenda by his own citizens, I can’t see this having any impact.

    • weka 12.1
      12 October 2015 at 10:53 am

      thanks joe.

    • maui 12.2
      12 October 2015 at 11:42 am

      What an amazing story. In a New Zealand context this would be like outcasting Peter Snell if he was outspoken on a political issue. I draw that comparison because both Norman and Snell still hold respective national records for their events over 50 years later! Normans is probably more impressive as its a sprint event, its more contestable, and a black dominated sport.

  13. greywarshark 13
    12 October 2015 at 11:09 am

    Coming soon in Auckland – this Wednesday to be specific:

    Rod Oram

    ‘Follow the money – the future of business journalism’

    Wednesday 14 October

    The feeble state of business journalism in New Zealand and around the world is but a subset of journalism’s general decline. To try to survive financially, many media organisations are increasingly blurring the distinction between journalism and advertising, devaluing both in the process. Yet, there has never been a more important time for business journalism.

    Profound change is sweeping through business and economics and the societies they help shape. Journalists should be trying to explain what’s happening – the good and the ill – for the benefit of participants and public alike.

    Wednesday 14 October, 6pm

    Maidment Theatre, 8 Alfred Street, The University of Auckland

    Doors open at 5.45pm, lecture starts at 6pm. The Maidment Bar will open from 5pm

    Koha
    There will be a collection for donations, so please bring some cash. This is a key fundraising opportunity for us.

    If you can’t make it to the lecture but would like to support our work you can make a donation via the website.

    There is street parking – which after 6pm is free. If none available – car park buildings as follows:
    Parking at Owen Glen building 16 Grafton Road, and a walk up the hill to theatre I think.
    There are mobility car parks around see map.
    http://www.maidment.auckland.ac.nz/en/maidment/contact/location-map.html
    Info. on transport, street parking etc
    http://www.maidment.auckland.ac.nz/en/maidment/plan-your-visit/parking-and-transport.html

    • tracey 13.1
      12 October 2015 at 11:15 am

      Donation to whose work?

      • greywarshark 13.1.1
        12 October 2015 at 11:23 am

        The work of the Bruce Jesson Trust, which holds a lecture each year by a leading thinker and has these available on line for later perusal.

        It also runs an annual competition for journalism excellence – and I think this is for encouraging young journalists particularly, not sure, and I think also applies to publications involving research.

        More details on their website – google Bruce Jesson.

  14. Puckish Rogue 14
    12 October 2015 at 11:49 am

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html

    If its true then bye bye to his election chances, of course if its not true then Corbyn can always sue the telegraph

    • weka 14.1
      12 October 2015 at 12:01 pm

      This might help you understand PR.

    • tracey 14.2
      12 October 2015 at 2:00 pm

      You see PR, you are not really a centrist but maybe a populist. Did you ever vote for the last Clark led Labour Government?

      • Puckish Rogue 14.2.1
        12 October 2015 at 2:48 pm

        No I couldn’t, while Helen Clark had/has some very good qualiaties I admire there were things like WFF that felt like far too much like middle-class bribery for me

        Of course its now so entrenched and National lacks the cajones to change it that we’re stuck with it…

      • Puckish Rogue 14.2.2
        12 October 2015 at 3:03 pm

        I wasn’t ok with the bribery of WFF so couldn’t vote for Labour…and now its so entrenched that it’d be electoral suicide to take it away

        • tracey 14.2.2.1
          12 October 2015 at 3:13 pm

          well my friend you are no centrist then… 😉

        • Psycho Milt 14.2.2.2
          12 October 2015 at 3:21 pm

          I also was livid at the ‘bribery’ of WfF – weaseling out of doing something to improve wages by offering a tax credit that was effectively a low-wages subsidy to employers, what a crappy thing for the party of labour to come up with.

          I suspect your reason for annoyance with it was different from mine, though…

          • Draco T Bastard 14.2.2.2.1
            12 October 2015 at 3:34 pm

            +1

          • tracey 14.2.2.2.2
            12 October 2015 at 3:40 pm

            It was a way to say they were helping the poor and vulnerable while actually assisting a numbe rof the so-called middle NZ

          • Puckish Rogue 14.2.2.2.3
            12 October 2015 at 3:46 pm

            Your point is valid, I just thought it was a straight up bribe to the middle class

          • alwyn 14.2.2.2.4
            12 October 2015 at 4:33 pm

            According to the studies reported by the Economist the benefits are split so that about 75% goes to the employee, and only about 25% to the employer.
            It is also much more efficient than is an increase in the minimum wage which appears to go, surprisingly, disproportionally to the better off.
            It is also unlikely to cause the loss of jobs that a high minimum wage can cause.
            See
            http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21659741-global-movement-toward-much-higher-minimum-wages-dangerous-reckless-wager?zid=309&ah=80dcf288b8561b012f603b9fd9577f0e

            • McFlock 14.2.2.2.4.1
              12 October 2015 at 5:08 pm

              Lol
              So now the “minimum wage increase increase unemployment” mantra is replaced by a sudden concern that it’ll disproportionately help the top 10% of households.

              You know what? I don’t care. If the richest households are demonstrably better off, they can pay higher taxes when that becomes evident.

              The only objection to minimum wage that was worth a damn was that a rushed increase would be a false improvement, hiding increased unemployment behind slightly higher wages for those lucky enough to keep their jobs. Glad to see that bullshit has expired and been replaced by an irrelevancy.

              • alwyn …
                12 October 2015 at 5:14 pm

                I suggest you read it again.
                I says that low levels of a minimum wage don’t have short term effects on unemployment BUT that the long term effects are unknown as are high levels of the minimum in comparison to the average.
                You have to read it right through.

                • lprent …
                  12 October 2015 at 5:30 pm

                  …that the long term effects are unknown as are high levels of the minimum in comparison to the average.

                  Why would anyone serious be interested in the effects on “average” incomes||wages? That includes people on high incomes who don’t feel effects from minimum wages. That means that increases in minimum wages will show little change in average wages in any society with severe inequalities in incomes (ie like NZ).

                  Shouldn’t anyone who was serious about looking at the effects be interested in the changes on median incomes||wages?

                  Furthermore, minimum wages at both low and high levels have been present in various economies for more than 50 years. Surely any credible study would consider that to be a good enough base line to draw some results from across a number of economies. I’d suggest that either the authors were talking out of their illiterate arseholes, or they were trying for making political or ideological point.

                  Perhaps you should re-read whatever you are talking about, because you aren’t making a good case for getting me to read it.

                  • alwyn …
                    12 October 2015 at 10:37 pm

                    Gee, I made a slip.
                    I typed “average” when I meant to type “median”, in line with the article.
                    That appears to fix the thing you object to, doesn’t it?
                    After all you say that “Shouldn’t anyone who was serious about looking at the effects be interested in the changes on median incomes||wages”.
                    Since that appears to be the main thing you are complaining about, perhaps you will now decide to spend some of your time and will look at the link? It isn’t very long. I doubt it will take more than three minutes to read it right through.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      12 October 2015 at 10:58 pm

                      The Economist article you cite says that activists in the US have succeeded in getting politicians to support a $15 minimum wage without once mentioning Seattle.

                      I wonder why.

                    • lprent …
                      13 October 2015 at 9:00 am

                      I am always concerned at the numbers of people who appear to not understand the difference between median and average in skewed distributions.

                      I might find time later to scan it. But right now I’m late heading to work.

                    • Tricledrown …
                      13 October 2015 at 9:21 am

                      Alwyn repeating Murdoch’s mantra.
                      OECD figures prove you wrong.
                      OECD research on the US economy state by state,show that those states with the highest minimum wage have the lowest unemployment!
                      Also states with the highest taxes have the most economic growth!
                      States with Ring wing governments ie Republican and tea party govts have the highest unemployment and lowest growth!

                    • alwyn …
                      13 October 2015 at 7:00 pm

                      To OAB @ 10.58.
                      Mostly to avoid stretching out the article to infinity I suppose.
                      The did mention Seattle, Los Angeles and San Francisco in a previous article that they referenced from the one I linked to.
                      It was at the point “article” here.
                      “several big cities, including New York this week, plan to phase in a $15 minimum wage, and Hillary Clinton’s two rivals for the Democratic nomination support the policy (see article). ”
                      I think you are seeing to many conspiracies.

                • McFlock …
                  12 October 2015 at 5:31 pm

                  yeah I saw all that “accelerating into a fog” nonsense.

                  But a few years ago the tory meme was that it would distort the wage supply and demand curve and increase unemployment, no distinction between short and long term, and adamant about the religious doctrine.

                  It took years for real world research to demonstrate that not only was the prediction false, in several studies unemployment actually decreased (e.g. NJ hospo and minimum wage). Feel free to use the minimume wage tag to see how the discussion has evolved on this website.

                  So now we’re supposed to be afraid of long-term unknown unknowns being predicted by the same crowd who previously predicted immediate and serious harm? Excuse me while I just press harder on the accelerator. It’s fun watching you squirm for no reason.

                  Here’s the other thing: if a living wage genuinely disproportionately favoured the top 10%, it would already be National Party policy. If tories believed their own shit, of course.

            • Draco T Bastard 14.2.2.2.4.2
              12 October 2015 at 5:48 pm

              Yeah, there’s good reasons why I don’t read the Economist – generally speaking, they’re usually wrong.

    • greywarshark 14.3
      12 October 2015 at 3:27 pm

      I used to think that PRs pseudo was a turnaround of Ruckish Pogue and that the Pogues were Irish so the last comment prompted me to google but no The Pogues were from London. But I put up a link to them anyway. They seem a bit more entertaining than PRs search for truth. Struth!

  15. Whispering Kate 15
    12 October 2015 at 3:16 pm

    Just a bit of light relief. I apologise in advance to any offended R.Catholics among us. I spied today on Trade Me a hugely amusing portrait of John Key in the solemn traditional pose of Jesus of the Sacred Heart, but replacing where the sacred heart should be is a dollar sign. The title is “The Transmogrification of John Key” and the number to look up on the Trade Me site is 960113553 if you wish to read how the artist describes it – unfortunately the portrait has already gone under the hammer. I see its going to also be printed off into posters – I wonder how long it will be before it is taken out of circulation under the guise of the cyber bullying bill because of poor John’s injured sensibilities.

    All praise to the artist, we need some more of this type of satirical art circulating – I think the painting says it all.

    http://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/tq/416384467.jpg

  16. Morrissey 16
    12 October 2015 at 5:22 pm

    Radio NZ management seems to have discouraged analysis of the secret TPPA talks.
    So why does Jim Mora continue to claim he has been discussing it?
    The Panel, Radio NZ National, Monday 12 October 2015
    Jim Mora, Irene Gardiner, Bruce Slane, Zoe George

    After indulging in banal, painfully long-winded and unnecessary reintroductions to Bruce Slane and Irene Gardiner, who are regular guests, the host moved on to the first topic for the once-over-lightly treatment….

    JIM MORA: [apologetically] Just a little bit at the start: we’re probably all TPP’ed out….

    That’s crap, of course. The most “serious” discussion of these top-secret talks consisted of the hapless University of Waikato “international law expert” Al Gillespie intoning pompously: “To a degree we have to trust the government.” [1] Otherwise, on the rare occasions this exercise in governmental contempt for the population has even been mentioned, it has received no more than a derisory half a minute or so of comments pretty much identical to the learned Professor Gillespie’s. Appalled, I sent the less than honest host the following email…

    How can you be “all TTP’ed out”?

    Dear Jim,

    After the 4 o’clock news you claimed, not for the first time, that “we’re probably all TPP’ed out.”

    In fact you, or more likely your producers, have hardly dealt at all with that vital topic. You have, by stark contrast, chosen to chat about the flag “debate” almost every day. [2]

    If, as it seems, Radio NZ management has discouraged you from treating the issue seriously, please say so, and stop pretending that you have given the TPPA more than a few cursory comments.  

    Yours sincerely,

    Morrissey Breen
    Northcote Point

    [1] http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04092015/#comment-1066917
    [2] http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-01102015/#comment-1077187

  17. stigie 17
    12 October 2015 at 5:33 pm

    I suggest Labour walk away from it….It can only benefit National.

    [lprent: And that has nothing to do with the post and appears to be made purely as a diversion flame starter.

    Moved to OpenMike and you are banned for two weeks. Read the policy. ]

  18. Draco T Bastard 18
    12 October 2015 at 5:58 pm

    And the present UK government has just authorised their pilots to fire upon Russian aircraft:

    As relations between the West and Russia steadily deteriorate, Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots have been given the go-ahead to shoot down Russian military jets when flying missions over Syria and Iraq, if they are endangered by them. The development comes with warnings that the UK and Russia are now “one step closer” to being at war.

    RAF Tornado pilots have been instructed to avoid contact with Russian aircraft while engaged in missions for Operation Shader – the codename for the RAF’s anti-Isis work in Iraq and Syria. But their aircraft have been armed with air-to-air missiles and the pilots have been given the green light to defend themselves if they are threatened by Russian pilots.

    “The first thing a British pilot will do is to try to avoid a situation where an air-to-air attack is likely to occur — you avoid an area if there is Russian activity,” an unidentified source from the UK’s Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ) told the Sunday Times. “But if a pilot is fired on or believes he is about to be fired on, he can defend himself. We now have a situation where a single pilot, irrespective of nationality, can have a strategic impact on future events.”

    Anybody would think that they’re trying to start WWIII.

    • Draco T Bastard 18.1
      12 October 2015 at 9:57 pm

      RAF Tornados

      The front page of today’s Star on Sunday speculates that RAF Tornados bombing ISIL targets in Iraq are to be armed with air-to-air missiles to protect them from attack and that RAF pilots have been cleared to fire on hostile Russian jets. The Sunday Times features a similar story and quotes a military source who is alleged to have said “up until now there has been no or little air-to-air threat, but the situation has changed and we need to respond accordingly”.

      An MOD spokesperson said:

      There is no truth in this story.

      • McFlock 18.1.1
        12 October 2015 at 10:22 pm

        Possibly giving air to air defences to British aircraft?

        Anyone would think russian radars had been locking onto NATO aircraft or something… /sarc

        • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1.1.1
          12 October 2015 at 10:43 pm

          The MoD statement is a laugh: of course they’re “ready” to attack hostile aircraft. Are they going to do dogfights with Vlad? Um, that’s unlikely, това́рищ.

      • maui 18.1.2
        12 October 2015 at 10:48 pm

        Far from keeping their country men and women safe, western media generally has a death wish by spreading lies and provoking other countries on our behalf. That goes for our media too as they just repeat the overseas stuff. I would say in a lot of instances they are more dangerous than the military. John Pilger’s doco – The War on Terror – truth & lies, is a good starting point for anyone who wants to know more.

  19. sabine 19
    12 October 2015 at 6:08 pm

    completely and utterly unreatlated to anything

    beautiful music via a friend from france

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaZT3I3Zd1Q&index=4&list=RDxa3uPdlFwSI

    Fatoumata Diawara fome Mali, currently living and working in France.

    Enjoy!

  20. Chooky 20
    12 October 2015 at 6:36 pm

    ‘Donald Trump links vaccines to autism ‘epidemic’ ‘

    http://www.businessinsider.com.au/donald-trump-vaccines-autism-2015-9

    “Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump during Wednesday’s presidential debate linked vaccinations to what he called an autism “epidemic.”

    Trump said autism rates have risen over the past few decades, becoming “an epidemic,” and that he’s had employees whose children became autistic after taking vaccines.

    “You take this little beautiful baby, and you pump — I mean, it looks like just it’s meant for a horse and not for a child,” Trump said. “We had so many instances [in which] a child had a vaccine, and came back and a week back had a tremendous fever, got very very sick, and now is autistic.”….

    • northshoredoc 20.1
      12 October 2015 at 7:19 pm

      DNFTT

      • One Anonymous Bloke 20.1.1
        12 October 2015 at 10:51 pm

        That doesn’t work, Doc. It just cedes ground.

        • McFlock 20.1.1.1
          12 October 2015 at 11:01 pm

          I dunno – in this case it’s a trump quote, it speaks for itself 🙂

        • weka 20.1.1.2
          12 October 2015 at 11:42 pm

          “It just cedes ground.”

          Only if the person was actually trolling. As opposed to say making a comment that you disagree with/think is stupid/don’t like.

          I mean, I thought the comment was pretty daft myself, but it doesn’t fit normal definitions of trolling.

        • northshoredoc 20.1.1.3
          13 October 2015 at 2:12 pm

          Fair point, however Chooky’s postings and the back and forth on this particular issue just seem to be a rallying call for morons to bring out the same old anti vaccination arguments again and again despite those arguments having been debunked numerous times.

  21. Muttonbird 21
    12 October 2015 at 7:28 pm

    National Party shill, David Farrar, is polling the six possible outcomes of the two flag referenda.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/10/rank_the_six_possible_new_zealand_flags.html

    Pity he can’t even bring himself to call the New Zealand flag the New Zealand flag.

    This of course is just another mechanism to try to devalue the New Zealand flag. This sort of behaviour and these sort of attacks on the flag of New Zealand will only increase over the Summer.

    But…

    …oddly enough, Farrar has created this six way poll in direct contradiction to the two stage process he and his masters prefer. In fact, he’s created this poll in the very image the Labour Party has advocated.

    Not sure where Farrar is getting his advice on this but he looks even more stupid than usual.

    • Srylands 21.1
      12 October 2015 at 11:36 pm

      I am sure DPF is acting independently and taking instructions from nobody as usual. Posts on Kiwiblog are not subject to directions from his clients.

      • Stuart Munro 21.1.1
        13 October 2015 at 2:43 am

        I wonder how you came by that piece of information; didn’t he do what your boss asked?