Open mike 17/12/2011

91 comments on “Open mike 17/12/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. mickysavage 1

   17 December 2011 at 6:11 am

   Now that the dust has settled and the Election result concluded it is time to start a new campaign.

   When publicly owned assets are under attack,

   STAND UP FIGHT BACK!
   • Pete George 1.1

     17 December 2011 at 6:44 am

     That’s the same old campaigning Greg, and it hasn’t been very successful.

     Maybe you should find out what Labour’s main priorities will be. A good place to start:
     http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10773745

     I could easily agree with much of that. But I suspect there will be bigger – new – things to focus on. Rebuilding New Labour?
     • Colonial Viper 1.1.1

       17 December 2011 at 7:20 am

       Pete George of 0.6% UF giving Labour campaigning tips. How cute.
       • newsense 1.1.1.1

         17 December 2011 at 12:15 pm

         well the election result didn’t obviously allocate posts on the standard. Petey must be up to about 50% here…
         • Ant 1.1.1.1.1

           17 December 2011 at 12:30 pm

           And they are all positive and constructive, working together posts, not nasty or negative ones.
           • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1.1.1

             17 December 2011 at 12:47 pm

             LOL
     • Puddleglum 1.1.2

       17 December 2011 at 3:25 pm

       Good to see Shearer’s positions outlined on the social liberalism/social conservatism scale.

       Now it would be good to see where he stands on the economy, public sector, welfare, etc..

       Specifically, I’d like to hear where he stands on ‘capitalism by stealth’ in the public sector; the economic structures required to eliminate child poverty, welfare ‘reform’, workplace regulation, global trade, democratisation of society and the workplace, etc., etc..
2. Keeshy 2

   17 December 2011 at 7:02 am

   Not true…fight and success can be had. Shonkey had his facebook bombarded and a petition went ballistic. Nek minute…

   Incredible news. Moments ago John Key’s government got directly in touch with the Auckland Sexual Abuse Crisis Centre, committing to “continued funding for the next 6 months” and pledging to work with them to ensure “a sustainable service for the future”.

   It’s an extraordinary victory — for you and everyone else who has been part of the explosion of support for Kirsty McCully’s Change.org petition to save the centre.

   Just a few short days ago things weren’t looking good. Funding was running desperately low, staff were about to be laid off and almost no one in the public or media was paying attention to the plight of the centre. No one in government was admitting they had responsibility — in fact no one would even return the centre’s desperate calls…..

   see more:

   http://www.change.org/petitions/new-zealand-government-stop-the-closure-of-aucklands-247-sexual-violence-crisis-service
   • Pete George 2.1

     17 December 2011 at 7:19 am

     A great result, albeit interim.

     Yes, campaigning can lead to success – if you pick the right fights. It’s hard to argue against this one.
   • yeshe 2.2

     17 December 2011 at 8:17 am

     Can this method be used somehow to gather support for a binding referendum on asset sales ? Jeanette Fitzsimons has offered her support .. 300K signatures needed and will delay any sales by at least one term … ideas anyone ?
3. kriswgtn 3

   17 December 2011 at 7:40 am

   bit of light hearted fun on FB

   http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Benette-diaries/282226425163478?sk=nf
   • Pete George 3.1

     17 December 2011 at 8:06 am

     A lot of people won’t see that as light hearted, it comes across as heavy nastiness whether that’s the intention or not.

     Zetetic just posted on the ‘nasty party’ meme – I’m sure this on FB is being done by an individual or individuals but it won’t help Labour’s aims of reconnecting at all.
     • rosy 3.1.1

       17 December 2011 at 10:20 am

       It maybe says more about you, Pete, that you would automatically think that this has anything to do with how people think about Labour, than it does about Labour.
     • millsy 3.1.2

       17 December 2011 at 11:43 am

       Do you think Cameron Slater and Cathy Odgers are ‘nasty’?
       • Pete George 3.1.2.1

         17 December 2011 at 4:45 pm

         Whale can be at times, sometimes he can be over the top or goes too far or for too long on issues, sometimes he just gets up people’s noses for taking them to task.

         Haven’t really seen it from Cactus but I don’t read much of what she posts.
         • McFlock 3.1.2.1.1

           18 December 2011 at 2:42 am

           sometimes he just gets up people’s noses for taking them to task.

            
           Really? Example, please – I’d just had him pegged as a propogandistic lying – well, to be blunt – cunt.
            
           • Pete George 3.1.2.1.1.1

             18 December 2011 at 7:11 am

             Really? Example please.

             At what you accuse him of I don’t think he’s any worse than some of those who post here.
             Except some of his hit job attempts are provided with actual facts, often from informants.

             I’d rate Whale about 50/50, some of what he does is worthwhile examination and some harmless ranting, while some is overblown, over persistent and over the top.
             • Colonial Viper …

               18 December 2011 at 4:23 pm

               I’d rate Whale about 50/50, some of what he does is worthwhile examination and some harmless ranting, while some is overblown, over persistent and over the top.

               But not often “nasty” then?
             • McFlock …

               18 December 2011 at 4:43 pm

               lol.
                 
               Him claiming credit for wandering around the labour party website a while back was a case in point. Not only did he scaremonger about credit card details, his youtube how-i-did-it style clip was unconvincing regarding his supposed ability to find it out for himself. But the stalking vibe was all him.
   • Bill 3.2

     17 December 2011 at 9:44 am

     Unfortunately, that kind of shit sets the bar too high in regards to what should rightfully be preceived as fishist. Nutzism was a particularily nasty strain of fishism. But it isn’t definitive, although it keeps getting presented as such. Meaning a lot of fishy stuff swims under the radar of people’s perceptions and understandings.
     • Colonial Viper 3.2.1

       17 December 2011 at 10:15 am

       And in a representative demogoguey like we have at the moment, all we end up with is yet another right wink dicktator.
4. The Voice of Reason 4

   17 December 2011 at 8:26 am

   The Guardian has a selection of some of the late Christopher Hitchen’s TV appearances. His thoughts on the afterlife are particularly good!
5. Jimmie 5

   17 December 2011 at 8:37 am

   bit of light hearted fun on FB

   more like completely weird – whoever started this diary needs to see a shrink. Is closer to obsession and stalking than anything else.

   kriswgtn get some help – please
6. Wayne91 6

   17 December 2011 at 10:11 am

   kriswgtn 3
   17 December 2011 at 7:40 am
   bit of light hearted fun on FB

   Not fun or even funny – dont some people get it – this turns people off
   • Colonial Viper 6.1

     17 December 2011 at 10:39 am

     Hopefully Bennett can turn them on again by releasing more beneficiaries’ files.
   • seeker 6.2

     17 December 2011 at 6:31 pm

     No Wayne91, what turns genuine people off is cutting the taxes of the wealthy by 5% there by causing this country to be run into the ground and allowing 200,000 children to live hungry and diseased in dire poverty with no hope apart from that given selflessly by over stretched charities and the Salvation Army.

     And what turns these genuine people off even further is a sneering, really nasty nactuf governmental mindset which blames the vulnerable for the economic situation, says they are just envious n’er do wells in order to ignorantly undermine them and dismissively assign them to the trash bin thereby legitimising the opinion of the right wing dismissers, and allowing said dismissers the comfort of the ‘out of sight, out of mind’ , no guilt, no conscience narrative they so crave.
     The moral universe says otherwise.
     • deuto 6.2.1

       17 December 2011 at 10:08 pm

       +1
   • Vicky32 6.3

     18 December 2011 at 4:30 pm

     Not fun or even funny – dont some people get it – this turns people off

     Not me, I am really enjoying it! 🙂
7. Mutante 7

   17 December 2011 at 11:29 am

   That’s why it’s hard to do satire in this country. Save the humourless.
   • kriswgtn 7.1

     17 December 2011 at 12:03 pm

     totally

     i find it hypocritical that the right say wtf they want

     Bennett is nasty
     forgotten the confidential breach of solo moms tia details???

     cos they stood up to her?????
     wot she did,,that goes way beyond the post i was sent on FB

     people are hurting in NZ- they’re not nasty they’re angry
     deal with it
     • seeker 7.1.1

       17 December 2011 at 8:00 pm

       @ Kriswgtn
       Had only been thinking today that it was about time we had a some really good political satire on the box. It is so needed in NZ. I had hoped for some intelligent satire from 7days as the original version of this in the UK, Have I Got News For You was brilliant on the light polit.satire front and helped to keep news and political events in perspective as well as inform and illuminate truths and lies. No such luck with 7days ,which is mainly comedy,funny tho it is.

       However, that’s why I was pleased to view your link Kris ,thankyou. It reminded me of the ‘big puppety’ scenarios they used in the UK in Spitting Image to depict Thatcher and her male harem/schoolboy followers. Her “are they one of us” group.
       The writers depicted Thatcher as a bullying cross dressing ,cigar smoking tyrant having a fine ol’ time with some of her ‘gang’; one of whom, her right hand man, NormanTebbit, was dressed as a leatherclad ‘skinhead’.

       It would be great to comment on what type of character could best represent some of our politicians.

       My one for Key would be a great big whirly eyed snake head, reminiscent of the snake in Jungle Book, singing in Key mangled speak but with parsel tongue type lisp…… trutht in me, trutht only in me……. buy the athets, they will thtay in new thilland we will make lawth, trutht in me……no GethT, trutht in me…. or Paula Bennett as Miss Benette or Hekia Parata as Edwina Currie from Thatcher’s government who was satirised as a vampire.- very glam and gothic….now about Stuart Nash………wily coyote?
       • kriswgtn 7.1.1.1

         18 December 2011 at 7:42 am

         well after watching 2 of my 4 series of The New Statesmen yesterday yup totally agree
8. Olwyn 8

   17 December 2011 at 11:41 am

   I have to say that, even allowing for Fran O’Sullivan’s political leanings, I find this article disconcerting:

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10773689

   “But much of the real strategising started several months back when Shearer and close caucus allies such as former Labour list MP Stuart Nash seriously began talking about a post-election leadership tilt. Influential members of the “commentariat” – particularly those of the right-of-centre persuasion – were informally briefed. Shearer was promoted as having a modern international outlook; pro-business, pro-science and innovation, and not prone to the phony cloth-cap ideology that Goff had to dip into to retain the confidence of the Labour unionists who have for too long dominated the party.”

   and

   “But Nash will have urged Shearer not to offer Cunliffe a high ranking on the front-bench…Nash has made no secret of the fact that he would prefer that Cunliffe exits politics altogether.”

   If anyone who is in the know reads this I ask you, (1) Am I now deludedly giving my little monthly donation to a right-wing party? (2) Are the people whose lives have been made wretched in this tin-pot neoliberal heaven to be further abandoned? (3) Why (if it is true) are you trying to hound your most talented politician out of parliament when you only have 34 seats in it?
   • Colonial Viper 8.1

     17 December 2011 at 11:51 am

     OMG.
     • Ant 8.1.1

       17 December 2011 at 12:15 pm

       Yuck
       • Jim Nald 8.1.1.1

         17 December 2011 at 2:03 pm

         So was Shearer installed by the Gang of Four (Robertson, Mallard, King and Goff)?
   • Draco T Bastard 8.2

     17 December 2011 at 2:41 pm

     I have to say that, even allowing for Fran O’Sullivan’s political leanings, I find this article disconcerting:

     It’s supposed to be – it’s an attack on Labour designed to drop their support even more and possibly increase the number of non-voters next election.
     • Olwyn 8.2.1

       17 December 2011 at 3:02 pm

       OK. But they are reasonably precise claims. If they are false, then Labour must be able to deny them, and if they are true but misleading explain them. Which was the point of my three questions.
       • Tigger 8.2.1.1

         17 December 2011 at 3:51 pm

         Why hasn’t she written about the meeting where Key asked to step down rather than this wet dream conspiracy shit? Marie Quinn was there Fran. Ask her and put that in your column.
       • Colonial Viper 8.2.1.2

         17 December 2011 at 5:09 pm

         In fact, many of her claims are stated as facts, and not opinion. Fran O’Sullivan has been around the block and would not make that rookie error of judgement unless she was certain that she couldn’t be instantly refuted by the players in question.
       • Draco T Bastard 8.2.1.3

         17 December 2011 at 5:35 pm

         But they are reasonably precise claims.

         Well, if they’re true then all I can say is that Labour are fucked. They would no longer be the party for working people. Although, they haven’t really been that for awhile.

         It was this bit that really got me:-

         In other words, the right politician to drag Labour into the 21st century and out of its ideological cul-de-sac.

         As it seems to show that Labour are going to go even more right-wing than they are now and that would mean that they’re going to become NAct light. All the same delusional economic policies (the ones that just saw the financial system collapse) with a few more identity politics polices thrown in.
         • Colonial Viper 8.2.1.3.1

           17 December 2011 at 5:41 pm

           Economic and corporatist right wing, (a few) more crumbs thrown to the poor and to workers than National would, socially liberal.
       • seeker 8.2.1.4

         17 December 2011 at 6:46 pm

         Thanks for commenting on this article Olwyn. Saw it just recently and felt as disconcerted as yourself, and am now totally off Nash as well as a few others. Labour needs to come clean to clear up any misunderstandings or we really will need a NEW Labour.

         I hope someone posts about this on Red Alert
     • oftenpuzzled 8.2.2

       17 December 2011 at 4:34 pm

       does she know all this stuff anyway?
       • oftenpuzzled 8.2.2.1

         17 December 2011 at 4:35 pm

         the ‘How’ at the beginning of the question dropped off! How does she know this stuff?
         • Colonial Viper 8.2.2.1.1

           17 December 2011 at 5:12 pm

           She said right wing commentators were briefed early on; she was probably one of them.

           It fraks me off royally to think all the leadership BS the right wing media were printing to undermine Goff, may actually have been based on facts verified from within caucus itself.
   • Blue 8.3

     17 December 2011 at 4:12 pm

     Fran may be a Tory, but she is very well-connected in the political world. And what she is saying here is pretty much what has been guessed at already.

     There is a poisonous little faction in Labour who undermined Phil Goff’s leadership at every turn and forced him out, and then blocked David Cunliffe’s bid in order to seize power for themselves.

     I don’t want any part of that disloyal, malicious and toxic little club.

     What they did to Phil was appalling, and now they are trying to force David C out too.
     • Salsy 8.3.1

       17 December 2011 at 4:33 pm

       I tend to agree, if Shearer doesnt give Cunliffe a significant role, it will be a crucial mistake. Fran is 100% correct when she describes Cunliffe:

       But he was also one of the few stellar performers in Goff’s team.. If Shearer is not captive to his supporters he will put some undeserving long-servers to the sword first
   • Anne 8.4

     17 December 2011 at 7:13 pm

     (1) Am I now deludedly giving my little monthly donation to a right-wing party?
     I think so Olwyn.

     (2) Are the people whose lives have been made wretched in this tin-pot neoliberal heaven to be further abandoned?
     In the short to medium term yes. Hopefully not the long term.

     (3) Why (if it is true) are you trying to hound your most talented politician out of parliament when you only have 34 seats in it?

     It’s a combination of jeolousy, tall poppy syndrome and an unseemly scramble for personal political power at the expense of the Party as a whole. The plotting to undermine Cunliffe and eventually destroy him began in 2008. The leadership meetings were a farce. I have been horrified by the lies and the scuttlebutt, and it looks like a number of Labour MPs fell for it. My sincere hope is that the culprits and their various motivations will eventually be publicly outed.

     Full credit to Fran O’Sullivan for writing the article.
     • Olwyn 8.4.1

       17 December 2011 at 7:21 pm

       Thanks Anne, you have gone some way toward confirming my fears (sigh).
       • RobM 8.4.1.1

         17 December 2011 at 7:48 pm

         So I’m not the only one that feels like they’ve been had.

         And what a good look it is to have Nash low down the list but returning as chief of staff.
         Nice comfy salary for everybody.

         2011 was never to be seriously contested.

         I’m afraid I fell for the last minute “Oh fuck we’re losing our base, let’s get out the friendly faces and empty rhetoric” campaign.

         The wretched have been sacrificed for the ambition of Alas Robertson & Jones.

         The right are going to crucify the naive chumps.
9. randal 9

   17 December 2011 at 11:48 am

   fran sullivan and her crew are just mouthpieces for the nashil gubmint. their stuff is hardly serious journalism.
   that is why new Zealand needs an alternative to corporate propoganda dissemination disguised as news.
   or. I cant stop laughing over this oxymoron, “think pieces”.
   more like glad handed payouts from the “interests”.
10. Wayne91 10

    17 December 2011 at 11:56 am

    CV agree – she shoudln’t have released those details but they should not have been decietful either.
    • Fotran 10.1

      17 December 2011 at 1:19 pm

      Wayne91
      You are possibly right but the MSM are above and beyond what is right and ethical. They make news to sell media for a price.
      Look at the way the MSM took over and controlled the recent Election. Disgraceful.
    • weka 10.2

      17 December 2011 at 2:25 pm

      How were they deceitful?
11. chris73 11

    17 December 2011 at 12:47 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6154368/Former-MP-Georgina-Beyer-unemployed

    She seems a little deluded IF this is accurate (journalists picking and choosing what they want to print and all)
    • kriswgtn 11.1

      17 December 2011 at 1:41 pm

      Georgina will pick herself up
      Remember Carmen died 2 days ago
      have some compassion instead of trolling wanker
      • chris73 11.1.1

        17 December 2011 at 3:50 pm

        Yes cumknuckle I’m sure Carmens death is the reason she can’t find a job.
        • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.1

          17 December 2011 at 5:27 pm

          have some compassion instead of trolling wanker

          Made your choice I see chris73.
12. Lanthanide 12

    17 December 2011 at 12:50 pm

    Maybe this was discussed yesterday, but:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-earthquake/6154354/Government-to-take-over-quake-claims

    The $1.8 billion of earthquake claims of troubled Canterbury insurer AMI Insurance are to be taken over by the Government which might eventually be left with a bill of $120 million or more.

    This would have been mostly fleshed out before the election. Certainly these deals don’t take just 3 weeks to plan from start to finish. Yet we didn’t hear anything about it until now. How strange.
    • Redbaron77 12.1

      17 December 2011 at 2:00 pm

      It immediatedly appeared to be a grubby “socialism is ok for corporates” deal. On closer inspection its a solution to reduce the Government’s exposure to a liability of a $500 million guarantee to cover AMI’s re-insurance shortfall for the Christchurch earthquakes down to $120 million. Plus it preserves AMI as a going concern as it had no future in its present state – with the takeover by IAG less the earthquake liabilities a way forward. However at the cost of the taxpayer (everyday people) having to pick up the shortfall.

      The deal firstly demonstrates once again the folly of poor regulation in markets and secondly exposes the mindset of the Government. Perhaps I am being naive here, but at looking at this deal IAG is the winner here. However if the Government was prepared to put up a $500 million guarantee to AMI, why did it not consider a version of the same deal that involves gaining control of AMI or going into partnership with a better insurance manager such IAG . The ROI would at least over the medium term help defray the $120 million that the taxpayer will have to stump up, partially retain profits in New Zealand and build up a valuable for asset over the long term.
    • Draco T Bastard 12.2

      17 December 2011 at 2:31 pm

      Yet we didn’t hear anything about it until now. How strange.

      Not strange – this government wouldn’t tell us a thing if they thought that they could get away with it.
13. millsy 13

    17 December 2011 at 1:38 pm

    David Shearer needs to think about a way to gain the inititave in 2012.

    I’m thinking he could make an Orewa style speech, like Don Brash (no, not slag off Maori, DPB ladies, etc), but the tactic itself was a good one, he essentially set the agenda. That is what Shearer needs to do. Labour have nothing to lose.
14. joe90 14

    17 December 2011 at 1:59 pm

    A Sunlight Foundation article on the influence of The One Percent Of The One Percent on US electoral spending.

    In the 2010 election cycle, 26,783 individuals (or slightly less than one in ten thousand Americans) each contributed more than $10,000 to federal political campaigns. Combined, these donors spent $774 million. That’s 24.3% of the total from individuals to politicians, parties, PACs, and independent expenditure groups. Together, they would fill only two-thirds of the 41,222 seats at Nationals Park the baseball field two miles from the U.S. Capitol. When it comes to politics, they are The One Percent of the One Percent.

    But WTF, money talks with Americans Elect, backed by millionaires with ties to the FBI, CIA and military, creating a third place on the 2012 presidential ballot for an unnamed candidate.
15. the pink postman 15

    17 December 2011 at 3:38 pm

    I have no doubt that the Nats are already campaigning for the next election. Crosby /Trextor will being setting the way now. Already we are seeing Key every night on the TV and the Right-Wing columists like Sullivan ansd Co will now also start on Shearer.However having said that the article on Shearer in todays Herald is excellent.Its up,to every Labour member to get this out to the public.Before we allow Garner and Holmes a chance to run down Shearer, perhaps now is the time to ask them what happened to their claims that the LP leadsip election will be a blood bath. They must be cringing .
    • seeker 15.1

      17 December 2011 at 6:40 pm

      Which article on Shearer pp.? can you link please?
      • Carol 15.1.1

        17 December 2011 at 6:46 pm

        This one, from the top of the NZH website?

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10773745

        New Labour leader David Shearer is a republican who supports a new national flag, and a social liberal on gay issues – though he is less liberal on drug and alcohol issues.

        Mr Shearer, who took over the leadership on Tuesday, is a strong advocate for an independent foreign policy, and personally believes New Zealand’s flag should be changed.
        • just saying 15.1.1.1

          17 December 2011 at 8:16 pm

          Well he’s certainly got the meaningsless waffle down pat.
          Wonder what “detail” he wants to see in the gay adoption issue. Surely he’s not proposing different adoption laws for gay people?
          He’s looking very much like the new Phil Goff – just like the old one with better OE.
      • the pink postman 15.1.2

        18 December 2011 at 3:43 pm

        it was was in Saturdays on line Herald and was on his background and work with STC and the United Nations,It was hard to believe it was the Herald but one is surprised sometimes.
    • Pete George 15.2

      17 December 2011 at 6:53 pm

      That article is just a right wing trick, it’s the Herald, don’t get duped by that.
      • the pink postman 15.2.1

        19 December 2011 at 2:55 pm

        Im never duped by the Herald or any other right-wing paper believe me
      • the pink postman 15.2.2

        19 December 2011 at 2:58 pm

        Im never duped by any thing I read in the Herald.With my background Im suspicious of anyone or anything that is even slightly right-wing . Never trust a Tory no matter what.
16. seeker 16

    17 December 2011 at 6:48 pm

    Thanks Carol. Forgot that one as I was so miffed by Fran O’s one.
17. AnnaLiviaPlurabella 17

    17 December 2011 at 6:53 pm

    Shearer’s failure so far to offer Cunliffe a credible role indicates that he actually is Trevor’s poodle. The party won’t accept a right wing group taking it over and white-anting lefties. We removed them before and we will do it again.

    The open approach of the “primary” process is now gone. It is back to the smart ass stuff of Trevor &co that lost us the election. Have a word with your local MP. Ask him or her to tell you what is going on.
    • Colonial Viper 17.1

      17 December 2011 at 7:29 pm

      Oh lets all just go over to the dark side. Like the US democrats have. Much easier.

      On second thoughts, nah. To the frakin barricades.
    • Carol 17.2

      17 December 2011 at 7:49 pm

      My local MP is David Cunliffe. Would he know everything, and is he likely to tell me what he knows?
      • Ianupnorth 17.2.1

        17 December 2011 at 8:13 pm

        Am I the only one who is pissed off by said Mallard?
        • Blue 17.2.1.1

          17 December 2011 at 8:18 pm

          Nope. I think I will have to make it a condition – no voting for Labour until Mallard is gone.
      • Colonial Viper 17.2.2

        17 December 2011 at 11:46 pm

        Carol – its your right as a consituent in his electorate to be able to meet with your MP. As for whether he “knows everything” I am sure he will have a better idea than most of us.
18. neoleftie 18

    17 December 2011 at 8:31 pm

    well the only people who know what really is going on is the insiders within the party elite.
    Ive watched trev mallard over the years – extremely hard working in the house till late at night and on red alert.
    Now how about lets show some unity, dignity and accept that the cuacus, one hopes, have it right and move on and start the campaign for 2014.
    We need to the tories gone so more unity, activity and reconnection i think
    • lprent 18.1

      17 December 2011 at 8:55 pm

      At this point I’m getting far more interested in the organisational review. I’ve been waiting for that for about 20 years
    • mickysavage 18.2

      17 December 2011 at 9:14 pm

      Neolefite it is all very good to talk about unity and dignity but you also mentioned Mallard.  To be honest he is Labour’s version of Stephen Joyce and Murray McCully rolled into one.

      Someone has been slurring Cunliffe for the past three years and it has Mallard’s fingerprints all over it.  If he is now insisting on unity and dignity he should have thought about this three years ago.
      • RedLogix 18.2.1

        17 December 2011 at 9:28 pm

        I’ve got a letter on my desk right now asking for a renewed committment to my current Labour party donations. And on my desk it will sit unanswered…. because I’m not getting any reassuring smoke-signals about this election of Shearer as Leader. Either it’s too soon and I should wait, or my instincts are telling me something that isn’t clear yet.

        Unity and dignity are essential…. but they are not code-words for blind loyalty either.
        • seeker 18.2.1.1

          17 December 2011 at 9:34 pm

          Oh well said RedLogix. Very wise words.
19. lprent 19

    17 December 2011 at 8:58 pm

    Darn, been either socialising with a family today, debugging some code, or having a nice afternoon snooze (the sheer pleasure of that).

    But now I have two posts in the editor and absolutely no will to finish them… Time for a w(h)ine. Maybe some TV would drive me back to anything less moronic.
20. Jum 20

    18 December 2011 at 1:44 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10773695

    private equity battle over Media Works? Didn’t taxpayers just loan them money thanks to Joyce?
21. AnnaLiviaPlurabella 21

    18 December 2011 at 1:48 am

    In a short two week “primary season” Cunliffe went from being dismissed to being endorsed by Chris Trotter, Brian Edwards, Matt McCartan, Paul Holmes, Guyon Espiner and many more. The membership went into the Debates generally pro Shearer and came out pro Cunliffe.
    Many will now be wondering why the negative briefing by Labour managers to undermine the top performer Cunliffe happened. And who was doing it. Shearer’s credibility in his new role will be measured by how well he handles this issue. The members will be watching: they know that a successful inclusion of Cunliffe will bode well for 2014.
22. the pink postman 22

    18 December 2011 at 3:52 pm

    The leadership debate is over .It was wellrub and without “Garners” bloodbath. Now we need to get behind Shearer and get Labour Back in 2012. Tell all the Nat cruitics to go to hell.Im rapidly beginning to believe the correct choice was made and I think the Tories know this and are quite worried. Shearer’s background is nothing less than super and is all Social Demicratic practice and labour can really be proud of such a leader.And
23. the pink postman 23

    18 December 2011 at 3:57 pm

    The leadership debate is over .It was well run and without “Garners” bloodbath. Now we need to get behind Shearer and get Labour Back in 2012. Tell all the Nat critics to go to hell.Im rapidly beginning to believe the correct choice was made and I think the Tories know this and are quite worried. Shearer’s background is nothing less than super and is all Social Demicratic ideals Labour can really be proud of such a leader.And corny or not the fact that Key made $i50m against Shearer saving 150 lives is true and let us tell the public .
    • Colonial Viper 23.1

      18 December 2011 at 4:49 pm

      I’m waiting to see how smart the front bench line up chosen by Shearer is, and I’m waiting to see if Labour continue down a strong and active social democratic stance towards 2014.

      Can we remind ourselves for a second that Michael Joseph Savage was a labourer, miner and unionist (thanks Wikipedia). He did not come from a heroic famous backstory. And Savage became the greatest NZ Prime Minister of all time through what he accomplished for the people in office, not what he did before office.
24. joe90 24

    19 December 2011 at 3:22 pm

    An interview with anthropologist David Graeber, the author of Debt: The First 5000 Years.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS