Open mike 20/04/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 20th, 2011 - 101 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…

101 comments on “Open mike 20/04/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. joe90 1
    20 April 2011 at 6:29 am

    Don’t envy the super rich…

    The Nostradamus award goes to…

    Secret memos..

    • rosy 1.1
      20 April 2011 at 7:37 am

      Don’t envy the super-rich

      Does he think only the super-rich are going to be attacked by armed thugs? The thugs probably get their training in their own neighbourhood first.

      Secret memos

      and, yes – just to confirm it was all about the oil.

    • ianmac 1.2
      20 April 2011 at 9:51 am

      joe90: In NZ the very rich seem to live in high walled secure houses, or in gated communities. By contrast my modest belongings which barely need protection are not a worry to me when I am out. Every time that I see John Key under protection even within the corridors of Parliament I feel no envy. Does it suggest a degree of paranoia as a PM or is it that of a rich man?
       
      And it is remarkably (?) surprising that the tax take has reduced in NZ after the Bush-like tax cuts. Surprise, followed by a cut in spending on Education and Health and Welfare. The parallels are here in NZ too Joe.
       
      What you find should be a wake-up call for New Zealanders as well. Sobering Joe.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.3
      20 April 2011 at 10:05 am

      Super rich link

      If you mass to protest in a way that will seriously threaten the power structure, you will die in a hail of bullets.

      That may be how it starts, and it will start, it’s not how it ends. As we’ve seen throughout history the rich cannot maintain their power once everyone else is pissed off enough.

  2. joe90 2
    20 April 2011 at 7:41 am

    Does he think only the super-rich are going to be attacked by armed thugs? The thugs probably get their training in their own neighbourhood first.

    Um, this bit Rosy.

    In short, the thugs who are robbing America of our Social Security and Medicare and product safety and education today will live in fear of even bigger thugs tomorrow.

    • rosy 2.1
      20 April 2011 at 7:50 am

      Yes, I get the point – It’s just that the comeuppance will, as usual, hit the poor first. They’ll live in more fear than even now – Mexico is a good example – It’s the poor who are paying for the US war on drugs. But then, they’re meant to expect it. It’s the super-rich who will be shocked when it hits them hard.

      • joe90 2.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 8:23 am

        Not just Mexicans losing their lives now Rosy and a cynic would say that the only way change will come is through more Americans losing their lives.

        And this wee gem. 

        The violence can be traced to a civil war between the state and leftist rebels, a three-decade struggle that, from 1960 to 1996, was the dirtiest of Latin America’s dirty wars. More than two hundred thousand people were killed or “disappeared.” According to a U.N.-sponsored commission, at least ninety per cent of the killings were carried out by the state’s military forces or by paramilitary death squads with names like Eye for an Eye.

        • rosy 2.1.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 8:41 am

          “Not just Mexicans losing their lives now”

          And isn’t this Tamaulipas state where Fisher & Paykel relocated to (Reynosa)? It makes me absolutely livid – It seems like history repeating with a new part of Latin America tied up in the US push for control – albeit of drugs this time, rather than coups and civil wars, like Guatemala, Nicaragua, Chile etc, etc.

  3. mickysavage 3
    20 April 2011 at 7:44 am

    Radio New Zealand shows why publicly owned news gathers and presenters are so vital.  It reports on Telecom’s recent $12 million fine.  This morning (no link as yet) a very strong link is being drawn between Telecom’s predatory action a decade ago and  the Government’s intention to prevent Commerce Commission oversight of Telecom for the next decade.

    Bend over and prepare to be rogered New Zealand by your unfriendly formerly publicly owned but overseas controlled telco which should properly be called telecon …

    • todd 3.1
      20 April 2011 at 10:24 am

      Telecon plan to appeal the decision as well… Watch for more moves against our civil liberties and organisations that hold private companies to account. The National ministers are so in the pocket of big business, when one of them realizes that their is a conflict of interest and steps down from a portfolio, hardly anybody bats an eyebrow… Maybe there are a few people around with their eyes open though:
       
      http://tumeke.blogspot.com/2011/04/national-are-dismantling-your-legal.html
       
      Wake up New Zealand.

      • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 11:15 am

        Have you read The Predator State by James Galbraith? It puts what NACT are doing in context and there’s no way that it’s for the best of the country. What it’s to do is transfer wealth and power away from the people and to the wealthy. It’s unfortunate that so many people wish to help them in their corruption and theft.

  4. logie97 4
    20 April 2011 at 8:01 am

    Mr Key and your mates in the Business Round Table and all parliamentarians, try to understand this simple fact. New Zealand’s assets are NOT YOURS to sell.  

    If we do not have the expertise to extract resources, then invite tenders for that expertise to do the job, and pay for those services but the ownership must remain New Zealand’s.

  5. William Joyce 5
    20 April 2011 at 8:02 am

    Joseph E Stigliz issues a warning that the “unrest”, born of inequality, we see in the Middle East could happen on the streets of America:
    Of the 1%, By the 1% and for the 1%

    Americans have been watching protests against oppressive regimes that concentrate massive wealth in the hands of an elite few. Yet in our own democracy, 1 percent of the people take nearly a quarter of the nation’s income—an inequality even the wealthy will come to regret.

     

    As we gaze out at the popular fervor in the streets, one question to ask ourselves is this: When will it come to America? In important ways, our own country has become like one of these distant, troubled places.
     

     
     

  6. MrSmith 6
    20 April 2011 at 8:03 am

    Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee today announced the make-up of the independent review panel that will assess all legislative and regulatory changes under the new Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act.
     
    Dame Jenny Shipley being one of them, the people of CHCH will just love being told how there city should be rebuilt by this corrupt patronizing cow!

  7. Salsy 7
    20 April 2011 at 8:06 am

    If anyone is free today please go to the Labour Party Stop Asset Sales Facebook Page, its being overrun by the “tsunami of stupid” – all with plaquards from whale-oils blog. Beware they are stupid and angry, its kind of scarey..
     

  8. Bored 8
    20 April 2011 at 8:12 am

    Selfish bastards! Repeat selfish bastards! Required reading for anybody who does not want to sleep walk to defeat.
    http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/
    Trotter emphatically makes the same statement that many of us lefties have: he does’nt care for the politics of the left. Damien was right and Labour were too collectively cowardly to get behind him versus factional groups. I am like Chris more than a little pissed that the efete liberal interest groups mean more to Labour than that of struggling Kiwis.

    • joe90 8.1
      20 April 2011 at 8:29 am

      Me too B, Labour, a workers party formed by workers for workers.

      • ianmac 8.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 10:02 am

        joe. A bit surprised that you endorse bored? Read your comment three times. Were you being ironic?

        • joe90 8.1.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 10:37 am

          No, just frustrated Ianmac that Labour keeps drifting off track.

          I don’t think they are Carol but they’re being flogged by the perception and both Trotter and O’Connor piss me off by fanning the flame. I want my party to work in the interests of workers and their families and in my case my family includes all of the above.

          I’m a worker with a family and if a party doesn’t serve my interests then it’s not serving the interests of my family.

      • Sam 8.1.2
        20 April 2011 at 4:32 pm

        Agree, the only time Goff’s ratings improved were after the “sackings” of the homosexual Chris Carter and the “closet’ homosexual Darren Hughes.  What does that tell you.  That mainstream NZ is homophobic or is it because manistream Nz is fed up with the Rainbow faction, so powerful in the Labour Party?

        • Carol 8.1.2.1
          20 April 2011 at 5:03 pm

          What does that tell you.  That mainstream NZ is homophobic or is it because manistream Nz is fed up with the Rainbow faction, so powerful in the Labour Party?

           
          Are those two things meant to be mutually exclusive?  Actually I’d rephrase the last part: perceived to be, or characterised as so powerful in the Labour Party?

        • millsy 8.1.2.2
          20 April 2011 at 10:15 pm

          Hey Sam, do you want homosexuality recriminalised?

          Remember, consenting adults and all that…

          • Sam 8.1.2.2.1
            21 April 2011 at 3:51 pm

            No.
            But consenting adults do it in private, only “drama queens” flaunt it openly.

    • Carol 8.2
      20 April 2011 at 8:30 am

      Don’t agree on the analysis that Damien was right.  Many of us emphatically want policians to support and promote the interests of those people stuggling on low incomes AND attacks on relatively marginal minorities. It’s not either/or.  And exactly how is the current Labour Party putting gay interests etc above policies targetting economic inequalities at the moment?  We should be working together.  Such attacks just divide the left & REALLY are not helping at this time.

      • joe90 8.2.1
        20 April 2011 at 9:20 am

        And exactly how is the current Labour Party putting gay interests etc 

        I don’t think they are Carol but they’re being flogged by the perception and both Trotter and O’Connor piss me off by fanning the flame. I want my party to work in the interests of workers and their families and in my case my family includes all of the above.

        • Carol 8.2.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 9:25 am

          OK, joe90, then we’re in agreement.  I do think that the focus should be on
          the interests of workers and their families and in my case my family includes all of the above.

          and that attacking people who should be allies is not helpful.  It’s buying into the right wing lines of attack and spin & letting them set the agenda. And going into panic mode in response to a shonky TV3 poll is not that helpful either. We know Labour is behind National in the polls. It’s time to focus on the essentials, and cut loose from the dominance of economically & socially destructive neo-liberal policies.

          • joe90 8.2.1.1.1
            20 April 2011 at 10:27 am

            I reckon start at the start Carol, win back the people in the $30-$50K bracket who had a rush of blood to the head at the last election and thought they were tories.

            As for identity politics, clueless gamed everybody with herceptin but sure, when you’ve got the numbers to advance an issue and, like a pub fight, never start something until you know that you can finish the job.

      • Colonial Viper 8.2.2
        20 April 2011 at 9:21 am

        My belief is Carol is that Labour spent far too much political capital and headlines fighting for social liberalism, and not for policies that would help the bottom 50% of families and wage earners.
         
        Social liberalism should have been done – while getting on with big progressive economic changes as the headlines.
         
        Labour did not get the old message: its the economy, stupid.
         
        (And making the property owners feel richer by driving up private debt levels and house prices to the sky doesn’t cut it)

        • Carol 8.2.2.1
          20 April 2011 at 9:27 am

          Social liberalism should have been done – while getting on with big progressive economic changes as the headlines.
           
          Yes, agreed that the economic issues should have been the major focus for a while.  And I agree that dealing with them has now become even more urgent.

          PS: I also think the neoliberal economic power and influence over the media at home and abroad, has also made it very hard for left wing parties in the west to follow their traditional agenda.

          • Pascal's bookie 8.2.2.1.1
            20 April 2011 at 10:42 am

            Can anyone point me to O’Conner speaking up for the poor and actually trying to promote economic leftie policy when he was in government?

            Saying that it was the social liberals crowding out economic policy is just garbage. There is no reason that the party couldn’t walk and chew gum, and even if that was the case, there is no reason now to use illiberal  rhetoric. Just get on with promoting the left wing econmics if that’s what you think would work.

            Blaming it on social liberals, saying the party was taken over; is saying that left wing voters would rather have right wing economics than social liberalism. That might well be true, or it might not. But unless the economic left gets up on its hind legs and makes the positive case we can’t know.

            It looks to me like Trotter et al spend far too much time crying and not enough time arguing their corner. It looks to me like they want to win votes from bigots via their bigotry rather than offering something that is more worthwhile to them than their bigotry.

            The fact that they don’t seem to be able to articulate something more worthwhile without blaming social liberalism? that’s their problem right there.

            • Carol 8.2.2.1.1.1
              20 April 2011 at 10:47 am

              Well said, PB.

              • Bored …
                20 April 2011 at 11:34 am

                Carol PB IanMac et al, I think I will go and sit with the “bigots” as you cheerfully label those working class Kiwis who went and voted for Key or did not vote at all. Your inability to see them as part of the left is precisely your electoral problem. I would suggest they are greater in number than your precious middle ground of social liberal chardonnnay socialists.

                • Carol …
                  20 April 2011 at 1:16 pm

                  Bored, I was talking of an inclusive model, not an either/or one.  I DO see working class people as part of the left, and people the left should be fighting for.  Where have I eer said I don’t see them as part of the left? As far as I understand it, you are trying to exclude some other marginalised people from the left.

                  And I will challenge expressions of bigotry whereever I see it, on the left or the right.

                  • Bored …
                    20 April 2011 at 2:08 pm

                    Carol, I too will shout at bigotry from left or right. To marginalise any group is to exclude, which is precisely what Trotter (and myself) are saying. A core Labour voting block is being driven away because they percieve that their interests are not in alignment, and are placed behind that of sectoral interests. They dont care if you are a Martian, what they care about is that the Martian is one of them first and foremost. They also get mightily pissed off when the Martians then accuse them of bigotry.

                    • Carol …
                      20 April 2011 at 2:29 pm

                      Well, Bored, the problem with Labour seems to me, not that issues of social liberalism & policies against idenitity group marginalisation are squeezing out class issues, but that various marginalised groups are being used as a scapegoat for Labour’s limitations on class issues.  The way forward seems to be indicated by PB in asking to positively state what you want Labour to support, rather than demonising groups within the left.
                       
                      I think this demonising of some on the left is not helping the cause (or causes). Curiously, one of the reasons neo-liberalism has been so successful is that it has been able to attract a broad range of people under their umbrellla.  It includes both social conservatives and social liberals.  They tend not to tear themselves apart over it, at least not in public.
                       
                      I gave up on voting Labour a while back as being too centrist, though I do think they have some good MPs and candidates in their ranks, and have some good policies (or atleast better than National).  But if the left is going to succeeed in getting rid of the cancerous policies associated with neoliberalsm & neoconservatism, then the left needs to accept some differences, and work together on the crucial issues.  It’s not going to help telling some on the left to ride in the back of the bus, while white men ride in the front.

                      According to critics like Trotter, the problem seems to be with Goff’s leadership (hardly someone who is virulently promoting gay, Maori & feminist agendas). The attacks on identity issues has been something that the right has beat up to try and undermine the left – divide and conquer.  I don’t see it as helpful to be following their agenda. And as PB said:

                      Can anyone point me to O’Conner speaking up for the poor and actually trying to promote economic leftie policy when he was in government?
                       
                      Meanwhile, we saw a very assertive interview with Cunliffe, yesterday, foregrounding the struggles of many relatively low income families, struggling to put food on their tables for their kids. There is no evidence that gays or self-serving unionists are dominating Labour policies, or positions on the labour list.

            • Colonial Viper 8.2.2.1.1.2
              20 April 2011 at 9:00 pm

              PB: Labour is not seen as the party of the working class and the under class. Consequently the working class and the under class are not rooting for Labour even though under this NACT Government they are larger than ever.
               
              Neither, according to the polls, are many of the social liberals. However, in the final analysis this is not about blaming the social liberals for following their agenda.
               
              Its about Labour losing its renown for being the champion of the working class and the underclass against all odds. And gaining instead renown for being the champion of civil unions, prostitution law reform, anti-smacking, foreshore and sea bed against all odds.

        • Bored 8.2.2.2
          20 April 2011 at 10:25 am

          Thank you CV, precisely my position, summed up beautifully. For the record I have fully supported and endorsed social liberalism. I will not however give it primacy over the needs of the left.

          • Colonial Viper 8.2.2.2.1
            20 April 2011 at 9:03 pm

            Chur dude.
            To me social liberalism even at its greatest extent risks sounding a hollow victory when your poor and old are eating cat food and your young and smart are leaving the country because there are no career prospects here.

        • Zaphod Beeblebrox 8.2.2.3
          20 April 2011 at 2:43 pm

          Of course. Thats because they will favour the voting middle classes over the non-voting poor. Until we have compulsary voting in NZ, both major parties will betrying to bribe the middle.

  9. logie97 9
    20 April 2011 at 8:14 am

    Cannot wait for the “Neanderthal of Epsom” to pursue the PM over this one (the way he pursued Helen Clark in 2001) …

    Herald reports PM used airforce Iroquois to visit V8s

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10720511

    • ianmac 9.1
      20 April 2011 at 10:09 am

      Of course, since the PM had the pressing important dinner engagement, he could have forgone the V8 photo op.
      PM flies by helicopter at taxpayers expense so he won’t be late for dinner! Austerity strikes NZ.

      • sean 9.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 10:55 am

        So, I can assume you were extremely pissed off when Helen Clark used an illegally travelling motorcade to get to a rugby game then?
         
        By the way – there are reports that it took 3 hours to get to Huntly from Hamilton after the V8’s – so it was actually a good move on the PM.

        • marsman 9.1.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 12:27 pm

          Helen Clark was going to meet the Prime Minister of Australia,protocol dictated she not be late. If she’d used an Airforce helicopter the whine from Nat supporters would have been even louder and longer than it already was. And did you speak up when Key was travelling in an illegally speeding motorcade? He wanted a fucking shower!!!

        • freedom 9.1.1.2
          20 April 2011 at 1:37 pm

          Clark was meeting a Head of State, Key was going to dinner at a golf club
          ‘nuf said
           

          • Sam 9.1.1.2.1
            21 April 2011 at 10:51 am

            Proof that Clark could no allocate her time properly.

            • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.2.1.1
              21 April 2011 at 10:56 am

              LOLz people attacking a Labour PM who actually tried to fit lots of important shit into her schedule, as opposed to Key swanning around sports fixtures and photo ops.

        • willie maley 9.1.1.3
          20 April 2011 at 4:38 pm

          Sean,
          I was told be someone who attended the V8 race, that it took him 1 hour 40m to travel from Hamilton to Auckland on Sunday after the racing had finished.

        • logie97 9.1.1.4
          20 April 2011 at 6:31 pm

          Sean – actually the motorcade was not the issue here.  It was Clark’s use of a military helicopter that the Neanderthal-perk-buster MP for Epsom was in a flap over in 2001.  Just waiting for him to pursue the Prime Mincer over this recent issue.

      • Sam 9.1.2
        20 April 2011 at 4:35 pm

        Like travelling in a motorcade at 160kph to egt to the rugby?

        • Tiger Mountain 9.1.2.1
          20 April 2011 at 5:24 pm

          It is ‘micro targeting’ voters, Shonkey got the attention of several thousand petrol heads “what a guy-he choppered in, wow! he’s one of us!” grunt, booya etc. Mission accomplished, any disapproval not important cause he scored.

          • Jim Nald 9.1.2.1.1
            20 April 2011 at 5:43 pm

            Typically and quite conveniently, whoosh, Shonkey is nowhere to be found.
             
            “Mr Key could not be contacted as he is in transit to Europe for  political meetings and the wedding of Prince William and Catherine  Middleton at Westminster Abbey on 29 April.”
             
            *Cough* flying from one photo-op to another photo-op.

            Listen, folks, this won’t be the first time nor the last time he can’t be contacted. This is the modus operandi of a man who has gone beyond having a stake in NZ.

  10. Robert Atack 10
    20 April 2011 at 8:16 am

    The Kiwi Saver trusties must be shivering in their boots over the governments order to pay back some of the free money they have coned out of the sucked in working public.
    Wonder if it will lead to yet more government payouts? opps forgot unlike SCF etc, Kiwi Saver savings are not government guaranteed, if one of these ponzi scams goes tits up it is bad luck suckers.
    And least we forget it was Labour and the Greeds that bought you this scam.  

    Captcha – school … which is were ever KS saver needs to go to learn there is no free lunch

    • prism 10.1
      20 April 2011 at 9:47 am

      Robert Atack  –  You seem to have a toxic view of the world.   Did you know this is bad for your health?    And doesn’t add anything helpful to the cogitations of others who believe there is a better way of doing things if it can be unearthed?   That does mean that commenters have to dig down into their brain for ideas not just whirl them from the surface like flying frisbees with a knee-jerk stance.

      • Robert Atack 10.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 6:09 pm

        The world is way worse for my health than anything my little brain can come up with.
        Believing there is a better way is like believing in the tooth fairy or that a politician is worth voting for.
        The ‘better way’ went out the window years ago.
        Wake up P, even  Charles Manson understands we are so very fucked )

        • Adele 10.1.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 9:39 pm

          Teenaa koe, Rob

          If the world had to depend on whatever issued forth from that little brain of yours, then yes, we are so very fucked.

          • Robert Atack 10.1.1.1.1
            21 April 2011 at 5:08 pm

            Adele
            I found the below comment at the top of a comments page the other day, it seems appropriate after reading your personal attack

            Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

            At least I have a name and am willing to stand by what I say.
             
            http://oilcrash.com/articles/struggle.htm

            • Adele 10.1.1.1.1.1
              8 May 2011 at 10:28 pm

              Teenaa koe, Rob Atack

              My apologies for not responding sooner to your reply post. I have only just used the site search function to overview my posts – grammar could do with much improvement, although, I do write from an indigenous perspective which has a tendency to screw with western traditions.

              I apologies to you sincerely and completely, I mis-used the language towards you – and did take it personal. Occasionally, it is warranted, but not in your case. I’ve read your blog and you fight the good fight – a fight that indigenous peoples practicing indigeneity would wholly applaud,

              An indigenous view of science would say that science merely limits possibilities to the capacity of human thinking only. Which is why we are in this anthropogenic mess now. Science is largely responsible – aided and abetted by technology. It has provided the fuel to the human capacity to live selfishly – to live independently and unrelatedly to the natural world.

              The dumb thing is, however, that it is not the natural world that suffers. Human beings are literally shitting in their own nest – and we’re supposed to have the intelligence.

              Recently I was having a conversation with an old guy (with impressive credentials) and he marvelled at how mankind has progressed from eating their toe nails to landing on the moon – in a relatively short frame of time. Whereas, on reflection, I could only think we haven’t progressed at all.

              Big deal that we have landed on the Moon – it simply means more whenua to shit on. We are polluting space as much as Earth. Indigenous peoples credit the natural world with an opinion, and I am fairly sure it will opine ‘good riddance’ once we have become extinct, or the gene pool has reduced to non-viability aka someone that votes National.

              In the not to distant future we may very well be living back 200 years albeit with solar-powered internet. I am thinking how do I fit a horse in my backyard.

  11. prism 11
    20 April 2011 at 9:17 am

    Is this the format that is now permanent for this site?

    • joe90 11.1
      20 April 2011 at 9:27 am

      I’ve found that by writing the full post and then adding links, quotes etc avoids the oddball text and the weird creeping format thing.

      • Carol 11.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 9:39 am

        When I did that transcription from the Cunliffe interview yesterday, I typed it first onto a word document.  When I cut & pasted it to the Standard comment box & submitted, it included all the WORD raw codes.  I deleted them through editing, but it was a little cumbersome.

        • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 11:43 am

          When I cut & pasted it to the Standard comment box & submitted, it included all the WORD raw codes.

          Easy answer – don’t use MS Word. Either use a text editor (Notepad) or a word processor that doesn’t include unnecessary control codes (OpenOffice comes to mind).

  12. felix 12
    20 April 2011 at 9:48 am

    Just had this horrible sensation that perhaps Labour are waiting for National to set the agenda for the election campaign so they can respond to it.
     
    Please say it isn’t so.

    • Carol 12.1
      20 April 2011 at 9:50 am

      Labour have gone out aggressively on the No Asset Sales campaign, which is causing reactive attacks from righties.

      • Jim Nald 12.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 5:51 pm

        Up to a point, opposition parliamentarians would track closely, i.e. the government proposes, the opposition oppose.
        Up to a point, that is.
        It would be a tactical call, on an issue to issue basis, for the opposition to propose alternatives. And it would be a strategic matter to decide when to systematically begin campaigning – hopefully neither too early, nor too late.

    • Bill 12.2
      20 April 2011 at 9:53 am

      I suspect that horrible sensation you have is going to be about as good as it gets.
       
      Remember how it’s suggested that Labour want to be ‘nice guys’ who seek compromise? So the response may well be a basic endorsement of the Nat’s proposals with a few suggestions of how they would implement the same basic broad agenda a little differently.

    • in memory of democracy 12.3
      20 April 2011 at 10:30 am

      Who is this Labour party of which you speak?  There used to be some folk who called themselves by that name but i haven’t seen them since the early eighties.
       
      i did see a Moose the other day chasing a Moa, perhaps they could give us a map to the land of the Lost where these mythical creatures reside  :]
       
      capcha: amuse

    • Bored 12.4
      20 April 2011 at 4:05 pm

      Numbness? Anaesthesia perhaps? Just a dull aching pain where a feeling of enthusiasm once existed?

  13. Name (Required) 13
    20 April 2011 at 10:08 am

    I submit the following is a must-read:
    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/blocking_the_gates_to_the_temples_of_finance_20110418
    Yes it’s the US today, but if it isn’t stopped there it will be here soon enough.
    (Yes I know it is now, but it’s still cautious and a little bit timid.  Once there’s nothing left to fear…..)

    • ianmac 13.1
      20 April 2011 at 10:20 am

      Joe90 is pointing to the same threats in the first posts Item 1 today. Chilling stuff if the poor unite in USA. If the force of Govt in Libya flattens the “rebels”, imagine what the might of arms by the USA Govt against their “rebels” could do! They could even use cluster bombs against the people because they would be declared as terrorists.

    • Olwyn 13.2
      20 April 2011 at 10:24 am

      @ Name (required) Wow! I love this man on the basis of this one article! How is that for telling it like it is!

  14. mikesh 14
    20 April 2011 at 10:10 am

    Labour once claimed to be socialist, which would have involved using the resources of the state to improve the economy. These days, however, the economy is left to the private sector, which is then taxed to provide a “social dividend”. Both parties follow the same agenda. Apart from getting rid of National, do we have any reason for voting Labour?

  15. Sanctuary 15
    20 April 2011 at 10:15 am

    Here is a bit of historical research that doesn’t the fit the nationalistic narrative of ANZAC Day and therefore won’t be done by anyone – How many of Massey’s Cossacks did the Turks kill off at Gallipoli?

    It is an interesting question, because many of the volunteers who went off to fight in 1914-15 came from that particular class of little Britons who had also tasted service in Massey’s Cossacks. The views, letters and diaries of these 15,000 or so men who initially volunteered is all that is offered today as representative of what people in this country thought in 1914-15. The national myth is completely colonised by the words and utterances of a bunch of rather unpleasant reactionary and provincial imperialists.

    Yet by 1916 conscription was needed and, dispite the considerable social pressure and incentives to do so (such as choice on what sort of unit you went to), less than a third of the available men in this country ever volunteered for service. Compulsion was required for rest. Could it be migrants from the slums of Glasgow were more sceptical of whose freedom they were defending than the golden sons of the rural squatocracy?

    This question will of course not be addressed next Monday. Instead, we will get shrill and simplistic hyper-patriotism wrapped in a flag of maudlin and sentimental tripe.

  16. todd 16
    20 April 2011 at 10:16 am

    Asshole of the Week Award

    http://thejackalman.blogspot.com/2011/04/asshole-of-week-award_20.html

    This award should come as no surprise… Tony Hayward former President and CEO of BP is a complete asshole! Just look at his response to the fact that BP used a risky well-casing plan, did not conduct a test of the well’s cement job and did not use a “lockdown sleeve” device that “would have prevented the seal at the wellhead from being blown out,” all of which could have prevented the Deepwater Horizon disaster that continues to despoil the gulf of Mexico…

    • joe90 16.1
      20 April 2011 at 10:52 am

      Well he did replace an arsehole Todd.

      What could possibly go wrong.
      We have a management style that has made a virtue of doing more for less,” said Hayward. To increase BP’s profitability and share price, Browne had encouraged the departure of hundreds of BP’s skilled engineers. To save money, Browne believed BP should use subcontractors to drill for oil, maintain refineries, monitor corrosion in pipelines and supervise the construction of oil platforms. Investigations of the accidents blamed cost savings and the inadequate skills of BP’s own personnel for poor supervision of the subcontractors.

      • Draco T Bastard 16.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 11:56 am

        And that is the management style in NZ after 3 decades of neo-liberalism. Cut cut cut and then we wonder why our homes leak, our national telecommunications infrastructure is less than what it should be and the people who caused all the damage are the ones who are most well rewarded.

        • prism 16.1.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 2:23 pm

          dtb – That’s not what we were promised in the 1980’s.  Changes were needed we were told, there would be pain we were told, but there would be gain but we weren’t told by whom?   While we waited for the gain in the normal way of rising wages and commerce we borrowed on our bright future.  We been dun!

  17. joe90 17
    20 April 2011 at 11:42 am

    When will crusher introduce these.

    “Complete extraction of existing, hidden, and deleted phone data, including call history, text messages, contacts, images, and geotags,” a CelleBrite brochure explains regarding the device’s capabilities. “The Physical Analyzer allows visualization of both existing and deleted locations on Google Earth. In addition, location information from GPS devices and image geotags can be mapped on Google Maps.”

    More:

    • Draco T Bastard 17.1
      20 April 2011 at 12:01 pm

      The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections.

      That means that there’s a built in back door to the encryption used on the phones. Bet that wasn’t touted as a feature on the shiny sales brochure.

  18. randal 18
    20 April 2011 at 11:48 am

    hey joe.
    i know where you live and I know what you say and I know what you think so why would I get rid of the apparatus that allows me to keep tabs on YOU!

  19. in memory of democracy 19
    20 April 2011 at 1:14 pm

    Surely Mr Goff can take whoever he wants to attend these meetings. It is not a good look for any government to behave in this manner
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/4907844/Little-angry-at-snub

  21. logie97 21
    20 April 2011 at 6:42 pm

    So Mora’s Afternoons-party-political-broadcast-show with residential pundit, the Penguin tried again this afternoon.  And the well informed Penguin spouted on giving us his “this-is-the-spin-you-are-to-use” line from above about family law excesses.  Unfortunately for the Penguin, Law Professor Henaghan from Otago, politely discredited Farrar’s point and on that subject the Penguin added no further comment.  Obviously because someone had rumbled that he didn’t know what he was talking about.  Perhaps Mora’s panel would be better served by having experts on his show more often.

    Then again, it’s irrelevant anyway, because as mentioned before, the listeners to the National Programme are not swayed, only riled, by what the panelists say.

    • felix 21.1
      20 April 2011 at 7:44 pm

      Yeah he shut Farrar down pretty quick. The poison dwarf is so used to his audience of the ill-informed, the uneducated, and the wilfully ignorant sycophants that he doesn’t know what to do when his bullshit is shown up for what it is.
       
      (on the radio he can’t log in under another name and hurl abuse at dissenters)

      But yeah, the whole “panel of people who don’t know anything in particular” format is fucking retarded. It’s like a talkback station but the stupidest callers get to talk all afternoon.

  23. Deadly_NZ 23
    20 April 2011 at 7:15 pm

    Anyone watching Campbell live about the Kate Shepard retiree’s .  Not too nice on the NAT politicians on it.

    • ianmac 23.1
      20 April 2011 at 8:36 pm

      Yes Deadly. Appalling that elderly folk are left out in the cold after laying down a plan and paid for security till they die. After paying insurance as part of the fees when they had bought a Kate Shepard unit, the earthquake wiped them out and they get minimal recompense. That’s bad.
      But even worse is the way that three Ministers were approached for help, and each refused to reply/comment. Coleman, Carter and Brownlie(?) Not my problem they each said. Shame.
      Last night I e-mailed TV3 to ask what happened to the Hide/Act Epson story that they were going to run. I received two replies. One from Pip Keane said that they ran out of Editorial time. Tomorrow instead. The second from John Campbell. Over run and had to cut said John and “We’ll run the story tomorrow.” he said. Today is tomorrow but no story. (I did ask in one word “political interference?” but John said “No such thing.” That just makes me more curious.

      • Jim Nald 23.1.1
        20 April 2011 at 9:08 pm

        No political interference, but what about being politically interconnected?
        I’ve recently given up watching Toryvision 3, TV3 … and also Toryvision New Zealand, TVNZ.
        You should email them to say you patiently waited yesterday for tomorrow, but today is tomorrow, and you’re now anticipating yesterday’s tomorrow tomorrow.

        • ianmac 23.1.1.1
          20 April 2011 at 10:00 pm

          But by tomorrow it will be yesterday-yesterday’s tomorrow and since everything is future or past, and there is no now I seem frozen in indecision just before and can’t manage the next moment. See?

        • Deadly_NZ 23.1.1.2
          20 April 2011 at 10:18 pm

          There was a Pub in NZ that put a sign out that said Free BEER tomorrow!
          The next day every one went to the bar and ordered their beers , were given their beers with the words “that’ll be 6 bucks thanks”  but the sign said Free beer tomorrrow they complained. Yes thats true said the publican But as well know Tomorrow NEVER comes..
           
          A little wisdom lol