Open mike 19/02/2013

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 19th, 2013 - 182 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

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

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

Step right up to the mike…

182 comments on “Open mike 19/02/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jenny 1
    19 February 2013 at 6:14 am

    ‘

    “The biggest climate change rally in US history”

    Will we have. to have similiar rallies here before our law makers start taking climate change seriously?

    :“I hope that Americans are fed up with being ignored and with having Congress controlled by the big polluting industries and that they have decided that they are simply not going to stop until their voices are heard.”

    Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse Euro News

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/17/keystone-xl-pipeline-protest-dc

    “I think it’s really important for Obama to realise that his base, the people who supported him, do not want this,”

    Judy Dufficy Former teacher from Chicago.and Obama volunteer.

  2. mickysavage 2
    19 February 2013 at 7:36 am

    Did anyone just hear our beloved leader on Radio New Zealand this morning? He sounded well under the weather and as if he had a hard night the night before.

      • Sanctuary 2.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 8:45 am

        Anyone else detecting signs Key has developed a drinking problem?

        He was slurring at the RWC opening, something politely overlooked by the media – but hey, he a Kiwi guy just like us and who would deny the man a drink?

        John Key “fainted” in a Christchurch restaurant, and no real suitable explaination was given. it was immediately after his holiday, so fatigue could hardly be the reason.

        Audrey Young sent out a not so subtle hint Key was suffering a hangover recently in Queenstown:

        “…During a wreath-laying ceremony, Key appeared to have difficulty keeping his eyes open for a couple of minutes. He kept rubbing his eyes, but no sooner had he opened them than they would shut. He said later, through a spokeswoman, that the problem was because of the glare on the war memorial, which made his eyes water…”

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10864459

        Muldoon famously announced an election drunk as a skunk, and our media studiously avoided mentioning that.

        Alcohol abuse is probably endemic in parliament, like hospo I would imagine it is an occupational hazard linked to ready access, long hours and work pressure. But would our media have the courage to expose a drunkard PM?

        • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 8:48 am

          But would our media have the courage to expose a drunkard PM?

          Well, who do you think he is drinking with half of the time?

          And yes, binge drinking is endemic in Parliament. MPs, staffers, advisors, what have you.

          • TheContrarian 2.1.1.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 9:35 am

            I worked in Parliament for about 3 years and never saw any of this binge drinking you mention. And as a heavy drinker myself I would have loved to have joined in but alas – it doesn’t really exist.

            And if John Key had a drinking problem then the opposition would be all over it. How better to win an election than to portray your opponent as a drunk?

          • King Kong 2.1.1.1.2
            19 February 2013 at 9:43 am

            And you know this because alot of MP’s and Parliamentary staffers carry out this binge drinking in your back bedroom in Dunedin?

        • Tim 2.1.1.2
          19 February 2013 at 11:33 am

          “Anyone else detecting signs Key has developed a drinking problem?”

          It’s hard to tell – he has such lazy speech. As mother used to say….. ‘Lazy speech, lazy thinking, lazy mind’

          It’s why he has to rely on an ideology learned parrot-fashion – and a failed one at that!

          • TheContrarian 2.1.1.2.1
            19 February 2013 at 11:34 am

            I thought it was a speech impediment he had as a child. Read it somewhere though can’t find any reference for it.

            • McFlock 2.1.1.2.1.1
              19 February 2013 at 12:13 pm

              It could be any number of things.
              Hell, he might have brain cancer, hence the desire to finish his bucket list.

              Whatever it is, it might be getting worse – hopefully for him it’ll clear up when he leaves office. Less stress and all that. I don’t think anyone can fuck up a country this badly without it having a corrosive effect on their soul.

            • felixviper 2.1.1.2.1.2
              19 February 2013 at 1:21 pm

              Yep, it’s a speech impediment.

              Oddly enough it only seems to surface when he’s on the piss.

    • David H 2.2
      19 February 2013 at 9:56 am

      Sound’s like he’s still half shickered. must have been a big nite last nite.

    • Chris 2.3
      19 February 2013 at 10:29 am

      I didn’t think it sounded like him,maybe he has a speech double.He sounded like he either had a hangover or had taken meds for something or other. Probably something to “relax” him.

  3. johnm 3
    19 February 2013 at 7:37 am

    More on the horror of ATOS in the U$K. Coming here if Johnny Keyshine can only work up the nerve:

  4. Mr Burns 4
    19 February 2013 at 7:52 am

    Oh look that Shearer person is a really tolerant fellow. He says there is room in the Labour Party for MPs with homophobic views.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/02/shearer_on_homophobes_and_labour.html#comments

    • TiggerViper 4.1
      19 February 2013 at 9:43 am

      Hardly breaking news since two Labour MPs met an anti-marriage equality petition on Parliament’s steps. And they’re still MPs. New diversion thanks.

  5. The Al1en 5
    19 February 2013 at 7:57 am

    Increasingly looking like, despite Labour’s best efforts, it’s status quo for the next few years.
    We’re on our people.
    Look after your mums, your neighbours and by the grace of dog, we’ll all make it through.

  6. Aww 6
    19 February 2013 at 8:05 am

    35 women are saved from having more babies while they are on a benefit or low income. Victory!

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/01/free_contraception_uptake.html

    • infused 6.1
      19 February 2013 at 8:10 am

      God forbid people actually pay for their own kids instead of lumping them on to everyone else.

      • Colonial Viper 6.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 8:37 am

        God forbid we create an extra 150,000 jobs so that everyone who wants a family can have a working income.

      • Colonial Weka 6.1.2
        19 February 2013 at 9:02 am

        God forbid that women should decline to take contraception that has risks and side effects. Why is the govt not free funding other kinds of contraception?

        • TiggerViper 6.1.2.1
          19 February 2013 at 9:46 am

          God forbid the media ask why men aren’t sharing responsibility for contraception. I say we offer free vasectomies along with all types of contraception.

          • Colonial Weka 6.1.2.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 10:10 am

            That’s not a bad idea. Problem is, Bennett wants teenagers to stop having babies, and I doubt many young men want to get the snip.

        • higherstandard 6.1.2.2
          19 February 2013 at 12:16 pm

          Virtually all forms of contraception are majority funded by the state in NZ.

      • Draco T Bastard 6.1.3
        19 February 2013 at 12:14 pm

        So, in your view, what is the purpose of the economy?

  7. JK 7
    19 February 2013 at 8:25 am

    This poll was on TV1 breakfast news yesterday. Extract from today’s Herald

    The poll also had good news for National, with a 5 percentage point jump in support taking them to 49 per cent. Labour was on 33 per cent and the Greens 11 per cent.

    Mr Key also gained five points, according to the preferred prime minister measure, giving him 44 per cent, with Labour leader David Shearer on 15 per cent.

    • Colonial Weka 8.1
      19 February 2013 at 9:09 am

      “TheDailyBlog.co.nz will bring together 30 of the best left-wing bloggers and progressive opinion shapers in NZ all onto one site to critique the news, the media, and politics to provide the other side of the story.”

      “Launching March 1st TheDailyBlog.co.nz will feature: Chris Trotter, Selwyn Manning, Professor Jane Kelsey, Keith Locke, Sue Bradford, John Minto, David Slack, Morgan Godfery, Gareth Renowden, Coley Tangerina, Phoebe Fletcher, Dr Wayne Hope, Queen of Thorns, Burnt out Teacher, Steve Grey, Aaron Hawkins, Marama Davidson, Tim Selwyn, James Ritchie, Efeso Collins, Robert Winter, Lynn Prentice, Frank MacsKasy, Matt McCarten, Wayne Butson, Chris Flatt, Allan Alach, TheDailyBlog Reposts and The Liberal Agenda.”

      • Pascal's bookie 8.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 9:30 am

        It’s a strong line up. I assume Bomber hisself will also be posting, but maybe not.

        Best of luck to them (you) all.

        • King Kong 8.1.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 9:38 am

          I am just scared about what happens when you put that many self satisfied, know it alls in the same place. The mix of with pathetic whinging and misplaced sense of entitlement could blow up the internet.

          • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 9:48 am

            Bankers, financiers and the 0.1% are the ones with the grand sense of self-entitlement.

          • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1.1.2
            19 February 2013 at 12:47 pm

            Kiwiblog and other similar sites haven’t blown up the internet yet and they’ve got heaps of whingers full of self-entitlement and other RWNJs.

        • David H 8.1.1.2
          19 February 2013 at 10:26 am

          I saw that list and on about half of them I either said “who” or “why” .

      • TheContrarian 8.1.2
        19 February 2013 at 10:03 am

        One just hopes that like Kiwiblog and The Standard (and unlike Tumeke) that commentary is free and moderated sparingly.

        With Bradbury at the helm though I am not very optimistic of this.

        • millsy 8.1.2.1
          19 February 2013 at 10:27 am

          You just hate him because you are a hard-core rightwinger who wants to close schools and hospitals, to pay for tax cuts.

          • Tiger Mountain 8.1.2.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 10:44 am

            “The Daily Blog” sounds like a sterling idea with a big enough roster to pace people or let them quietly slide off if the pace is too much. BUT it had better have like buttons, moderation and one off registration not the the google account login nightmare Tumeke is, if this daily blogger is going to use it.

            • millsy 8.1.2.1.1.1
              19 February 2013 at 11:02 am

              Yeah that’s what pissed my off about Tumeke as well. I didnt want to log in under my real name to post. I would very much prefer to post under “millsy”, the post name I have had for the past 13 years…

          • TheContrarian 8.1.2.1.2
            19 February 2013 at 10:55 am

            Wow – nice non-sequiter, Millsy.

            Sounds like it came from a quote generator.

      • millsy 8.1.3
        19 February 2013 at 10:21 am

        Bloody awesome. Sounds bloody good. A powerhouse of good decent left wingers who belive in things like taxing the rich to pay for schools and hospitals and locking up all DOC land from mining forever.

        Ill definitely be going there on my daily web trawls.

      • xtasy 8.1.4
        19 February 2013 at 10:52 am

        Great!

        This is what is needed! Combining voices and forces, using the power of synergy, to establish a resolute opposition to what we get served up by incompetent, indifferent or even damned biased, misinforming, manipulating and increasingly disgusting privately controlled, commercial mainstream media.

        I look forward to this blog.

        Just one worry I have, I hope it does not come with the features and technical hiccups that Tumeke has caused. Just trying to open that website once again, it instantly made my browser collapse.

        Also I hope it will allow pseudonyms and fair, open debate, similar to what we have here on TS.

        • TheContrarian 8.1.4.1
          19 February 2013 at 11:31 am

          “Also I hope it will allow pseudonyms and fair, open debate, similar to what we have here on TS.”

          As do I. No point in haven’t a big blog with numerous editors if you are just going to shut off dissenting POV’s which unfortunately seems to be the case at Tumeke

      • karol 8.1.5
        19 February 2013 at 6:01 pm

        Now that’s a really good leftie line-up, including many people whose posts I usually read.

        When Bomber dropped his teasers, I was hoping for something with an audio component (like radio) rather than print based. Maybe a left radio/TV station is still something waiting for it’s time to come.

        However, hopefully it’s a line-up that will gain critical mass, and widespread significant mainstream attention. Also, Bomber will likely include some of his bloggers (if not all) as guests on Citizen A.

        I hope it’s an extremely successful blog.

        • felixviper 8.1.5.1
          19 February 2013 at 7:06 pm

          I think a leftie radio network would be more effective than a tv station. Most people can’t watch telly at work.

          • karol 8.1.5.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 7:11 pm

            Hmm… some of us can’t listen to the radio at work. But, I agree a leftie radio station would be an excellent innovation – could be done online. Could be listened to while traveling/commuting.

  9. Dv 9
    19 February 2013 at 9:28 am

    NZTA bills crash victim $1300

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8320507/NZTA-bills-crash-victim-1300
    The mother of a teenager nearly killed in a car crash has been billed by the New Zealand Transport Agency for the cost of closing the road while she was cut free.

    Is this legal?
    The insurance industry does not know much about it.

    Insurance Council insurance manager John Lucas had never heard of such a charge.

    “From discussions I’ve had with insurers, it would appear to be a new practice.”
    And if it is legal, can accident victims recover costs if the road is not up to standard?

    • Colonial Viper 9.1
      19 February 2013 at 9:36 am

      OMG

      welcome to America

      • TiggerViper 9.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 9:49 am

        I damaged my car on a pothole last month. Invoicing NZTA as we speak…

      • Tigger 9.1.2
        19 February 2013 at 9:52 am

        I damaged my car on a pothole last month. Invoicing NZTA as we speak…

      • Colonial Weka 9.1.3
        19 February 2013 at 9:56 am

        Jeeze, is there no such thing as an accident any more? Wouldn’t NZTA have to prove that the ‘accident’ was the fault of the car owner, if that’s who they are billing?

        • Colonial Viper 9.1.3.1
          19 February 2013 at 10:06 am

          Innocent bystanders to be billed next.

          I guess the NZTA need this money for more valuable highways?

        • David H 9.1.3.2
          19 February 2013 at 10:28 am

          There is NO such thing as an Accident. They are all just Incidents, with differing degree’s of fault, and or blame.

    • millsy 9.2
      19 February 2013 at 10:24 am

      If we all had to pay through the nose for the mistakes we made, then there would be huge queues at the bankruptcy courts.

      Quite frankly I think this charge is BS, and it sets a worrying precedent.

    • ianmac 9.3
      19 February 2013 at 10:35 am

      But the generous souls will not be invoicing dead people. They are so kind???

    • millsy 9.4
      19 February 2013 at 10:52 am

      I note the rednecks on the stuff site think its OK. Nothing turns a redneck on like bankrupting someone because they made a mistake.

      • King Kong 9.4.1
        19 February 2013 at 11:18 am

        Generally people take out insurance to cover their mistakes. The only people who might go bankrupt from this are the selfish who expect everyone else to pick up the tab for their fuck ups.

        • millsy 9.4.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 11:26 am

          So you think its OK to financially cripple this woman? I bet you would have everything taken from her and her out on the street.

          All because you want a tax cut.

          • King Kong 9.4.1.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 11:30 am

            She has got insurance so they should pay it. What is wrong with that?

            • McFlock 9.4.1.1.1.1
              19 February 2013 at 12:41 pm

              It’s called “being a prick to people who have better things to worry about than your 0.03% increase in budget expenditure”.

              The issue seems to be that the fuel levy and other incomes no longer fund our roads, so regional cost centres are forced to be fuckwits to worried or grieving relatives.

            • Draco T Bastard 9.4.1.1.1.2
              19 February 2013 at 1:04 pm

              Because the chances are the insurance won’t pay for it. The NZTA has determined that the driver was at fault and such a determination will let the insurance companies off. It’d be the same as not having a WoF on your car even though the car was up to standard.

        • bad12 9.4.1.2
          19 February 2013 at 11:31 am

          As this would seem to be part of the cost of an accident, guess who will be paying for this piece of stupidity, and i am talking about the billing of this person for these costs as the stupidity,

          The arms of the State shuffling paperwork in an idiots dance will result by the time all the shuffling is done in the costs being double what the original bill was…

        • felixviper 9.4.1.3
          19 February 2013 at 11:55 am

          Are you saying that this goes on all the time?

          That NZTA regularly bills people in accidents for closing the road, but we never heard about it until now because it’s usually covered by insurance?

          Highly unlikely KK. I hardly think our insurance companies would be paying out such fees and not telling us.

          • King Kong 9.4.1.3.1
            19 February 2013 at 12:40 pm

            According to NZTA they have been doing it for years. Obviously you know better.

            • McFlock 9.4.1.3.1.1
              19 February 2013 at 12:43 pm

              depends under what circumstances. Were they billing families of hospitalised drivers ten years ago? I reckon they were probably billing people for vandalism or diesel on the roads for donuts, and it’s encroached from there into full fuckwitted behaviours.

            • Draco T Bastard 9.4.1.3.1.2
              19 February 2013 at 1:06 pm

              Insurance Council insurance manager John Lucas had never heard of such a charge.

              “From discussions I’ve had with insurers, it would appear to be a new practice.”

              And yet it seems to be the first time that the insurance companies have heard of it.

        • Draco T Bastard 9.4.1.4
          19 February 2013 at 1:00 pm

          Generally people take out insurance to cover their mistakes.

          And the most efficient and cheapest insurance is living in a community which is something we all do and, in fact, have to do.

    • NoseViper (The Nose knows) 9.5
      19 February 2013 at 12:58 pm

      This is shocking stuff. Assistance to citizens should be part of the national support of road users. If it is a commercial vehicle being used for business then it could be argued that this be done.

      How can it be that daft bu..s go off to sea or on tramping trips with no proper equipment, or tourists hit their emergency beacon for a helicopter and I don’t think there is a charge for this.
      Yachties floating around on the sea, wanting to be rescued of course, if their lifestyle or sport goes badly wrong. Do they pay the ships diverted to help them?

      Some things are just unreasonable – like tenants being asked to pay for a house they were renting if it burns down. How can ordinary people have to shoulder these extra costs which should be borne elsewhere?

      • Draco T Bastard 9.5.1
        19 February 2013 at 1:10 pm

        Call the Coast Guard and you will be charged. Of course, the Coast Guard is a volunteer organisation and not (or minimally) government funded.

        • KJT 9.5.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 1:54 pm

          Coastguard does not charge for rescuing people, only if you want them to save your boat as well. Even this is free if you have paid the, modest, membership fee.

          Same with shipping companies. I have never heard of a shipping company charging for rescueing people after a Mayday. There is a fund available to reimburse rescuers. I don’t think it has ever been claimed.
          Loss of income, or damage, from having to divert for a mayday is, however, covered in marine insurance.
          Which means we can come and rescue you without worrying being sued for risking the owners ship, so long as you have made it a “Mayday”.

          If you want a commercial vessel to go to the time, trouble and expanse of picking up your boat as well, though, expect to pay. In most cases this risks the ships insurance cover as well as extra delays and costs. At 50k plus a day they add up quick.

      • McFlock 9.5.2
        19 February 2013 at 1:15 pm

        I think ambulances have a charge that’s more commonly applied now, too.

        Everyone gets short of public funds, everyone finds incremental revenue.
        National’s “brighter future”.

      • Rogue Trooper 9.5.3
        19 February 2013 at 4:36 pm

        cereally though, cobber, there is always “The Sunbird” or “Ancient Evenings” (Smith and Mailer) 🙂

  10. Pete 10
    19 February 2013 at 9:59 am

    We’re all very highly critical of the government, but I think we should applaud Cabinet’s decision to go ahead with plain packaging on cigarette packets. I think it will remove the cachet some brands have – like Marlboro, Dunhill, Lucky Strike and Camel. I don’t think it will deter those who stick with more downmarket brands, but it will take some of the glamour away for those who might take up smoking. A positive move, in my opinion.

    • bad12 10.1
      19 February 2013 at 11:42 am

      Lolz, i don’t think it will have the slightest effect on those who take up smoking, having been a smoker during the limited amount of time i spent at college and also having had the displeasure of watching the same (mis)behavior from my nieces during their incarceration at the same institution i can assure you that for the young smoker ‘brand’ isn’t a consideration,

      These days cigarettes aren’t shared as freely as they were when i was a young smoker, but, the size of the school of smokers that gather in those out of the way places on the college campus for a quick puff befor class looks to be remarkably the same in number as it was during my stint in the corridors of such august edifices of learning,

      These days in the ‘smoking school’ one person usually has found the cash with which to buy a packet of filtered cigarettes and the other smokers in the ‘school’ usually have a dollar each to buy a smoke,

      Bit like a ‘drunks school’ or a ‘druggies school’ it’s the addiction what brings them together as they know that the numbers mean at least one of them on any given occasion will have the means to supply the group with whatever the addiction is…

      • bad12 10.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 12:02 pm

        As far as applauding the Government on this issue i fell that you are viewing the whole issue very simplistically through the lens of the manipulation of your mind,

        With at least a billion dollars of tobacco tax being collected from users being over and above the actual cost to society of the use of tobacco products the Health budget could now be said to be being propped up by that taxation on tobacco products,

        Should the use of the products decrease radically from Government taxation and other ‘moves’ against the product Government would have to ‘find’ that extra billion dollars from somewhere else or cut that money from the Health or other budgets,

        The Government tho knows that very few users will actually quit the product and within 6 months most of those who quit have taken to using the product again,

        The chairman of the Quit program admitted in its annual report 2011 that ‘they’ only reach 2% of smokers and a study by a university Professor, (both of which i have provided links to befor on open mike),says that only 1.9% of smokers who try end up actually quitting the addiction,

        Meanwhile there is an unknown number of young people who take up the habit and become addicted constantly replacing the small % of users who have managed to kick their addiction,

        The only means of actually reducing the number of addicts to this product would be to declare tobacco a prescription poison only available via Doctor’s prescription and register all the present cohort of addicts with their Doctors,

        Within a year of such a registration program tobacco could then be made only available to registered addicts thus dramatically curtailing access to the product for anyone not a registered addict…

    • McFlock 10.2
      19 February 2013 at 12:47 pm

      lol
      whatever, pete.
      Now I’m not allowed to see what they have to sell me, they’re not allowed to tell me, and I can’t see what they sold me. The absurdity of zealotry.

      • Pete 10.2.1
        19 February 2013 at 1:01 pm

        If it weren’t for the inevitable organised crime, I’d outlaw tobacco entirely. If you’re buying it, I’d question your wisdom to make rational purchasing decisions in the first place.

        • McFlock 10.2.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 1:11 pm

          Luckily for me, my personal habits are none of your business.

          Maybe I looked at the relative odds and decided it’s better to live life and have fun than to live in fear. My level of smoking is probably about as harmful to me as your sanctimonious attitude is to you. Each to their own, I guess.

        • bad12 10.2.1.2
          19 February 2013 at 2:56 pm

          As the largest cohort of the 20 odd % of the population who do indulge in the product are in the lowest income brackets ‘health issues’ are merely a smokescreen for Government revenue farming off of those who are addicted,

          There is one ‘thing’ that will kill a person faster than will the tobacco addiction and that is ‘poor diet’ and extremely poor diet will speedily result in a number of health issues becoming apparent in those that suffer from that poor diet,

          So, constant revenue farming of tobacco products by Governments simply leaves those addicted and suffering low and extremely low incomes then have a ‘choice’, kick the addiction or face a severely restricted diet as the food spend is in most cases for the poor the only area of expense where cuts can be made,

          As i point out above, the chairman of the quit program admitted in the annual report,(first sentence), that the program is accessed by barely 2% of smokers, the further study i allude to above,(which i have previously posted a link to) shows that barely 2% of those who try actually manage to quit the addiction,

          What then going forward will be the health results for the other 98% of tobacco addicts unable to quit their addictions and being forced to exist on an increasingly severe poor diet,

          i wont argue here about the rationality of purchasing the product except to say what addict do you know of that makes an entirely rational decision to support such an addiction, it is however given the facts, totally irrational for governments to attempt to stop addicts accessing the product at the center of their addiction by continuously raising the price of that product thus putting the health of those addicted in as much if not more danger from another causative than the original addiction,

          All of that tho is only relevant if you believe the raising of such taxation is based upon rational health decisions by that Government…

    • Colonial Viper 10.3
      19 February 2013 at 1:45 pm

      Pete – next thing to do: all alcohol advertising, packaging and labelling to be in black and white only.

    • QoT 10.4
      19 February 2013 at 6:58 pm

      The only winners here are the manufacturers of branded cigarette tins.

  11. xtasy 11
    19 February 2013 at 10:32 am

    Fascist Work and Income NZ –

    A new website has been set up by someone, to offer a forum for those that have suffered bad, unfair treatment, wrong decisions and whatever else at the hands of NZ’s largest government department/agency:

    http://workandincomerfascis.wix.com/fascistworkandincome#!name-n-shame/c1qno

    I am not sure who is behind this, and “fascist” may be over the top for some, but it seems, that the increasing harrassment, denial of rights and entitlements, off-loading from some benefits and shifting of claimants and applicants onto other, lower rated ones (e.g. from sickness to UB or invalid’s benefit to SB), is leading to increasing anger and people seeing a need to let off steam.

    Bennett is creating a lot of adversaries with the policies she and her government are introducing, now forcing not only sole parents, but also increasingly sick, and soon even disabled, into some kinds of work, same as the Department of Work and Pensions have been doing in the UK for years, using private assessor ATOS and bizarre work capability tests, that led to over 1,100 deaths from Jan. to August 2011 alone:

    http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2012/10/31/government-use-might-of-american-insurance-giant-to-destroy-uk-safety-net-by-mo-stewart-update/

    http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2012/05/31/a-tale-of-two-models-disabled-people-vs-unum-atos-government-and-disability-charities-by-debbie-jolly-dpac/

    See also Bennett’s speech that is considered to be a “game changer” in the way seriously, longer term sick and disabled will be put under pressure in future:

    http://www.beehive.govt.nz/speech/speech-medical-professionals

    She is clearly a fan of those assessments and test that are used in the UK, and she was already consulted and lobbied by the man who saw to it, that the tests (designed in principle by highly controversion US insurance giant Unum) were implemeted by governments in Britain.

    So lots to be worried about, that is on top of what WINZ and MSD throw at beneficiaries already now, to make life a misery.

    Perhaps use this website to vent your anger, WINZ dependent, disentitled and disowned NZers?

  12. bad12 12
    19 February 2013 at 11:26 am

    Hah, Kathryn Ryan on RadioNZ nine to noon trying to twist what Economics and Business commentator Rob Oram was saying about ‘the living wage’ into some right wing political framing,

    Oram told that tool that He was talking economics not politics, that shut Her up…

  13. Elizabeth Bourchier Real Labour 13
    19 February 2013 at 11:32 am

    Poor John, he had a busy night at Antoine’s on Parnell Rise. He was very well looked after.
    That genius Tony A never disappoints.

    Good thing John lives around the corner!

  14. Anakereiti 14
    19 February 2013 at 11:46 am

    Needing some ideas….friend of mine is only 19 with a 10 week old baby, yes she is a solo mum, currently back at school and working part time also. She currently lives in the redzone and has until May to leave. She like so many others is having a hell time finding a rental. Her rental payments are guaranteed, thanks to Paula B – her landlord is happy to be a referee….I have been sending out emails for housing rentals and the tone of the reply is all about her being a young solo mum, and then declining her. She has good credit, no previous rental issues…can anyone suggest a way to get past the stigma of being a young solo mum. 🙂

    • unpcnzcougar 14.1
      19 February 2013 at 12:01 pm

      Tell her to meet with the agents/landlord with a grown up (preferably one in a suit) and then state her case ie she is studying and working and will always meet the rent payments. This is what I did in the same situation and got a rental when they were in short supply.

      Also tell them you are happy to have inspections more frequently. Don’t take baby (but of course tell them about baby) and make sure she is dressed well.

    • bad12 14.2
      19 February 2013 at 12:25 pm

      Lolz, if there is no specifics in the ad for the places your mate is trying to rent about babies DON’T TELL THEM, there is nothing in any legislation that would require Her to do so,

      Suggest you also tell them that your friend is a ‘student’ who works part-time and can pay the rent through the help of the accommodation supplement, might have to stretch the ‘student’ one to include the field of study,

      The only other suggestion which probably is a non starter is that your friend shift to a city/town that doesn’t have the accommodation problems currently being experienced there which are probably going to get worse as the re-build ramps up…

    • Rosie 14.3
      19 February 2013 at 1:25 pm

      Hi Anakereiti. There is nothing about your friend that would indicate that landlords should be wary of her. In fact, she has things in favour as a tenant, regular guaranteed rent payments, a referal, part time work and is in education. So I would say its the landlords that have the problem and doesn’t their response sound like discrimination?

      I wonder what the tenancy act would have to say about declining a reliable prospective tenant on the grounds of solo parenting?

      Sorry not that helpful but maybe call the DBH on 0800 83 62 62 to clarify her rights

      http://www.dbh.govt.nz/tenancy-index

      • Anakereiti 14.3.1
        19 February 2013 at 1:47 pm

        Thanks to all, for your help. Il try a couple of different ways ….see which one gets her in first lol. Thanks

      • bad12 14.3.2
        19 February 2013 at 2:31 pm

        Don’t think the tenancy law says anything about a landlord discriminating against anyone, if anyone wanted to buy into a fight, a long one, with landlords appearing to discriminate the Human Rights Commissioner would be the place to start,

        Wouldn’t tho solve the immediacy of the housing problem…

        • Rosie 14.3.2.1
          19 February 2013 at 3:35 pm

          Hi bad12. I think its wise to always be aware of your rights, not necesssarily in the event that you will take issue with another party and take it up at a formal level – its just something that may help at an informal level and maybe can be used in an opportunistic way. Nothing like a subtle mention of the other parties legal obligations/or your rights to get things moving.

          Sometimes works. Sometimes doesn’t.

          We have had the experience on two occasions of being selected as tenants due to our child free status and have been chosen over couples with children. I’ve found this out later once via the landlord herself and once via a friend of the landlord. Great to get a flat but sucks to be partly responsible for an outcome in that discriminates against children. It happens, landlords are excluding children from their right to housing. This is happening in Anakereiti’s friends’ instance.

          I think if Anakereiti is receiving regular responses that refer to the prospective tenant being a “solo Mum” then it wouldn’t hurt to look into her rights as parent seeking accomodation. No it won’t solve the immediate problem (and it is a major one especially if she’s settled into study). Its not for the tenant to carry stigma and work out ways around that to get into a flat, its up to the landlord to put their prejudice aside. Easier said than done I know, but I wish her well for finding a good place to live soon.

          • bad12 14.3.2.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 4:58 pm

            True, the one answer i forgot to put to AnaKereiti was her friend could apply to the State for housing as, (i assume),Her friend is on a low income and a single parent,

            Unfortunately the friend also appears to live in Christchurch where accommodation is becoming scarcer,

            Other than suffer renting a wreck of a house which i have seen highlighted on the TV i cannot think of any other good advice,

            Yes the problem with ‘our rights’ is that while many of us know them,(or know discrimination when we are subject to it), in most cases we are left to fight such battles on our own behalf which can be one hell of a battle for those without the skills,

            This is the uneven playing field of the past 30 years of deregulation, instead of having a relevant Government department to complain to which then investigates such complaints and prosecutes in the case of wrong-doings being found we all have been left having to investigate and prosecute on our own behalves,

            Such ‘thinking’ which presupposes the honesty and integrity of those in ‘higher’ positions in society is obviously failed ideology and we need return to a system where alleged breaches of rules and laws across all facets of society are investigated and ,(if warranted), prosecuted by the relevant Government Department which deals with that legislation…

  15. mickysavage 15
    19 February 2013 at 12:13 pm

    In breaking news Charles Chauvel has resigned as a list MP to take up a job at the UN.

    Bugger, he was once of the best performing Labour MPs …

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10866354

    • Te Reo Putake 15.1
      19 February 2013 at 12:17 pm

      And an pretty damn good left MP comes in, Carol Beaumont.

      • mickysavage 15.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 12:19 pm

        I agree with you there TRP. But Charles performed quite a specialised and important role. Carol is and will be good because she is staunch and understands the party and the trade union movement very well.

      • millsy 15.1.2
        19 February 2013 at 10:39 pm

        In CB we have a good union presence in Parliament. I think you have to go back to the 30’s to see the same amount of union bod in parliamentary Labour.

        (Matthew Hooton will be crying in his beer tonight, he has been worrying about this for a while)

        • Colonial Viper 15.1.2.1
          19 February 2013 at 11:03 pm

          I think you have to go back to the 30′s to see the same amount of union bod in parliamentary Labour.

          Excellent observation. And what an imcomparably Left Wing party that has created under their watch.

    • Rosie 15.2
      19 February 2013 at 12:54 pm

      You beat me to it MS! Just read it on Scoop

      http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1302/S00258/charles-chauvel-announces-resignation.htm

      I’m really curious to see what will happen in Ohariu now. We desparately need to get rid of Peter Dunne in this area for the sake of the electorate but most importantly for the sake of the country. (I know I’m repeating myself) Looking at previous election results, it could be done.

      • millsy 15.2.1
        19 February 2013 at 11:18 pm

        He is pretty much embedded in there really I am afraid. I think he is the reason why the 5th Labour government drifted to the right back from 02-08.

        Hopefully Labour and the Greens will win enough seats to render him irrelevant in the post election horse trading, and he will spend 3 years in the wilderness.

  16. Penny Bright 16
    19 February 2013 at 1:01 pm

    WHAT ‘mandate’ for asset sales?

    DEBUNKING THIS ‘URBAN (AND RURAL?) MYTH’!

    Do the maths!!!!!

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/cabinet-holds-back-pushing-asset-sales-waits-supreme-court-bd-136063#comment-607156

    The final vote on the Public Finance (Mixed Ownership Model) Amendment Act 2012, was 61 – 60

    http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/e/8/e/50HansD_20120626_00000012-State-Owned-Enterprises-Amendment-Bill-Public.htm

    A party vote was called for on the question, That the Public Finance (Mixed Ownership Model) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.

    Ayes 61
    New Zealand National 59; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.

    Noes 60
    New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 8; Māori Party 3; Mana 1.
    __________________________________________________________

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/02/a_lie.html/comment-page-1#comment-1097573

    [ Pete(r) George – Dunedin North candidate – United Future )
    (16,292) Says: February 15th, 2013 at 10:28 pm]

    ” UF did not specifically campaign for the ‘mixed ownership model for the electricity companies and Air New Zealand’ because it was not UF policy”

    WHAT UNITED FUTURE DID CAMPAIGN ON: RE ASSET SALES:
    http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/asset-sales-policy-announcement/

    Asset Sales Policy Announcement
    10 October 2011

    Kiwibank, Radio New Zealand and the water supply should be ruled out of any future asset sales programmes, UnitedFuture Leader Peter Dunne said today.

    Speaking to the Auckland Rotary Club, he said that given that National has a manifesto that includes asset sales, New Zealanders need to start a proper debate on the future limits of those sales.

    “To this point there has not been a proper national debate beyond National saying yes and Labour saying no.

    “We need a conversation that is more detailed and drills down into what New Zealanders really think are acceptable bottom lines,” he said.

    “New Zealanders, I believe, are not definitively pro-asset sales, but under certain conditions, it is no longer the bogeyman issue that Labour would have you believe.”

    Mr Dunne said UnitedFuture’s role as a support partner is not just to contribute its own policies, but to help keep a government to a reasonable, centrist path.

    ……….. ”

    In my considered opinion – the voting public of Ohariu were thus effectively misled by United Future and Peter Dunne on the issue of support for the ‘Mixed Ownership Model’ for State-Owned electricity assets and Air New Zealand.

    In my considered opinion, United Future and Peter Dunne SOLD OUT the voting public of Ohariu by voting in support of the Public Finance (Mixed Ownership) Amendment Act 2012.

    Had Peter Dunne kept faith with the voting public of Ohariu – the Public Finance (Mixed Ownership Model) Amendment Bill should have BEEN DEFEATED 60 – 61.

    I thus believe that I am absolutely correct in my statement that THERE IS NO MANDATE FOR ASSET SALES – given that this minority National Government (which DID campaign on asset sales) has only 59 out of 121 MPs.

    ACT did not specifically campaign on asset sales – but their support for privatisation is hardly a secret.

    However –

    ” UF did not specifically campaign for the ‘mixed ownership model for the electricity companies and Air New Zealand’ because it was not UF policy”

    THEREFORE! NO MAJORITY – NO MANDATE!

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption campaigner’

    Auckland Mayoral Candidate 2013

    http://www.dodgyjohnhasgone.com

    • chris73 16.1
      19 February 2013 at 4:00 pm

      National said what they were going to do if they won, they won so now they’re trying to do what they said they were going to do, I’m not surprised the left arn’t keen on this but National are in power because the majority of voters wanted them in power

      Don’t want this to happen? Then make sure Labour get the majority, quite simple really

      • Te Reo Putake 16.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 4:18 pm

        National did not get a majority, Chris. That’s why they are in a coalition. They rely on John Banks and the vote of Peter Dunne to get the sales passed and Dunne didn’t even campaign on the issue, preferring to stay silent to fool the electors of Ohariu into trusting that he wouldn’t do it.

  17. freedom 17
    19 February 2013 at 1:16 pm

    War memorials may be chattels of nationhood, built of the lives lost in endless blood they are also mausoleums for the freedoms sold long afore their sacrifice, but this embroiders every campaign badge with shame

    http://rt.com/news/sandhurst-mons-rename-bahrain-457/

    I for one would be very interested in what our Prime Minister, who has so often spoken of his respect for the fallen, has to say on this deal.

  18. Rogue Trooper 18
    19 February 2013 at 1:23 pm

    Dom-on T.V; risk of having a criminal conviction by early adulthood increases approx 30% with every hour (?) children and teens spend watching T.V on an average weeknight.-Professor Bob Hancox, Otago Uni.
    conclusion: a strong association

  19. Te Reo Putake 19
    19 February 2013 at 2:50 pm

    “We read all our mail. We welcome leaks, news-tips, feedback, and suggestions for content. Please feel free to email us: thestandardnz@gmail.com. One or more of the editors look at this during the day.”

    Yeah right!

    Does anyone really read the emails that get sent to the Standard or is that line from the contact page a joke? I don’t want to get sniffy about it, but for the second time, I’ve sent through a guest post and not heard diddly back. Fine if you’re not going to publish it, that’s your call, but I’m confused as to why I’m not at least worth the courtesy of a reply.

    Cheers.

    TRP

    [yeah, it’s not easy finding good help when you’re offering no pay and lots of hours. Your post is already in the queue for tomorrow. Eddie]

    [lprent: I looked at this (again) this morning. But after staggering home at or after 2000 after a hard days coding, cooking, blobbing in front of the TV before bed, and then heading to work at 0630 the following day for the last few weeks…. Well the last few bugs are all that stands between me and a life. The time required to set up a guest post is a bit too long. But the guest posts have been a bit neglected over the last month or so. I think we’re all a bit busy. ]

  20. Santi 20
    19 February 2013 at 3:02 pm

    I’m very sorry to se Chalres Chauvel leaving Parliament. I really am.

  21. Santi 21
    19 February 2013 at 3:05 pm

    I’m very sorry to see Charles Chauvel leaving Parliament. I really am.

    • chris73 22.1
      19 February 2013 at 4:29 pm

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10866356

      – Wait its ok, Hones offering to help settle this

      First time I’ve heard violent assault and home invasion being described as a dispute…

      • bad12 22.1.1
        19 February 2013 at 5:34 pm

        What point are you actually trying to make here???, if you are attempting to pillory Hone for the actions of His nephews you would also have to pillory Nick Smith over His brother being prosecuted by the Canterbury Regional Council…

        • chris73 22.1.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 6:08 pm

          The point is they’re drop kick losers who should be in jail but they probably won’t because an mp will use their influence to effect the out come

          • bad12 22.1.1.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 6:22 pm

            Carry on with your defamation, i hope Hone reads that and drags you through the courts to ransack every last cent you possess from what can only be described as a sorry sack of you what…

    • Rogue Trooper 23.1
      19 February 2013 at 4:23 pm

      you psychic marionette you

    • McFlock 23.2
      19 February 2013 at 4:31 pm

      Yep.

      What get’s me is that there’s no “valour” or “exceptionalism” involved – what counts as exceptional drone flying? It’s basically down to logged hours and maybe attributed deaths.

      I don’t think they’re too far from going back to “citizen-soldiers”, but someone comes home from work, logs on, plays a computer game for a couple of hours, and gets experience points that count towards a medal.

      The only change from today is that people on the other side of the planet die.

      Quintessential alienation.

      • chris73 23.2.1
        19 February 2013 at 4:36 pm

        On the other hand its actually a good thing if you can kill the enemy without any of your own side dying…kinda makes it easier for your side

        • GregJ 23.2.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 7:13 pm

          Ahh – channelling Paton:

          “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.”

        • McFlock 23.2.1.2
          19 February 2013 at 11:41 pm

          It’s a bad thing to be able to do it too easily, with little or no effort. Becomes easier than thinking about a long term solution – or at least that’s one point the General quoted in the article made.

          And of course, it’s all very well being able to blow shit up and then bounce the rubble around, but the acid test is whether your guy can walk down the street in broad daylight. But then that particular debate goes back to Douhet.

          • chris73 23.2.1.2.1
            20 February 2013 at 7:25 am

            It’s a bad thing to be able to do it too easily, with little or no effort.
            – Depends if you’re the one sitting safely at HQ or the one at the pointy end I guess…

            • muzza 23.2.1.2.1.1
              20 February 2013 at 8:52 am

              Moronic attitude C73.

              The risk is in the degrees of control which these methods lead to. Are drones patrolling skies in war zones and out, really something which is going to take humanity in a positive direction!

              If you’re a parent, or going to be, I hope for your families sake that your comments are not reflective of your actual views!

              Come on man, think a little deeper eh!

              • chris73 …
                20 February 2013 at 9:17 am

                I’m thinking of the poor grunt at the sharp end that has to implement the policies of whatever government of the day is running…hes the one that has to go and do the dirty work.

                Someones son, brother, nephew, father, cousin, uncle, friend has to go and do it and if theres a safer way for that guy to do the job then I’m all for it.

                • muzza …
                  20 February 2013 at 10:39 am

                  There ia always a choice, nobody has to do the dirty work, they chose to, situational or not, you’re talking about taking lives by remote control, based on it being safer for someone else, this is madness.

                  Scope creep, mission creep etc, your words are supporting it!

                  You can tell your family and friends that your position lead to NZ skies being droned, because thats where its headed!

                  • chris73 …
                    20 February 2013 at 11:08 am

                    Correct, they chose to do a job…kill the enemy without (preferably) being killed yourself. They have the technology to do the job safer then ever so it would be morally wrong to deny them the opportunity to do so.

                    You want the killing stopped then look at the governments not the soldiers, its not the soldiers (at least in western democratic countries) that decide to go to war its the politicians and the people that elect (or keep electing them)

                    • muzza …
                      20 February 2013 at 11:28 am

                      its the politicians and the people that elect (or keep electing them)

                      Actually its nothing to do with the politicians deciding anything, The decisions to go to war run far deeper than any front facing political entity, which is not elected!

                      That’s why its even more important that people do not buy into this system, and as such the choice being made to wage war using remote control, is trite!

            • McFlock 23.2.1.2.1.2
              20 February 2013 at 12:43 pm

              True. But that’s the difference between political leadership and soldiers. The leader needs to not just take the easy course, but to find a long term solution to the situation.

              Because if drone strikes happen in perpetuity, what are the odds of people responding to that constant terror putting a bomb in the pilot’s local shopping mall? Or the areas involved shift geopolitically to China or Russia to preserve their internal stability, so the US loses some regional influence, and fifty years down the line the drone pilots’ grandkids end up on the pointy end of ww3? And what happens when opponents get the hang of evading detection/slipping through the surveillance filters – classic assymetric problem. If you kill the chaps as soon as you think you’ve found them, you don’t find out who their friends are or what they’re doing.

              Short term “solutions” can be long term mistakes.

    • joe90 23.3
      19 February 2013 at 6:36 pm

      From couple of years ago, Barbara Ehrenreich: War Without Humans and a ted talk, The Robots of War, by P W Singer, the author of Wired for War and Corporate Warriors:The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry.

      This too.

      http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/hubris-rachel-maddow-documentary-iraq-war-david-corn

  24. Rogue Trooper 24
    19 February 2013 at 4:22 pm

    sooo, the Ozzie “manufacturing confidence” index is in the low 40’s (N0rty)
    Cosgrove-“significant losses of sub-contractors due to Mainzeal flattening may have an effect on the entire construction industry…
    Williamson up against the wall
    Excellent work by Eugenie Sage nailing and hoeing into Tremain (HBRC debt to increase in excess of 500% by 2021; don’t we love spending other peoples money!)

    Spirituality is In The House, thanks to Winning some tutae 🙂

  25. GregJ 25
    19 February 2013 at 6:06 pm

    If I may briefly slip into my professional field – the Overseas parliamentary news has this fascinating snippet about archiving of email for Danish MPs (it’s about half way down the page).

    MPs will be able to select emails for preservation by the State Archives as part of their day to day email management. Members’ correspondence held in the Archives is generally accessible to the public after 75 years.

    I will be fascinated to see how it will actually work in practice (in my experience recordkeeping is not one of the strengths of most politicians).

    Interesting in light of the recent responses to the Law Commission’s recommendation to extend our OIA to cover Parliament.

  26. bad12 26
    19 February 2013 at 7:32 pm

    Pssst, when you get time to look Lprent, the edit function has thrown a spaz, i can access it but none of the comment that needs editing is showing up…

    • The Al1en 26.2
      19 February 2013 at 9:03 pm

      I can’t even see how to edit in the first place, you must have a bourgeoisie pc. 🙂

      • bad12 26.2.1
        19 February 2013 at 9:24 pm

        Lolz and i thought i was the only computer illiterate round here…

        • The Al1en 26.2.1.1
          19 February 2013 at 9:36 pm

          Seriously, the amount of mistakes I make, the edit function was the second thing I looked for after the ‘self publicise’ button.
          Never found either, even if I only really need the one.

          I run music studio software without breaking (many) synapses, and I’m getting really envious when I read posts with *edit in them. :grrr: 😆

          I’m on Chrome, with pop ups blocked and that’s about it. No edit button.

          • bad12 26.2.1.1.1
            19 February 2013 at 9:55 pm

            Seriously, i mean hell pull the other one,leg that is, it plays Jesus my Lord come unto me, that’s with the backing of the full NZ Symphony orchestra as well,

            The edit function appears next to the delete function on the bottom of your posted comment, Yeee-essss, i feel so computer literacerially superior after having said that,

            And even more so with my coining of a brand new word, wonder if i can patent it…

            • The Al1en 26.2.1.1.1.1
              19 February 2013 at 10:04 pm

              There’s a delete button? Now I’m really getting pissed off 😆
              All I see is ‘reply’, and that’s it, even when logged in.

              If you’re making up words – Is the site being al1enistic by denying me buttons others have?
              I’d write to my mp if it wasn’t macindope.

              • bad12 …
                19 February 2013 at 10:36 pm

                I can only say how saddened i am for your loss as i eagerly await seeing both functions appear as my comment comes up on the page,

                i also now have the sudden urge to deliberately make a large number of errors, both spelling and grammatical, in this latest comment just so i may avail myself of such functions others are not in possession of,

                i will tho resist such an egotistical aberration in character as the aforementioned function tonight only leads to the production of a blank page which in turn leads me to thoughts that perhaps this is the true value of my posted comments…

              • lprent …
                19 February 2013 at 11:10 pm

                Do you have JavaScript enabled? Doesn’t work without it.

    • lprent 26.3
      19 February 2013 at 11:18 pm

      Ok. In the morning….

  27. Toosense 27
    19 February 2013 at 9:26 pm

    Is David Shearer still the leader of the Labour Party?
    And is the Labour Party still the major opposition party?
    There’s been so much going on and it seems that neither David Shearer or anyone else in the Labour party have anything to say. About anything…

    • bad12 27.1
      19 February 2013 at 9:50 pm

      Aw god not another one, next you will be telling us all your a disgruntled member and, ”shrill voice” you wont be voting for them again with that Shearer there….

      • blue leopard 27.1.1
        20 February 2013 at 12:11 am

        @bad12
        Yeah what a bitch that the punters don’t respond the way the Labours strategists (if they have any) think they should.

        Shame on the New Zealand public for being so disobedient!
        Bad New Zealanders!

        (…and take care not criticisze the strategists, its not as though its their job to predict correctly how people will respond…./sarc)

  28. bad12 28
    20 February 2013 at 12:33 am

    Apart from female dogs is there an actual point here that you are trying to get across to me, i fear that if there is my attempts to de-cypher this point,limited i must admit, have failed…

    • blue leopard 28.1
      20 February 2013 at 12:54 am

      Well I was unclear whether you were being sarky in your first comment, so chose to hedge my bets and be sarky in response.

      I am commenting on this trend of criticizing people’s views that express concern about Labour’s or Mr Shearer’s effectiveness, and how it is seeming kind of arse about face in a democracy.

      Despite apparently living in a democracy there appears to be an increasing message that we have to “be nice” and not express dissent to the sham that is going on on both sides of the parliamentary house.

      I mean if everyone just shut up and voted for Labour, it stands to reason they would win. Guess that is how the logic goes.

      I understand that people are paid good money to play the role of political strategist and if any ordinary person not in parliament did their job as badly, as both this government and the Labour party strategists over the last 5 years we would have our arses fired; so a wee bit of negative feedback here and there, really is a very small price to pay, and if listened to, would improve their game.

      • bad12 28.1.1
        20 February 2013 at 2:08 pm

        In answer to that, how many comments have you seen the commenter i was replying to make on the Standard,

        There ‘seems’ to be a trend developing here, and i highlight the word ‘seems’ as this is only a personal observation, that when the ‘i hate Dave S’ crew quiets down it’s criticism of Him up will pop a few ‘names’ here and there who will poke the anti-Shearer fire for signs of life, or to get it raging again,

        These odd commenters who seem like strangers to me could be genuine in their concern about Shearer and having found this site cannot but help unloading such concerns into whatever post they have ‘landed in’ so to speak be that open mike or a specific post on a topic,

        Because of this i give far more ‘weight’ to comments from ‘names’ i recognize as having commented on the site befor and tend to view comments such as the one we are discussing above as just as likely to be posted into the site by those with the specific goal of attempting to destabilize the current Labour leadership for reasons other than concern for that Party…