Open mike 16/10/2013

Written By: - Date published: 6:30 am, October 16th, 2013 - 258 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy). Step right up to the mike…

258 comments on “Open mike 16/10/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. phillip ure 1
    16 October 2013 at 7:40 am

    so..the mayor has had an affair..

    ..could someone remind me..

    ..why i should care..?

    phillip ure..

    • tinfoilhat 1.1
      16 October 2013 at 7:42 am

      I don’t know why have you chosen to post about it ?

      • phillip ure 1.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 7:52 am

        um..!..tinfoil..yr sentence can be read with two meanings..

        ..cd u plse clarify..?

        ..phillip ure..

        • tinfoilhat 1.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 8:02 am

          I don’t know why you personally should care ?

          I only know why I personally care as I reflected on whether it would have made a difference to who I voted for if they had been found to have behaved in this manner … and it would have.

    • The Al1en 1.2
      16 October 2013 at 7:46 am

      You don’t have to care, but the mayor of AK can’t be trusted or taken as a man of his word, which may or may not be of some importance to voters in his electorate.

      • Colonial Viper 1.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 7:50 am

        “You don’t have to care, but the mayor of AK can’t be trusted or taken as a man of his word”

        In that case, thank grod I’m not married to him.

        • The Al1en 1.2.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 7:57 am

          I’d have his balls in a jar and a lawyer drawing up the papers.

          • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 8:21 am

            Take a European leaf mate, this shit happens, it happens A LOT, and spouses need to figure out together what they want to do next and if its worth continuing.

            • Chooky 1.2.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 8:43 am

              CV +1…and they don’t need the interference of 1) the Moral Majority( outmoded Christian fascists) or 2)prissy frustrated Catholics( you know that hypocritical Church of sexist Papists and perverts with a direct line to God)..or 3)wannabe Mana Party Mayors like John Minto, who would never get in as Mayor anyway, and who does a better hatchet job on Brown on National radio than the vested interests and right wingers who set Brown up in the first place)

              Brown should stay…and he should be judged on what he has done as a Mayor for Auckland ( He was elected in with a huge majority …remember).

              His family should stick together, if that is their will…and not let the ‘moral’ mud -slingers cause a family tragedy.

              The Europeans are far more sophisticated then the Americans on this…We live in New Zealand not USA….let us make up our own minds and give Brown a chance…( and btw…who would replace him?)

              • Rosie …
                16 October 2013 at 9:27 am

                Exactly CV and Chooky. It’s interesting that we come over all uppity on the moral high ground and recover some long lost religious type outrage about Len Brown having an affair when we can turn a blind eye to the immorality of say, the way beneficiaries have been treated under the Bennett regime.

                If this had happened to a poli in France, no body would have raised an eyebrow, but as it happens you could have mistaken Cameron Slater for some hick being interviewed for Fox news, if last nights new was anything to go by. This is Little America now, so maybe we take on their fake morals too, and this is reflected in the media coverage this situation is receiving. Or maybe NZer’s are so small minded that they want to be scandalised by something like this.Either way, it’s hardly news worthy.

                His affair is for him and his family to deal with. It’s nobody’s business but theirs. The only time you need to be concerned about affairs is if and when it happens to you.

        • Ennui 1.2.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 8:48 am

          CV, this “grod” entity of whom you speak…….does he too whip into other mens “virgin” wifes in order to start a religion? Was he watching Len? Who can we trust?

      • phillip ure 1.2.2
        16 October 2013 at 7:51 am

        “..a man of his word..”

        um..!..reality-check here for you..

        ..he is a politician..eh..?

        ..so..by his very nature..etc..

        ..i repeat..so fucken what..?

        ..i cd criticise brown all day long..for his incrementalist-approach to the urgencies we confront..

        ..i just don’t see what this (moralistic) fuss is all about..

        ..i mean..do people really believe what politicians say to them..?

        ..i know i fucken don’t..

        ..phillip ure..

        • The Al1en 1.2.2.1
          16 October 2013 at 7:55 am

          He’s a politician, what a cop out argument.
          Used on here last night a few times excusing his deceit.

          There’s nothing moralistic about it. It is about politicians being trusted.
          You don’t need that from your pollies, okay, good on ya.

          • phillip ure 1.2.2.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 8:02 am

            perhaps you could define for us allen..

            ..just how/where browns’ affair..

            ..has any impact on his abilities to do his job..?

            ..and..how are you not outing yrslf as a moralistic-bluestocking..?

            ..and as a comparison-marker..

            ..how wd you rate yr outrage over banks’ dodgy-dealings around political-donations..?

            ..mm..?

            ..phillip ure..

            • The Al1en 1.2.2.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 8:05 am

              No, you’re his defender, you tell us how a man who lies to his wife for two years can keep a level of trust amongst the wider community in the job of mayor and all it entails?

              Re Banks: Fuck off and do your research.

              • David H …
                16 October 2013 at 8:32 am

                “Re Banks: Fuck off and do your research”

                Why so nasty ? He only asked for you to rate your outrage level.

              • phillip ure …
                16 October 2013 at 8:35 am

                so..allen..u r all 4 politicians being totally open about their sex-lives..?

                ..how far do you take it..?

                ..should brown interrupt press-conferences on say..whatever..to confess to present reporters..

                ..that while in the shower that morning..

                ..he committed infidelity with his hand..?

                ..(and in this case – it is a multi-faceted/nuanced exhortation..

                ..but..get a bloody grip..!..eh..?..)

                ..and re yr banks-reaction..?

                ..heh..!..eh..?

                ..no untoward penises to be seen there..eh..?..

                phillip ure..

                • The Al1en …
                  16 October 2013 at 9:00 am

                  Here’s the thing. If Len has nicked some money from the public purse, even a hundred dollars, he’s be gone before breakfast because the ‘trust’ would be gone forever. Of that we must all agree, regardless of how one eyed we are being for the team.

                  Interesting then that a two year deceit is viewed as less bothersome by an elected official as pinching a hundy.

                  • McFlock …
                    16 October 2013 at 11:27 am

                    If an elected official misappropriates funds, trust is not involved.

                    It is professional misconduct and should be detected by standard accounting practises, and directly affects the organisation’s ability and reputation for being able to fulfil its role.

                    Sticking your dick in a consenting adult might be shit for your personal life, but it is not misconduct and does not affect the organisation’s ability to fulfil its role.

                    • Rogue Trooper …
                      16 October 2013 at 11:31 am

                      What A Great Cuntry?

                    • the Al1en …
                      16 October 2013 at 11:37 am

                      It’s all about trust and now Len doesn’t have any.
                      Defend him, mitigate and minimise if you must, but it won’t change a thing.

                      ps You can always have a mini stalk-a-thon until you think you;ve won, but I’m at work til later, so don’t be offended if I don’t come rushing in with a snap back 😉

                    • McFlock …
                      16 October 2013 at 12:15 pm

                      Why is being an elected official “all about trust”?

                      If they don’t do the job, they get overruled by their colleagues. If they do really badly, they get voted out. Simple. Don’t project more onto the relationship than actually exists. Like ’em, then vote for ’em. Don’t like ’em, don’t vote for ’em.

                      ps: I get to work with a broadband connection, lucky me 😉

                • Chooky …
                  16 October 2013 at 2:18 pm

                  phillip ure….lol

            • David H 1.2.2.1.1.2
              16 October 2013 at 8:30 am

              @phillip…
              I don’t have any outrage.

              I don’t care if Lenny has been dipping his wick all over town. What I WOULD care about is, has it impacted on his ability to do his job ? A: NO

              And the only drawback is he will waste a lot of time talking to the deaf and blind idiots that are our MSM.

              • Tracey …
                16 October 2013 at 9:10 am

                I dunno, that’s alot of time he could have been spending working for auckland or with his family, or are we only talking a couple of minutes each time.

                • Chooky …
                  16 October 2013 at 2:26 pm

                  @ Tracey…what you call a “quickie”…Bill Clinton specialised in them…..provides stress relief on the job!

                  ( But politicians should beware!….especially Left politicians….Somehow they always seem more vulnerable….and the Right always seems better able to shrug the scandals off or sweep them under the carpet….Maybe the difference is that the Left does not have the equivalent of the ruthless hunters and scandal mongers like Slater et al))

                • greywarbler …
                  16 October 2013 at 2:48 pm

                  Tracey
                  It is important that politicians don’t get fat and have heart disease and die before their time like Norm Kirk. Brown was actually using his time well – working out in a very effective and satisfactory way. Getting sweaty and relieving tension at the same time.

                  Thinking about working more efficiently, ways of multi-tasking – I’ve forgotten how many minutes it has been calculated that we spend waiting at traffic lights in our lifetime. Time which could be used for neck massage relieving stress and preparing for the next round of talks with central government partners.

                  And while driving to and from work, he could probably run through all the points he wants to make on the agenda for both the morning’s and afternoon’s meetings. I understand that some of those beamers in Wellington have massage units built in to the seats – so many ways of enhancing sharpness of mind and work effectiveness.

          • AsleepWhileWalking 1.2.2.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 8:13 am

            Sex is only a small part of being trustworthy. It’s naive to expect complete morality from any human being. If you want to continue expecting that from your pollies…

            • The Al1en 1.2.2.1.2.1
              16 October 2013 at 8:15 am

              Yeah, the same he’s a politician cop out.
              NZ, you can do a lot better.

            • Tracey 1.2.2.1.2.2
              16 October 2013 at 8:29 am

              Some people will always wonder if someone can lie to their wife and others around them for 2 years, what else do they lie about. If we dont expect higher standards from our pollies we will continue to get lower standards.

              CV and I have disagreed on this before, and will again I am sure.

              Mission accomplished though, Banks is off the front pages.

              • Colonial Viper …
                16 October 2013 at 8:42 am

                Shall we have a clean out of Parliament then? Both National and Labour MPs have had extramarital affairs. And they run the whole country!!!

                No, this is a very bad US politics road to go down, there are zero redeeming features to it.

                I understand your view point, but down this road lies madness.

                • Tracey …
                  16 October 2013 at 8:50 am

                  “Both National and Labour MPs have had extramarital affairs. And they run the whole country!!!”

                  Could go a long way to explain the current state of “affairs” in this country… a country shaped by self centred people lacking self discipline and ethics. 😉

                  Yesterday Slater acted as a mirror.

                  Let’s agree to disagree fella?

              • The Al1en …
                16 October 2013 at 8:46 am

                Tracey: On the money as I see it.

                • Chooky …
                  16 October 2013 at 2:32 pm

                  @ Tracey @ The Allen….Lets just get the Catholic Church to run the country ….. as they used to do during the Inquisition….they are celibate and they dont have extramarital affairs do they?!….

                  • The Al1en …
                    16 October 2013 at 4:03 pm

                    I’m not a god squad kind of man, so the pious angle is wasted on me.

                    I’m coming at it straight from political perception not the immaculate conception. I’m not part of any moral minority and have no vested interest, I don’t even live in Auckland so have no voter rights or sensibilities to be offended or cajoled.

                    Should Brown resign and there be a new ballot, for me, yes and yes.
                    I neither care if you agree or disagree, if trust your pollies or not, or even if you appease and excuse the mayor of the countries largest city having a secret two year long affair, each to their own and all that, but it does show a real lack of judgement on his part, and an insight into his character that isn’t pleasant to see in anyone.

                    Whether trust is transitive or not, his lack of respect for his family probably is, especially as far as the wider community is concerned. Unscientific as they are, all the web polls I’ve seen so far seem to support this theory.

                    • Chooky …
                      16 October 2013 at 4:34 pm

                      @The Allen…Loosen up!!!! ….ok you wouldnt do it….I wouldnt do it….lots of people wouldn’t do it……( not on the job and not in that way…we would be too cautious, or have too much loyalty, or be too sensible, or have too much self control)…..But does that make us better people?…Would that make us better Mayors?.

                      ….no one is perfect….and there are far worse things…what he did was consensual and it sounds like he was ‘set up’ ….. and he never had any intention of leaving his wife…he broke it off!

                      The issue is was he a good Mayor?…an overwhelming number of voters said “YES” ……just leave it at that….otherwise it becomes a moral witch hunt…and it wont do his family any good

                    • fender …
                      16 October 2013 at 5:00 pm

                      Al1en, How do you know the Browns don’t have an open marriage, and all he’s done that requires an apology is not having told his wife earlier, or carried it on too long?

                      Should he still resign?

                    • The Al1en …
                      16 October 2013 at 5:11 pm

                      To be fair they said yes without knowing he was a love cheat.

                    • The Al1en …
                      16 October 2013 at 5:15 pm

                      Judging by the tv interview I’d guess no to the notion of open marriage, but hope that poor lady doesn’t read these pages if not, it would just compound her hurt. Last night there were comments like she might have had an affair herself :rolledeyessofartheycamebacktheotherway:

                    • fender …
                      16 October 2013 at 5:22 pm

                      They’re not eyes….they’re little lights that blink…

                    • Rogue Trooper …
                      16 October 2013 at 5:34 pm

                      Meaney O’Br1an

                    • The Al1en …
                      16 October 2013 at 5:38 pm

                      They’re not rose tinted, that’s for sure 😉

              • Chris …
                16 October 2013 at 6:33 pm

                “Mission accomplished though, Banks is off the front pages.” Tracey

                precisely .

          • muzza 1.2.2.1.3
            16 October 2013 at 8:21 am

            TA – Politicians can’t be trusted, wake up, it’s not new, what are you on about!

            This is how the system works, its arms up backs, and threats, plain and simple!

            The fact that the system has turned on one of it “brothers” is interesting though!

            • The Al1en 1.2.2.1.3.1
              16 October 2013 at 8:47 am

              Indeed, and when they’re caught out they should go.

              • Treetop …
                16 October 2013 at 3:24 pm

                Allen, had Brown denied the affair he would be run out of office not because of having the affair but because of lying about it.

                Brown needs to stay to fight the dirty tricks because this is what is behind the affair coming out. Any dirty tricks on Browns part e.g. were he involved in any intimidating or harrassing txts I would throw him to the wolves because I would find this to be unacceptable from an elected mayor.

                It is not illegal to have an affair, neither is it illegal to deny having had an affair.

                I get it when you say that being able to trust an elected high profile politician is important to you. It comes down to the individual person on what breaches the trust for them. For some it is an affair when married, for others it is denying the affair, for others it would be being involved in intimidating or harrassing txts (the latter is unproven to date).

                I do not like double standards e.g. two years ago a security guard who worked for the council got sacked because of having sex on council premises. However there was not a dirty tricks brigade behind the secuirty guards job.

                Brown having sex on council premises maybe an employment issue and he has himself to blame. When it comes to the dirty tricks brigade they never play fair because it is about a grab for power and innocent people get hurt and you never know how or who they are.

          • McFlock 1.2.2.1.4
            16 October 2013 at 11:14 am

            It’s not a cop out argument.

            Trust has nothing to do with being a representative.

            Look, I used to be responsible for securing items of value. A shit system would have relied on me being trustworthy. As it was, trust never came into it because the system was designed with checks, balances and audit trails. Not only did I behave properly in my role, I was seen to behave properly in my role. Have I always behaved properly in my personal life? No. But the systems in that job were set up to make it very difficult for me to behave improperly, even if I had wanted to.

            Democracy has councillors, legal frameworks, and voters who can challenge the mayor if he behaves improperly in his role (not mentioning the 4th estate as it’s been on holiday for the last decade or two).

            Trying to discern professional integrity from someone’s personal life is unreliable at best, and an excuse for fetishistic voyeurism and public harassment at its worst.

      • weka 1.2.3
        16 October 2013 at 11:24 am

        “but the mayor of AK can’t be trusted or taken as a man of his word, which may or may not be of some importance to voters in his electorate.”

        Trust isn’t transitive. Being untrustworthy in one’s marriage doesn’t mean that one is untrustworthy in one’s job. One of course can be untrustworthy in both, but they’re not necessarily related in the way you imply.

        • Ennui 1.2.3.1
          16 October 2013 at 12:50 pm

          Aha Weka, the good old selective morality argument…we can compartmentalize? Of course my mother told me tales of leopards and spots, and she is a very wise woman. And some prior seer asked those without sin to throw the first stone. I suppose if we are all sinners the question becomes “do we genuinely seek redemption?”

          • Rogue Trooper 1.2.3.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 1:01 pm

            well, if you watch a mechanic rebuild enough engines, in time, you’ll know where the starter goes. 😀

          • weka 1.2.3.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 2:42 pm

            “Aha Weka, the good old selective morality argument”

            No, that is a different thing. The issue was whether someone was trustworthy, not whether they were moral or not.

            Google “trust is not transitive”, read the article on airplane pilots, and come back and tell me if when you fly in a plane you want the pilot to be someone who doesn’t cheat on their spouse, or someone who is very good at flying planes safely, and whether those two things are related.

            • Ennui 1.2.3.1.2.1
              16 October 2013 at 3:28 pm

              I always trust the pilot, regardless of his/her morals….killing yourself is fairly self selective, the passengers don’t really come into the equation.

              • weka …
                16 October 2013 at 3:33 pm

                And yet we know that there are pilots that drink and fly for instance, so their sense of self-preservation is not really the issue.

                • Ennui …
                  16 October 2013 at 4:04 pm

                  Do we know? I don’t or I would not fly. It is going to look really good as I burst into the cockpit prior to take off to demand an answer though.

                  • Rogue Trooper …
                    16 October 2013 at 5:39 pm

                    wearing a towel.

                  • weka …
                    16 October 2013 at 9:47 pm

                    Perhaps you could tell me what you are on about? I replied to someone else about trust not being transitive. You brought up selective moralilty, but haven’t clarified why.

            • The Al1en 1.2.3.1.2.2
              16 October 2013 at 3:36 pm

              That’s okay, I’m not suggesting you’re not allowed to trust Len any more, just saying I don’t because he’s proven to be very untrustworthy over a sustained period.

              In politics that’s poison.

              • Treetop …
                16 October 2013 at 4:00 pm

                That’s fine because that is how you feel and only you get to speak for you.

              • Ennui …
                16 October 2013 at 4:01 pm

                Leopard spots and personal choice!

              • ScottGN …
                16 October 2013 at 6:51 pm

                How has Len proven to be untrustworthy over a sustained period? Were questions over this affair put to him during the campaign? Did he mislead us about that? Has he lied to Aucklanders at any point about this affair? The fact is (to paraphrase Simon) you didn’t trust him from the start. And if it’s poison in politics you’re after well the ashen face of Key at his stand-up today might be a good place to look.

                • weka …
                  16 October 2013 at 9:49 pm

                  +1.

                  Or to put it another way, if trust were transitive, then someone lying at work would mean their spouse could no longer trust them in their marriage. Doesn’t make sense though, does it.

    • vto 1.3
      16 October 2013 at 7:50 am

      because our leaders are people to look up to?

      because our leaders represent the very best of humankind?

      because he is Christian, or some other religion with rules about fidelity?

      because if he is subject to the whims of the devil then how can we trust him to do the right thing for the community?

      none of the above?

      you shouldn’t care at all and most people don’t. Because most political leaders are very very average people who do the same things as the rest of us and have no more brains or pieces of wisdom in their heads about anything at all.

      that is why you shouldn’t care

    • northshoreguynz 1.4
      16 October 2013 at 8:00 am

      One of the real issues here is that now ALL politicians personal lives could be up for severe scrutiny. As a country do we really want to go down that “News of the Screws” road? My guess is that a lot of people in positions of power will be somewhat apprehensive over the latest turn of events. To quote Henry KIssinger, “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.” Slater has opened a Pandora’s Box here.

      • Tigger 1.4.1
        16 October 2013 at 8:21 am

        Agreed. I could personally out ‘dirt ‘ on three National MPs. With a little effort I could get affidavits on their extramarital affairs/sexploits. It’s a small country we live in and secrets are hard to keep.

        • Tracey 1.4.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 8:31 am

          get your affidavits, have them delivered by a process server to Slater and see if he publishes them… when he doesn’t, make the story about him, not the MPs.

      • Tracey 1.4.2
        16 October 2013 at 8:30 am

        So strange from the side that abhors politics of personality, negative tactics and smears.

    • AsleepWhileWalking 1.5
      16 October 2013 at 8:02 am

      From my point of view the worst part of this was his choice of skanky partner. Rating your lover 4/10 when it was your own choice to stay with them for two years. Ugghers. Signing a sworn affidavit that crassly describes sexual acts that, if we are honest, go on in offices all over the country.
      I wonder how much of this was threatened by her during the campaign just to put pressure on Len Brown – and didn’t he cope well! I think she is the real issue here and I really hope the media look very closely into her background. No doubt a trail of pissed off ex-lovers are just dying to talk about how the bitch manipulated them.

      • Colonial Viper 1.5.1
        16 October 2013 at 8:18 am

        That language is unnecessary mate. My sense is she is going to end up thoroughly screwed by her right wing “friends” and is as much a victim of WO. Her campaign manager described her as “ambitious”. However her ethnic community cred is now fucked, and if she is unelectable by her own base, sayonara to any political career.

        • andy (the other one) 1.5.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 8:36 am

          This Young lady has not thought through her dealings with the Family Slater. Her google history is forever tainted.

          The Herald already has a couple of old articles about her wanting a Dragon baby, and in light of current events its all a bit creepy for her.

          Not much career prospects at all I am afraid.

          • Tracey 1.5.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 8:40 am

            not the same scrutiny for slater… and then there’s Slater taking “credit” for stephen cook’s work? No one comes out of this smelling of roses…

            NOT

            Brown
            Chuang
            Slater
            Cook

            Herald online has nothing noticeable of a man who holds the balance of power in NZ in Court for a serious allegation of undermining the rules of democracy….

        • Tracey 1.5.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 8:36 am

          Agreed.

          She says she wasnt politically motivated but I am unsure what other motivation she had unless she is angry and bitter at it ending? She mentioned his catholicism but didnt let this stop her screwing him for two years. I agree if she had really wanted to hurt him she would have released BEFORE the election, but thenit wouldn’t have saved Banks further publicity.

          Jabba the Whale on TV didnt do himself any favours, imo, he looked like Jabba the Hut, salivating over the salacious gossip he tried to seriously look like was in the interests of the country. While giddingly lapped up by his followers I am not sure everyday NZers would see him as some kind of champion of truth.

          Did he give Len 24-48 hours to break it to his family before he published? He could still have had his scoop but preserved some aspect of the innocent’s pain.

          It all gets very murky once you know Jabba’s father ran the campaign for Palino.

          While she is not an innocent victim (such as Mrs brown and the kids) she will be feeling like one this morning I sispect.

      • Murray Olsen 1.5.2
        16 October 2013 at 9:03 pm

        Seeing she hangs around with right wingers, 4/10 was probably a significant improvement. I heard from the voices in my head that her combined score for Slater, Lusk and Simon Bridges didn’t even manage to beat Lenny boy all on his own.

    • vto 1.6
      16 October 2013 at 8:21 am

      You should care because people love to project themselves onto other people and situations. They like to see our political leaders as people with higher standards, greater character, finer wisdom, superior understanding. They need to do this to make them feel better. People need leaders.

      You should care because this affair shatters that projection by people. It shows how exposed humanity is to itself. That there are no great defenders of some higher order. There is just us. You should care because such disillusionment is not good for society – we need higher beings and Len and lady have shown that they do not exist (in any useful number)

      That is why you should care.

      • Colonial Viper 1.6.1
        16 October 2013 at 8:23 am

        Politicians as paragons? I don’t think that’s the consensus view, somehow.

        • vto 1.6.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 8:28 am

          Quite, but my point was that humans are herd animals and need leaders. Currently, society’s leaders tend to be the political kind, for better or worse. P Ure should care because this type of act is an attack at this base human requirement for upstanding leadership. Nothing to do with caring for Len or lady, it is about caring for the requirements for good human existence, one of which is good leadership, even if it is a front.

          • bad12 1.6.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 8:38 am

            vto, can you point out any decision, any negative effect on the management of Auckland as a city that Len’s little dalliance has caused, were the cities secrets revealed in the ‘pillow talk’, one section of Auckland society favored over other’s because of Lens wayward ways???,

            If there were NO negative effects n the functioning of the Mayoralty i find what are in essence the private lives of politicians as big a yawn as their sexuality…

            • vto 1.6.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 8:53 am

              You’re quite right bad12 but I think you miss the point that people imo need leaders, whether it is in transiting across the Serengeti, inside the Vatican or playing a team sport. As I said, even if it is a front, people still need leaders. Humans need their leaders to be stronger, faster, wiserer, clevererer, someone to look up to.

              The issue is that when a leader lets a people down it is a dint in the side of the community.

              This is the case (whether it should be or not). This is why P Ure should care.

          • phillip ure 1.6.1.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 8:54 am

            @ vto..

            ..re yr ‘leaders’ contention..

            ..we don’t need ‘leaders’..

            ..we need good ideas..and people with the skills to implement them..

            ..yr whole ‘leader’-thesis is misguided..a fantasy..

            ..all ‘leaders’ are also humans..with the faults/flaws shared by most..

            ..and..all politicians lie to attain office..

            ..and just one example is both brown..and the ‘green’ mayor of wellington..

            ..who..before their initial election-victory..

            ..both promised to help the homeless..if elected..

            ..both have done just the opposite..

            ..introducing legislation to remove the beggars/homeless from the city centres..

            ..personally..i find that promise-breaking/persecution of the weakest..

            ..far more fucken obscene..

            ..than silly old man brown having a bit on the side..eh..?

            ..phillip ure..

            • vto 1.6.1.1.2.1
              16 October 2013 at 8:58 am

              People know this about their leaders and happily turn a blind eye to their averageness unless it is shoved in their face like this.

              People know this but that is immaterial to humanity’s requirement for leadership. imo.

      • muzza 1.6.2
        16 October 2013 at 8:29 am

        People do not need “leaders”.

        This is a nonsense which has been “learnt”, it is not the case, even less so these days\.

        What people need, is not own up and accept that they are already a leader, of themselves, because like heck anyone else is going to look out for you, we all know that.

        I’m not advocating every man/woman for themselves, but there is nothing higher than man/woman in this earth, so stop searching for something/someone to look up to, admire, or follow!

        So no, we should not care about it, its par for the course we have all been put on, and Len has walked straight into the oldest trick in the book!

        • vto 1.6.2.1
          16 October 2013 at 8:55 am

          Do you really think so muzza? I would have thought that just about all of human history indicates that leadership is always at the forefront.

          Sure, people are their own sovereign entities but the idea that there is no inbuilt requirement for leadership just seems off the planet….

    • Tim 1.7
      16 October 2013 at 10:50 am

      you shouldn’t. I don’t even care if he owns a Harley Davidson.

  2. phillip ure 2
    16 October 2013 at 7:46 am

    tho’..i am enjoying the humour..

    ..that rightwing business-trout on tvone breakfast..

    ..has her knickers knotted up to her neck..

    ..over this one..

    ..wholesale corporate/elite-looting..?

    ..said ‘expert’ is far more relaxed/loose-knickered over/about that one..

    ..eh..?

    ..i think it has something to do with her bowing to the demands of the ‘acceptable-gatekeeper’ role she so hungers for..

    ..eh..?

    (and..heh..!..the female co-compere…stretched/strove for a suitable simile/metaphor..

    ..and the only (ever-so-tenuous)penis-connection she could come up with..

    ..was andrew williams peeing on a tree..(heh..!)

    ..utter dumbness…as cheap entertainment..

    ..eh..?..)

    ..phillip ure..

  3. miravox 3
    16 October 2013 at 8:23 am

    Looks like John Boehner just scuttled another plan to end the U.S. stand-off.

    A visibly angry Chuck Schumer, the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate, summarized the mood when he said John Boehner had killed the momentum that had gathered behind their bipartisan deal.

    “We’re at the 11th hour. The train to avoid default was smoothly heading down the tracks and picking up speed, and at the last minute, speaker Boehner decides to throw a log on those tracks. Enough already.”

    “I am so disappointed. I am not disappointed in my Senate Republican colleagues. I think many of them understand the danger and want to help.”

    Now, that’s a dangerous game.

  4. BM 4
    16 October 2013 at 8:23 am

    If one of the Auckland city council managers got caught rooting some woman in the Ngati Whatua room would he still have a job.

    Or do different rules apply to the Mayor, is he untouchable?,
    Does he have some sort of employment contract? or can he do fairly much what ever he wants as long as he doesn’t break the law?

    • Ant 4.1
      16 October 2013 at 8:33 am

      Common sense would tell you the mayor is an elected official, so most likely there are different employment rules and they are accountable to different people.

      • Colonial Viper 4.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 8:36 am

        “Common sense”? Remember who you are replying to here.

      • Tracey 4.1.2
        16 October 2013 at 8:44 am

        IF he was in her direct employment line, line manager etc then yes, it would be an employment issue, particularly if he threatened her or advanced her career. No evidence of that so far.

        Those work places where I have been aware of an affair (married person/s with someone other than partner/spouse) it has always been hierarchical not on the same level. It causes HUGE problems employment wise. Staff morale plummets, especially if lower ranked one throws weight around, awkwardness of staff social functions when partners are present.

        So, BM if Mark Thingy (Ford??) was having an affair with someone immediately below him in line management and it was impacting staff, yup I would call for resignation,

        • BM 4.1.2.1
          16 October 2013 at 8:50 am

          So, apart from the voters the mayor answers to no one.

          He can do whatever he wants along as he doesn’t do anything bad enough to be imprisoned?

          Apart from voting once every three years there’s no way you can get rid of the mayor if he doesn’t want to leave?

          • felix 4.1.2.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 9:00 am

            Bloody democracy, who needs it eh?

          • miravox 4.1.2.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 9:01 am

            Maybe you could get him on misusing council resources for personal gain?

            *shrug*

          • karol 4.1.2.1.3
            16 October 2013 at 9:26 am

            Interesting thing. Stuff currently has a vote on it. I usually think Stuff’s unscientific polls lean to the right/conservative side pf politics. I was expecting to find a massive vote for Brown resigning. Instead, the vote is slightly in favour of Brown not resigning – by just over 50%.

            And, as an Auckland voter, who voted for Brown, I want my vote to stand. There is no way I want one of the SleazeOil benefactors on the right to take office.

            Now can we get back to the really pressing issues local and government politicians should be dealing with?

          • Tracey 4.1.2.1.4
            16 October 2013 at 9:29 am

            Kind of like a PM who either has alzheimers or is a liar. He gets to stay too.

    • The Murphey 4.2
      16 October 2013 at 8:39 am

      Q: Who is John Dragecivich?

      A:__________

      Q: Why does Auckland Council condone/endorse bullying?

      A:__________

      Q: Does corporate council or the elected members have a “no affairs” policy, or a “no affairs” code of conduct?

      A:__________

      • Tracey 4.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 8:46 am

        Good questions. You wont get them answered while media is focused on “sex and the super city” headlining.

      • Murray Olsen 4.2.2
        16 October 2013 at 10:16 pm

        I think Dragecivich might be the idiot I came across in 1987 out at Waitemata City when I was looking for information about council building codes. He was extremely rude, an absolute prick, and refused to answer any questions. He told me about four times to get back to school teaching, but scuttled back into his office when I told him I hadn’t been teaching at all, but had been in prison for criminal assault (I hadn’t. I have no convictions for violent offences.) The photo could well be him, thirty years on. Such was the disfunctionality of the Waitemata Council with Shadbolt as Mayor. If the stories about his mayoral antics ever came out, they’d make Brown look like a choirboy, but Invercargill seem to like him as Mayor. Just like Auckland, it’s not WhaleSpew Blubber Boy who gets to choose. Thank god and all her angels.

  6. karol 6
    16 October 2013 at 8:58 am

    I was just looking at yesterday’s site stats. So with the whole trooling frenzy over Len as a result of sleazeoil and his sewer rats, it would perhaps be understandable that TS had an unusually high number of hits. But most surprisingly hits for “Angry Simon Implodes on Campbell Live” seemed to have gone through the roof, in contrast with the number of hits posts usually get in a day.

    So, I guess there’s more online interest in the implosion of Nat Crosby Textor failure Simon Bridges, than in sleazoil and his sewer rats’ smear campaign?

  7. Rogue Trooper 7
    16 October 2013 at 9:05 am

    Brian Edwards attempts to limit Bridges damage after storm
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11140640

    • fender 7.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:26 am

      What a load of shit Edwards, stay away from Boag…she’s rubbing off on you old boy.

    • Ennui 7.2
      16 October 2013 at 3:35 pm

      I think Simon had watched Shonkey v Campbell and thought he could do the same volume voice over trick his master uses….Campbo learnt from Shonkers technique…never fight the next war with the last ones tactics, the enemy learns quickly how to counter.

  9. Penny Bright 9
    16 October 2013 at 9:21 am

    UPDATES!

    GRAHAM McCREADY vs JOHN N BANKS + VINCE SIEMER!!

    The Graham McCready vs John Banks case is waiting for the Judges’s decision today Wednesday 16 October 2013 at 2.15pm, in the Auckland District Court, as to whether or not it will go to trial.

    What came out loud and clear in Court yesterday, was that John Banks DID know that the donations from Kim Dotcom and Sky City were NOT anonymous. But because he had (lawfully???) delegated the responsibility of compiling his candidate’s returns (including donations) to a third party, who purportedly DIDN’T know the donations from Kim Dotcom and Sky City were NOT anonymous, they were recorded as such.

    If this third party was not present at the meetings with Kim Dotcom and Sky City, at which it was clear these donations were NOT anonymous, then how was it correct for him to record these donations as anonymous?

    It was stated in Court that it was effectively the ‘custom and practice’ in the 2010 and previous John Banks Mayoral campaigns to deliberately keep financial details, particularly about donations, separate from the Mayoral candidate.

    So how could John Banks, in all honesty, ask this third party who had prepared his candidate’s returns if the information was true and correct, before signing them, if the knowledge of the John Banks as Mayoral candidate, and this third party were not one and the same regarding donations?

    What dodgy ‘sleight of hand’ is being perpetrated here, by the (now) Leader of the ACT Party – the Party which supposedly upholds the principles of both ‘personal responsibility’ and ‘one law for all’?

    How can ANY candidate for public office, sign their candidate’s returns without first PERSONALLY double-checking that the information is correct???

    In my considered opinion as someone who was a Mayoral candidate both in 2010 (and 2013), this case SHOULD go to trial.

    ___________________________________________________________

    Today – fellow Public Watchdog / Judicial Whistle blower Vince Siemer is in the Auckland HIGH Court (Waterloo Quadrant) , where at 10am he will be cross-examining Detective SuperIntendent Lovelock over his role in organising the Police raid/invasion of the Siemer’s home in February 2008 where they took heaps of stuff (unlawful search and seizure) and still have not returned some of it. It’s a BIG deal and Vince deserves support! So folks – if you can come to the High Court today at 10am I think you will find this VERY interesting!

    WHEN YOUR RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK – STAND UP – FIGHT BACK!

    Good on you Vince Siemer!

    http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz

    Good on Graham McCready!

    Cheers!

    Penny Bright

    Her Warship 😉

    • karol 9.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:29 am

      Thanks, Penny. I will be interested in the outcome. Justice may not be served, as it may rest on some fine legal point.

      • Tracey 9.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 9:36 am

        Have a read of the first decision that got the case this far. The Judge shrugged off, pretty easily, some of Bank’s legal teams arguments.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.2
        16 October 2013 at 11:50 am

        It’s not a “fine legal point” but a huge fucken loophole (Talking about Banks).

  10. ak 10
    16 October 2013 at 9:31 am

    So even at the far ends of the earth the global Tea Party agenda is reduced to smearing filth. Desperation, you see. A black president, a socialist pope – neck minnit even all-powerful Granny is reduced to publishing pictures of Len’s daughters.
    Carry on, chaps. Your thirty-year hiatus is closing. Back in the sewer, old boy.

  11. Tracey 11
    16 October 2013 at 9:31 am

    King Kong posted from Koru International lounge yesterday and then today this headline caught my eye

    “Rat family found living on plane”

    Coincidence?

  12. Morrissey 12
    16 October 2013 at 9:48 am

    On-air display of dumb insolence by Jim Mora’s producer.
    But who can blame her?
    The Panel, Radio NZ National, Tuesday 15 October 2013
    Jim Mora, Graham Bell, Mai Chen

    JIM MORA: We’ll be discussing these sensational revelations about Len Brown after 4 o’clock, but first Jessica Maddock is here, with what the WOOOOOORLD is talking about!
    JESSICA MADDOCK: Well first up is a plan to deliver books in Australia by drone!
    JIM MORA: Ha ha ha ha ha!
    MAI CHEN: What if they run out of batteries?
    GRAHAM BELL: Ho ho ho ho ho!
    JESSICA MADDOCK: Two kilos, I think, is the most they can carry.
    MORA: [urgently] Can they carry two kilograms?!?!!??

    …..Significant pause……

    JESSICA MADDOCK: [significant pause] Mmmmm.
    MORA: Mmm-kay. What else?
    JESSICA MADDOCK: Well, a study shows that when you watch advertisements on TV when you are eating something, you subconsciously mouth the brand names.
    GRAHAM BELL: Ho ho ho!
    MAI CHEN: I believe it!
    MORA: Hang on! So when you watch TV and eat you are subconsciously mouthing the brand names?

    …..Significant pause……

    MORA: Mmmmm.
    MORA: What else have you got for us?
    JESSICA MADDOCK: Well, a study shows that children who go to bed earlier behave better.
    MAI CHEN: You reckon?
    GRAHAM BELL: Ho ho ho!
    MORA: Okay, so it’s like a scientific confirmation of conventional wisdom isn’t it.

    ….. Extended silence……

    JESSICA MADDOCK: Well, another study shows that using plastic items, like water-bottles, can lead to miscarriages!
    MAI CHEN: Good grief!
    JESSICA MADDOCK: And it can also lead to a decrease in male fertility!
    GRAHAM BELL: Ho ho ho!
    MORA: Okay, we’ve got thirty seconds. Anything else?
    JESSICA MADDOCK: Well, there is this item is about the rediscovery of seventeenth century beauty practices. For example, the use of tobacco ash will whiten your teeth.
    MORA: Tobacco ash?

    ….Silence…..

    MORA: Tobacco ash will whiten your teeth?
    JESSICA MADDOCK: Mmmm, hmmmm.

    Thankfully for Jim Mora, the news rescues him from any more dumb insolence by his producer. This writer missed the rest of the program. Perhaps it improved….

    • Lanthanide 12.1
      16 October 2013 at 10:18 am

      Morrissey, do you have any actual consistent or objective measurement for what constitutes a “significant pause” or “extended silence” compared to “pause” or “silence”?

      • weka 12.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 11:26 am

        I take it that’s a rhetorical question.

      • felix 12.1.2
        16 October 2013 at 11:41 am

        As far as I can tell he doesn’t even distinguish between ‘devastatingly pregnant pause’ and the ordinary ending of one sentence followed by the beginning of another.

        • Rogue Trooper 12.1.2.1
          16 October 2013 at 11:46 am

          .

          • miravox 12.1.2.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 11:59 am

            Pfft that made me laugh…

          • ianmac 12.1.2.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 4:04 pm

            Hey Rogue. I believe that you would equal the Guiness Book of World Records which claimed that a letter exchange between two angry writers had the shortest well thought out response.
            The second to last letter had nothing on the page but “!”
            The last letter had nothing on it but “.”
            Well done that man!

            • Rogue Trooper 12.1.2.1.2.1
              16 October 2013 at 5:49 pm

              you are very kind, and it’s a bit of an off day. No rhyme or reason, (well, that would not be entirely true at all)., however, it’s getting better. An excellent therapeutic intervention in my opinion, gardening, so I’ve put in some Kamo Kamo plants, which are generally very productive, and you can koha them around joint.

      • Morrissey 12.1.3
        16 October 2013 at 12:03 pm

        Morrissey, do you have any actual consistent or objective measurement for what constitutes a “significant pause” or “extended silence” compared to “pause” or “silence”?

        Come on Lanthanide, both you and I are perfectly aware of what constitutes an awkward, pregnant or extended silence, and all the other points on the continuum. I wouldn’t like to attempt to chart them scientifically, of course, but they are real, and undeniable.

        • Ennui 12.1.3.1
          16 October 2013 at 3:42 pm

          Carry on Morrissey, you make me laugh whether it is accurate or not. You get the gist right most of the time so regardless of the criticism around here I will treat it as Gonzo, and something slightly more amusing than the dry balls stone faces comments.

        • Rogue Trooper 12.1.3.2
          16 October 2013 at 6:17 pm

          phenomenally so.

    • Te Reo Putake 12.2
      16 October 2013 at 11:34 am

      “JESSICA MADDOCK: Well, a study shows that when you watch advertisements on TV when you are eating something, you subconsciously mouth the brand names.
      GRAHAM BELL: Ho ho ho!
      MAI CHEN: I believe it!
      MORA: Hang on! So when you watch TV and eat you are subconsciously mouthing the brand names?”

      Moz, you’ve got this arsebackwards. Maddock correctly said that the study shows that eating in the cinema STOPS people subconsiously mouthing the brand names. Presumably she was quoting the Guardian article, or one of many other news reports on the finding:

      http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/13/eating-popcorn-cinema-advertisers

      Your misunderstanding/mishearing of what Maddock said also means that the words you attribute to Bell, Chen and Mora were not actually spoken by them. And what they did discuss was the exact opposite of what you claim.

      As I suggested the other day, if you listen to the show a second time, you are far less likely to get things like this wrong.

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/afternoons/audio/2572874/the-panel-pre-show-for-15-october-2013

      • felix 12.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 11:47 am

        No, TRP. Morrissey’s transcript, as always, is accurate.

        The only grey areas are what was said, who said what, how they said it and what they meant.

        • Morrissey 12.2.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 11:59 am

          The only grey areas are what was said, who said what, how they said it and what they meant.

          You’re quibbling over exact details. Yes, I made a mistake as to the actual findings of a no-account study in the Grauniad, but I got the dynamics of that dreadful conversation just right. As you would know if you had listened to the show.

          • McFlock 12.2.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 12:04 pm

            lol – quibbling exact details like the diametric opposite of what they actually said.

            • Morrissey 12.2.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 12:13 pm

              lol –

              Word of advice, my friend: avoid such puerile antics. It makes you look like a teenager—and not a very bright one.

              quibbling exact details like the diametric opposite of what they actually said.

              As I’ve already pointed out, the substance of my post was about the vacuity and foolishness of the chit-chat infesting our public radio. The actual details of the trivial subject being discussed are not really important. You know that, of course, perfectly well.

              • McFlock …
                16 October 2013 at 12:23 pm

                I’m not you’re friend, buddy.

                Given that you’ve previously argued that your “transcripts” are “pretty close to word-perfect”, arguing that the details of what was said (like whether they said something completely different) makes you a fucking joke.

                • Morrissey …
                  16 October 2013 at 12:59 pm

                  I’m not you’re [sic] friend, buddy.

                  We’re all friends around here, buddy. Except for Brett Dale.

                  Given that you’ve previously argued that your “transcripts” are “pretty close to word-perfect”….

                  They pretty much are. That’s not an “argument”, that’s a fact. And you know it.

                  ….arguing that the details of what was said (like whether they said something completely different)

                  What they said was not the point. How they reacted to one another—-especially the way Jessica Maddock reacted to Jim Mora—-was the point.

                  …makes you a fucking joke.

                  Ha! A little bit of swearing just to intimidate, huh? I’m sure that works for you in real life situations, but here in cyberspace it only makes you look foolish.

                  • McFlock …
                    16 October 2013 at 1:30 pm

                    Given that you’ve previously argued that your “transcripts” are “pretty close to word-perfect”….

                    They pretty much are. That’s not an “argument”, that’s a fact. And you know it.

                    … except when they say the exact opposite of what actually took place.

                    What they said was not the point.

                    Well, then. It doesn’t matter that your transcripts are grossly inaccurate.

                    • Morrissey …
                      16 October 2013 at 2:03 pm

                      … except when they say the exact opposite of what actually took place.

                      I have explained with perfect clarity what the point of my post was. It was to highlight the vacuity of that fifteen minutes of excruciatingly poor quality radio chit-chat. Your quibbles about my slip-up over an incidental detail are utterly spurious.

                      Of course, that suits your purpose perfectly well: after all, your aim is not serious discussion, but to assail my integrity. Are you Whaleoil? You certainly write like him.

                      It doesn’t matter that your transcripts are grossly inaccurate.

                      Another wild, swingeing statement by you. My transcripts are pretty much on the money always, and you know it. You are going after me (ineptly) not because you are worried about anything that happened on that awful radio show yesterday, but because I have in the past targeted dishonest people and corrupt organisations that you have, foolishly, chosen to parrot.

                    • McFlock …
                      16 October 2013 at 2:15 pm

                      My transcripts are pretty much on the money always, and you know it.

                      Bullshit. They’re bunk.

                      You are going after me (ineptly) not because you are worried about anything that happened on that awful radio show yesterday, but because I have in the past targeted dishonest people and corrupt organisations that you have, foolishly, chosen to parrot.

                      Bullshit. You’re making shit up (again). I’d quite like your transcripts if they were accurate, or satire, but they can’t be both. You’re ego’s writing cheques that your recollection can’t cash.

                      See, I had to transcribe some quotes from an interview today. It was easy: I pressed “play” for a few words, then “pause”, wrote it down, replayed that section to make sure I was word perfect in something other than my imagination. It transcribing is how you get your rocks off, it’s not that difficult.

                    • sockpuppet …
                      16 October 2013 at 3:32 pm

                      Your are all either mischievous or mistaken.

                      Morrissey’s renditions are always accurate and telling representations, he is truly a Shakespeare of our times.

                    • Morrissey …
                      16 October 2013 at 4:50 pm

                      Your [sic] are all either mischievous or mistaken.

                      “All”? In case you haven’t noticed, a small clique of my ideological enemies are following a strategy of quibbling about nothing of consequence, in order to attack my credibility. Fortunately, I can simply cite my substantial body of work on the internet, both here and elsewhere, and am happy to put my credibility up against that of people who parrot the lies of people and organisations that have been shown repeatedly to be dishonest and even fraudulent.

                      Morrissey’s renditions are always accurate and telling representations, he is truly a Shakespeare of our times.

                      Thanks for that!

          • felix 12.2.1.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 8:01 pm

            “As you would know if you had listened to the show.”

            No need to, I can just read your transcript and imagine the opposite.

            • Morrissey 12.2.1.1.2.1
              17 October 2013 at 9:08 am

              I can just read your transcript and imagine the opposite.

              As we saw last year with your strident and unashamed support for the most obviously nonsensical and bizarre official lies, you are adept at imagining the very opposite of reality to be the truth.

        • greywarbler 12.2.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 2:59 pm

          The only grey areas are what was said, who said what, how they said it and what they meant.
          You’re quibbling over exact details.

          So there.
          Priceless.
          When this ends I’ll know the Meaning of Lif.

          • Ennui 12.2.1.2.1
            16 October 2013 at 3:46 pm

            Life, say what you will about it you cant like it…..I think that is what marvin said but hell it is a bit hazy, many years since. Still thats what he meant.

            • greywarbler 12.2.1.2.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 5:15 pm

              You mean Marvin the Paranoid Android. He really doesn’t want to know because he knows that if he ever does find out he will be even feel more depressed.

      • Morrissey 12.2.2
        16 October 2013 at 11:55 am

        Moz, you’ve got this arsebackwards. Maddock correctly said that the study shows that eating in the cinema STOPS people subconsiously mouthing the brand names. Presumably she was quoting the Guardian article, or one of many other news reports on the finding:

        Thanks for that, my eagle-eyed, bat-eared friend. Accuracy, that’s the thing! I’ve GOT to up my game!

        Your misunderstanding/mishearing of what Maddock said also means that the words you attribute to Bell, Chen and Mora were not actually spoken by them. And what they did discuss was the exact opposite of what you claim.

        The point of my post, and I’m sure you realise this as well as anybody, was not to critique another vacuous study published in the ever-vacuous Grauniad, but to highlight the vacuous nature of the chit-chat that has been allowed to take over National Radio. Yes, as you so helpfully point out, I did get the earth-shatteringly important findings of that study “arsebackwards”, but that was not really significant. What is significant is: (a) the faux jollity of Graham Bell, (b) the obvious boredom of Mai Chen, who must have been wondering (yet again) why the hell she bothers with this program, (c) just how incredibly vacuous and annoying Jim Mora is, and (d) the contemptuous silences and curt replies by Jessica Maddock.

        • Te Reo Putake 12.2.2.1
          16 October 2013 at 12:35 pm

          ” … another vacuous study published in the ever-vacuous Grauniad …”

          If you can’t even read what I wrote, what’s the point of you? I said it was in the Guardian and many other news sites. Which google will confirm. It’s not the Guardian’s study, it’s peer reviewed research from academics at Cologne university and it has major implications for advertising on both the big screen and the one your reading this on.

          Y’know, it’d be great if you could just say, ‘cheers, I got that wrong’ instead of offering vacuous piffle to try and excuse yourself instead.

          Indeed, Moz, you are the Jim Mora of the interwebs.

          • Morrissey 12.2.2.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 12:53 pm

            Y’know, it’d be great if you could just say, ‘cheers, I got that wrong’

            Errrr, that’s exactly what I did do.

            ….instead of offering vacuous piffle to try and excuse yourself instead.

            I explained the purpose of my post, and you understand it perfectly well, of course. Instead of acknowledging that, you instead focus on a minor failure to get all the details correct. It’s like picking holes in Citizen Kane because Welles used stock footage in some of the scenes with less than due care and attention.

            Indeed, Moz, you are the Jim Mora of the interwebs.

            I’ll take that as a compliment.

            • McFlock 12.2.2.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 1:55 pm

              Holy fuck, did you just compare yourself to Orson Welles???

              Outstanding

              • Morrissey …
                16 October 2013 at 2:13 pm

                Holy fuck, did you just compare yourself to Orson Welles???

                Outstanding

                Well, he had his failures too, don’t forget. I myself have never been so down and out that I have been reduced to providing a voiceover for something as dire as the Future Shock movie.

                • McFlock …
                  16 October 2013 at 2:25 pm

                  Ya reckon. You’d be delusional to even set it as a distant aspiration.

                  • Morrissey …
                    16 October 2013 at 3:30 pm

                    At one stage about ten months ago, I was banned from Whaleoil, Brian Edwards and The Standard, all at the same time. But I tell ya now, my friend, despite such low-points, I can say with hand on heart that I’ve never been as desperate as this….

  14. Rogue Trooper 14
    16 October 2013 at 10:03 am

    More irrelevance from Key (Armstrong, not so much just recently).
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11140632

    • karol 14.1
      16 October 2013 at 10:25 am

      Hmmm… interesting. Armstrong no longer the total Key Shill.

      • Rogue Trooper 14.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 10:33 am

        been a couple along those lines recently. maybe some Integrity , as opposed to Despair

        • Rosie 14.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 10:40 am

          Integrity Vs. Despair. The senior developmental life span stage? Generativity Vs. Stagnation me.

          • Rogue Trooper 14.1.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 11:05 am

            same
            anyway, Holy Shamoly, Queensland’s Plan For Bikie Prisons
            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11140628

            so grateful to live in quiet, provincial New Zealand.(although, there is representation here, The ‘A’ Team , can be quite serious stuff, and people know people…), and, Napier has elected the Mayor they suit.

            • Sanctuary 14.1.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 12:01 pm

              Napier has elected a mayor with a mandate to oppose being tied to the corpse 20km away on the Heretaunga plains with every tool available. As a born and bred Napier boy from a well-established family, all I can say that is a good fight! If National plans a forced amalgamation of Napier and Hastings, they can kiss goodbye to the Napier electorate for two generations… Perhaps that is why Tremain is bailing?

              • Rogue Trooper …
                16 October 2013 at 1:28 pm

                it doesn’t bother me, I have heard Bill Dalton on Bay FM, so I understand. I’m not sure what Labour’s policy is on these amalgamations (not being a rate-payer, apologies). Maybe someone can enlighten us (slow day today). You are correct however, there is significant feeling in letters and op-eds to HBT (which I no longer read much).
                You may be aware, I grew up in the ‘nui, yet was quite socially mobile for many years, so met families with mates and daughters, students at Lindisfarne,, St John’s etc. Briefly dated, and remained friends with, the Dux of Sacred Heart.
                It appears the Growers Action Group candidates have been elected to the HBRC, so that’s gonna be interesting. Personally, I support water collection, but not the RWSS.

          • ghostrider888 14.1.1.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 11:16 am

            how a stage is negotiated influences subsequent stage outcomes. much is determined, hence I’m on the cusp and always ready to return.whoooooo, glad that ride is over. Cups of
            Tea all round. Choysa round.

  15. Rogue Trooper 15
    16 October 2013 at 11:39 am

    What Does Fran Have To Say?
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/international-politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503226&objectid=11140602
    on China.What Liu Chang (Xinhua) had to say, and then a bit more. Trend you see, renminbi. 😀

  18. McFlock 18
    16 October 2013 at 12:08 pm

    Apologies if someone mentioned this already and I missed it through all the panty-sniffing about sex lives above:

    Groser admits MPI underresourced.
    Who knew – apparently if you gut a public service of its staff, it might not be able to handle individual or multiple crises when they eventually arise.

    • miravox 18.1
      16 October 2013 at 12:33 pm

      Funny, the Dept of Education has said the same thing about their privacy lapse. It all got a bit busy and not enough people to handle the detail.

      Back office people – what are they for, huh?

    • richard 18.2
      16 October 2013 at 1:18 pm

      Even more telling is that it is Groser making the call on MPI staff resources.

      It looks like Nathan Guy has been put in a box and told to shut-up.

      • Rogue Trooper 18.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 1:33 pm

        that would be an advantageous strategy. Maybe the National Party is finding that the “types of material we want”, are not the materials they need, Hence , Minister for A Lot, S. Joyce.

    • greywarbler 18.3
      16 October 2013 at 2:52 pm

      That’s why we elect Political Supermen with Big Muscles and Very Little Brain. Pooh to you they say to every disaster in Their Way.

  19. Sosoo 19
    16 October 2013 at 12:20 pm

    Oh please. It’s laugh material and not much more.

    Reminds me of that scene with the mayor in The Wire. Someone should mail Len the DVDs.

    [lprent: the more that this thread proceeds, the more that it seems to me that it should be in OpenMike as being unrelated to the topic of the post. ]

  20. Morrissey 20
    16 October 2013 at 1:49 pm

    BRIEF ENCOUNTER
    …..ACT ONE….

    Esquire’s Coffee Shop, Lorne Street. In one corner, a television shows Jeremy Kyle, a segment called “Is my porn addict husband a cheat?” At a corner table beneath the television set, a furtive couple lurks in the shadows; the man is moustachioed and wears a fedora tilted low over his head, his overcoat collar pulled up to further hide his face.

    YOUNG WOMAN: Shall I play mother? Milk — and sugar?

    MAN: Thank you. [looks around nervously] You know what’s happened, don’t you?

    ….[TELEVISION: “It’s an addiction. I need to get help for it.”]….

    YOUNG WOMAN: Yes. Yes I do. You’ve been reduced to wearing a false moustache and a fedora.

    MAN: No, no, no. What’s happened is: I’ve fallen in love with you.

    YOUNG WOMAN: [rolls eyes heavenward] Yes, I know.

    MAN: Tell me honestly — please tell me honestly — what I believe is true.

    YOUNG WOMAN: What do you believe?

    MAN: That it’s the same with you. That you’ve fallen in love, too.

    ….[TELEVISION: Jeremy Kyle: “Are you going to pass the lie-detector test?”]….

    YOUNG WOMAN: It – it sounds so silly.

    MAN: Why?

    YOUNG WOMAN: I know you so little.

    ….TELEVISION: “If you fail this lie-detector, she says she’s gone. Are you gonna pass?”….

    MAN: It is true, though, isn’t it?

    YOUNG WOMAN: Yes, it’s true.

    MAN: [relieved] Oh, B____.

    YOUNG WOMAN: No, L__, please. Please. We must be sensible. Please help me to be sensible. We must forget we’ve said what we’ve said and done what we’ve done. Done in the Ng_t_ Wh_t__ Room.

    MAN: [nostalgically/lasciviously] And the L_ngh_m. And the H_lt_n. And Sk_ C_t_.

    YOUNG WOMAN: [shuddering] Urrrrrrgghhh! Oh God! I feel like Monica Lewinsky! I want OUT of this NOW!

    MAN: Not yet. Not quite yet.

    ….TELEVISION: “We asked, Did you steal the money from your mother’s stockings on Christmas Eve?”….

    YOUNG WOMAN: But we must. Don’t you see? Because the security guards know! They’ve known about the pair of us ever sin—–

    …..[Suddenly she sits up and waves. A bulky, oily, menacing male figure approaches]…..

    MAN: Oh FUCK! Oh fuck, fuck, fuck! It’s C_m_r_n fucking Sl_t_r ! Do you fucking KNOW him?

    YOUNG WOMAN: Of course! He’s an old N_t__n_l Party friend! Just pull your fedora down a bit further. He’ll NEVER suspect it’s you.

    MAN: [whimpering and cowering in terror] I’m fucking DOOMED!

    [The YOUNG WOMAN turns to the interloper and beams a warm smile]

    YOUNG WOMAN: Hey, C_m_r_n! How are you? Have you met my friend, errrrr, uhhhh, “Neil”?

    …..SOUNDTRACK: Ominous music plays…..

    TO BE CONTINUED…..

  21. NickS 21
    16 October 2013 at 2:26 pm

    http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/are-yuppies-killing-london-and-will-people-riot-about-it

    Short version – invasion of yuppies + the continuation of Thatcher’s attack on social housing is pricing people on low incomes out of London, including Brixton, which is probably going to erode a good deal of local culture.

  22. gobsmacked 22
    16 October 2013 at 2:56 pm

    This just in … John BANKS to stand trial.

    Huge story (sorry, panty sniffers, this is about fraud, things that really matter) …

    Tick tock tick tock!

    • Ennui 23.1
      16 October 2013 at 3:52 pm

      Banksie versus Len for Auckland heavyweight “most trustworthy person” title…..come on McF, show us your hand. Tell us the difference as you see it.

      • McFlock 23.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 4:21 pm

        Seriously, you can’t see the differences? Circumstances might change, but at the moment:

        The possibility of up to two years in prison. Brown NO Banks YES

        The fact that it was allegedly done so people would not know when he was acting in a conflict of interest (all that “I’ll be able to help you” crap he bailed on). Brown NO Banks YES

        The fact that the allegations pertain directly to his duties as a public representative, such as filling in declarations truthfully. Brown NO Banks YES

        • The Al1en 23.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 4:23 pm

          I agree with post 22.1.1

          • fender 23.1.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 10:02 pm

            “I agree with post 22.1.1”

            Are you sure? There isn’t one….yet….shall I put one there ? What about: The Al1en is spacejunk 😀

            • Rogue Trooper 23.1.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 10:21 pm

              ackshully, when The Al1en posted that, there was the corresponding post 22.1.1, I scrolled up, still, Believe It Or Not.

        • Ennui 23.1.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 4:54 pm

          Q: Seagoon, which way is South America?
          A: It all depends where you are standing!

          Yes I can see this from a number of places. And it all has the same leopard spots despite the different silhouettes. Do I trust Banks not to be criminal? Certainly not! Do I trust Brown to be honest and honorable? Ask his wife.

          So to cut to the chase: why defend Brown and attack Banks on trustworthiness? And remember we are debating trustworthiness, not any particular deed criminal or personal. I would suggest that you are being decidedly partisan which is fine by me. You have valid reasons for not trusting Banks….might you not agree I have valid reasons for not trusting Brown?

          • greywarbler 23.1.1.2.1
            16 October 2013 at 5:08 pm

            Only if you are a sexy woman Ennui. I think gender would indicate the ratio of trustworthiness.

          • McFlock 23.1.1.2.2
            16 October 2013 at 5:09 pm

            I’m attacking neither on trustworthiness.

            My criteria for attack are whether they performed their official functions to the required standard.

            Brown has.

            The main issue of Banks’ professional performance (signing declarations truthfully) is now set to be evaluated in a trial.

          • McFlock 23.1.1.2.3
            16 October 2013 at 5:19 pm

            ps: nice Goon Show line 🙂

    • Ennui 24.1
      16 October 2013 at 3:56 pm

      That good old “internationally experienced high flying CEO” (and associated multi-million $ package) bit….I feel a little botulism coming on. I need an …..expert.

  25. Puckish Rogue 25
    16 October 2013 at 4:08 pm

    Just for people who might be interested:

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/10/effective_schools.html

    Harvards report on schools provides food for thought

  26. Morrissey 26
    16 October 2013 at 4:38 pm

    HYPOCRISY WATCH!
    Compassionless people lecture about lack of empathy
    The Panel, Radio NZ National, Wednesday 16 October 2013
    Jim Mora, Steve McCabe, Gordon McLauchlan

    JIM MORA: It’s quarter to four: time for Susan Baldacci and what the WOOOOOOORLD’s talking about!
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Well, first up is this modern phenomenon of giving children names that can contribute to them becoming narcissists.
    JIM MORA: Oh yes? Ha ha ha ha!
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Jean Twenge, psychologist and co-author of The Narcissism Epidemic, notes that a remarkable number of people have turned naming their babies into opportunities to show off — a sign of our culture’s increasing vanity.
    GORDON McLAUCHLAN: [sagely] Ha ha ha ha!
    STEVE McCABE: [thoughtfully] Hmmmmmm….
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Yes, there is an ever increasing incidence of names such as Messiah, King, Prince, Greatness. There are even sixteen girls called Beautifull—with two Ls.
    JIM MORA: You’d have to be beautiful, with a name like that!
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Well it reflects a growing narcissism in society. You know, a lack of feeling, a lack of empathy for the suffering of others….

    At that point, I was simply unable to continue listening to the idle chatter any longer. I’m sure I was not the only one to pick up on the exquisite, canting hypocrisy of Ms. Baldacci’s words. Messrs McCabe and McLauchlan were too polite to mention it, but Susan Baldacci and Jim Mora are the last people in the country who should be pontificating about a lack of empathy for the suffering of others….
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-14062013/#comment-648511
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-15062013/#comment-648684
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-26062013/#comment-654151
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-28062013/#comment-655089
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-18072013/#comment-664502

    • felix 26.1
      16 October 2013 at 8:08 pm

      Hi Morrissey.

      Before I listen to the segment tonight, is your transcript “near word-perfect” or just “accurate”?

      Or is it one of the ones where the actual words don’t matter at all?

      • Te Reo Putake 26.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 8:18 pm

        It doesn’t matter. It’s the vibe, your honour. Mabo, etc.

        • sockpuppet 26.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 8:29 pm

          Oh look the tr0lls are out stalking Morrissey again, a more hapless pair of wannabees the blogosphere has never seen.

          • muzza 26.1.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 9:38 pm

            Socko – Well put.

            Felix let’s himself down, and gives himself away by lowering to such puerile comments, which if truth be known, I find some of the cats comments to be entertaining and witty, so clearly a level of intelligence there, cross pollinated with something slightly unsavory!

            TRP – The follower, easily lead, also a handbag thrower!

            Rule Qatar!

            • Rogue Trooper 26.1.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 9:42 pm

              Dr Strangelove I presume 😀

            • Te Reo Putake 26.1.1.1.1.2
              16 October 2013 at 9:45 pm

              How’s project Onan coming on Muz? And pointing out that Morassey regularly makes stuff up is not stalking, it’s a public service. The irony is that he accuses others, but can’t see the mote in his own eye.

              • muzza …
                16 October 2013 at 9:57 pm

                Public Service – Um, yeah ok Mr Plod!

                I prefer Mozzas commentary over your so called public service announcements, all day ref

                That’s not to say you don’t make some witty comments from time to time, you do, they don’t go unappreciated, but the above ain’t one of them, IMO.

              • Morrissey …
                17 October 2013 at 8:50 am

                How’s project Onan coming on Muz?

                Ha ha ha ha ha! How will Muzza recover from THAT one?

                And pointing out that Morassey

                “Morassey”. Oh I see what you’re doing there!

                ….regularly makes stuff up is not stalking, it’s a public service.

                I make up nothing in my transcripts. I don’t get them word-perfect all the way through because, sadly, I have never learned shorthand beyond a rudimentary few dozen words. But I make up nothing. You are the one who has made nonsensical claims, like claiming that the cuddly liberal icon Chris Trotter did not embark on a pompous and windy defence of Deep South lynch law.

            • Rogue Trooper 26.1.1.1.1.3
              16 October 2013 at 9:48 pm

              Time to saddle up and roam wide. Adios.

          • felix 26.1.1.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 9:58 pm

            “Oh look the tr0lls are out stalking Morrissey again, a more hapless pair of wannabees the blogosphere has never seen.”

            I don’t give a damn about Morrissey and I don’t imagine TRP does either. We do both share this habit of mocking obvious bullshit though, and it does tend to annoy the feeble.

            • Morrissey 26.1.1.1.2.1
              17 October 2013 at 9:06 am

              I don’t give a damn about Morrissey and I don’t imagine TRP does either.

              Now that must be about the funniest dishonest statement made in this country in the last 24 hours. It’s possibly even more funnier and dishonest than either the Prime Minister’s assertion that “John Banks is a thoroughly credible and trustworthy individual” or John Boscawen’s solemn pronouncement that the ACT party was in great shape.

              We do both share this habit of mocking obvious bullshit though, and it does tend to annoy the feeble.

              You are not “mocking bullshit” at all; the pair of you have shown yourselves to be assiduous recyclers of the most malicious black propaganda; if we were able to send you back to a more suitable milieu for your talents, we’d zap you back fifty years to Red China, where you could enthusiastically denounce dissenters and truth-tellers and ridicule satirists to your dark hearts’ content.

              • Te Reo Putake …
                17 October 2013 at 9:18 am

                “dissenters and truth-tellers and ridicule satirists”

                You’re none of those things, Moz. You’re just someone with comprehension difficulties who thinks making things up and attributing them to others is acceptable. On the upside, your intellectual laziness is matched by your pomposity and self delusion.

                • Morrissey …
                  17 October 2013 at 9:52 am

                  You’re none of those things, Moz.

                  Oh really? Could you explain why I’m not a satirist? Maybe you missed this little gem from yesterday….
                  http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-16102013/#comment-710949

                  ….or this little pearler from the more distant past….
                  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/nz.general/Ern1_QrFIw8

                  ….or THIS one….
                  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/nz.general/morrissey$20breen$20$2B$20bush$20$2B$20blair/nz.general/sl3yTyT3Bec/s76OirkbI0IJ

                  …and don’t forget THIS one….
                  http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04082013/#comment-674390

                  your intellectual laziness is matched by your pomposity and self delusion.

                  “Pomposity”? On the part of this writer?!?!???!??

                  • Te Reo Putake …
                    17 October 2013 at 10:35 am

                    I’m too bored with you to bothered with your linkwankery. Though still waiting for you to show where I defended Trotter as you allege.

                    • Morrissey …
                      17 October 2013 at 4:48 pm

                      ….still waiting for you to show where I defended Trotter as you allege.

                      On July 19th I transcribed Trotter’s grandiloquent declamation on behalf of the Florida jury in the Trayvon Martin travesty. I might have omitted his windy “ummms” and “ahhhs”, but I got the pretentious and intellectually vacant tone of Trotter’s bloviating just right.

                      Instead of chiding me for minor inaccuracies, which would have been a reasonable and fair thing to do, you foolishly claimed I had made it all up…..

                      http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-19072013/#comment-664870

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 October 2013 at 5:11 pm

                      Link fail. Show me where I defended Trotter.

                    • Morrissey …
                      17 October 2013 at 5:19 pm

                      You claimed I made it up that Trotter had said that. I did not make any of it up, and you knew I did not.

                      Here is your claim, and my refutation of that claim….
                      http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-19072013/#comment-665680

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 October 2013 at 5:23 pm

                      Link fail. Show me where I defend Trotter.

                      edit: here’s your made up claim again:

                      “…like claiming that the cuddly liberal icon Chris Trotter did not embark on a pompous and windy defence of Deep South lynch law.”

                    • Morrissey …
                      17 October 2013 at 5:34 pm

                      Link fail. Show me where I defend Trotter.

                      You said I made it up. That implies Trotter did not defend that lynch mob. He did, in the most pretentious manner possible.

                      edit: here’s your made up claim again:

                      There you go again! I made up nothing. There are (necessarily) some ellipses and some accidental transpositions of vacuous laughter. I made up nothing, and you know I did not. You are acting just like you did when you were parroting the most scurrilous official lies against Julian Assange last year, i.e., you’re prepared to say anything at all. That’s a very unwise course to embark on, my friend, and one you would be well advised to reconsider.

                      “…like claiming that the cuddly liberal icon Chris Trotter did not embark on a pompous and windy defence of Deep South lynch law.”

                      That’s exactly what he did, as you know.

                    • felix …
                      17 October 2013 at 5:53 pm

                      Another day, another crock of lies from Morrissey.

                      You’ve still not quoted this supposed “defence of Deep South lynch law” that you made up.

                      And if you didn’t make it up, you’d be able to quote it.

                      But you did.

                      So you won’t.

                    • McFlock …
                      17 October 2013 at 6:26 pm

                      Just to recap, the closest I could find was this bit of The Panel 18 July, from 6’14”.

                      “…like claiming that the cuddly liberal icon Chris Trotter did not embark on a pompous and windy defence of Deep South lynch law.”

                      That’s exactly what he did, as you know.

                      This, as best as I can transcribe, it what trotter said in relation to Zimmerman’s juror’s lives being forever changed:

                      T: Yes, and I can’t help thinking that the system we have here which really protects jurors [um] from the attentions of the news media, and in fact as far as I know prohibits jurors from discussing [ah] any case that they have judged, I think that’s by far th-the most sensible approach to take. The idea that having delivered their collective verdict they come out as individuals and muddy the waters in the way that this person has, I mean especially in a case as controversial as this

                      N: and as fraught as this

                      T: yeah I I I think it’s most unfortunate

                      N: Were you surprised that only three of the jurors were said to have thought that this man was not guilty?
                      [1 second pause]
                      T: Oh, I think you have to be in the courtroom, in the jury box to judge any case. Ah, I think the information people don’t have, even if the news media is covering a trial, y’know, to the very best of it’s ability is so huge that that you really should trust jurors, I think – even in this case it would seem that the tragedy, ah notwithstanding, y’know, there were, um, items of evidence which would raise reasonable doubt I think in most people’s minds
                      [1-2 second pause before N starts a standard bridge to the next topic

                      Whether that counts as a ” pompous and windy defence of Deep South lynch law”, I’ll let others decide.

                      But unless Mozz has a link to a different piece that he was actually transcribing, it’s interesting to compare it with Moz’ near-word-perfect, extremely accurate transcription:

                      CHRIS TROTTER: [very slowly, mustering all the pomp and gravitas he can] I think all this talk about the jury is most unfortunate. You have, even in this case I think, to trust the jury. In any trial, there are always items of evidence that we do not know about, even in this case I think.

                      ….[Long, extremely uncomfortable pause]….

                      NOELLE McCARTHY: [doggedly positive] One thing the whole world is talking about, Zoe Ferguson, is the royal birth!

                    • marty mars …
                      17 October 2013 at 6:37 pm

                      Well I think your snookered there Morrissey. Why not just say it is satire I don’t get why you are holding so tightly to this word perfect get the feel transcript stuff – heads up – no one cares – haven’t you seen the positive comments about your satire – that is your skill – so just say it and then all this would be over.

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      17 October 2013 at 7:43 pm

                      Still waiting to see where I defend Trotter, Moz. Have a think about what I said about Trotter and let me know whether that’s a defence or an attack.

                      “You actually let people like Trotter off the hook by making up quotes, when the real words he used should be damning him.”

                      Should be damning him.

                      Does that sound like I was defending Trotter? Nooooo, just the opposite, you goose! I actually had some small sympathy for your position, though not in the weird way you expressed it today (Deep South make excellent ice cream btw).

                      I thought Trotter missed the point that day. On the evidence, I think you miss the point every day.

                    • Morrissey …
                      17 October 2013 at 8:21 pm

                      Thanks for transcribing that, McFlock. I can see that I missed a lot, and you have a valid point in disagreeing with my interpretation of Trotter’s comments. I did render his words a little more pointedly than they actually were. However, I think that even when you compare my admittedly imperfect rush “transcript” to your word-perfect transcript, I have captured the essential pomposity of his speaking style and the gist of his admonition to the lesser mortals in the studio to respect that outrageous verdict in Florida. Trotter was speaking slowly and sententiously, as if he was defending the Western system of justice; what he was actually doing was defending a grievous miscarriage of justice. His suggestion that there were “items of evidence which would raise reasonable doubt I think in most people’s minds” was not backed up at all, and disappointingly, Noelle McCarthy failed to demand he did so.

                      You are right to time the silences; they’re not as long as I recalled them in my mind, but they are significant nonetheless. Noelle McCarthy was, I believe, genuinely lost for words after listening to that. So was I.

                    • McFlock …
                      18 October 2013 at 4:22 pm

                      oh fuck off.
                      So let’s say you “captured” trotter’s pompousness (personally, I think you overstated it). That means that you are (at best) a dadaesque caricaturist of discourse.

                      So are all the claims as to near word perfect accuracy simply self-delusion, or are you trying to mimic Sacha baron Cohen’s immersion satire?

  29. greywarbler 29
    16 October 2013 at 5:05 pm

    Someone from a wealthy country chooses to sail somewhere in a yacht for fun and adventure. It goes missing and any country nearby is asked to conduct searches for it.

    Tongan fishermen getting food or money for their families drift for a month or die, refugees from hard regimes, or cruel ones, or wars, or starvation are going into the water probably every day in their efforts to find land and a living and instead find dying.

    Probably because of the actions of the forces from the country the yacht came from. Who gets looked for and cared about?

  30. ScottGN 30
    16 October 2013 at 5:10 pm

    Has Tim Groser gone rogue on his own government? His comments around the under-preparedness of MPI and its subsequent reactions to all the recent food safety crises we’ve had are quite extraordinary.

  31. travellerev 31
    16 October 2013 at 5:32 pm

    If y’all can get past the Auckland mayor letting it all hang out something which in Europe people more or less expect their politicians and “leaders” to do with all of them being Apha personalities and all here is what else those same people do behind the scenes and that pesonally has me way more worried that an alpha male midlife crisis: Jason Burmas from Loose Change shines a light in the shade where the cockroaches of Bilderberg reside. Ladies and gentlemen I give you Shade, enjoy!