Open mike 21/07/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, July 21st, 2011 - 70 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…

70 comments on “Open mike 21/07/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. RedLogix 1
    21 July 2011 at 6:24 am

    Well this is interesting.

    The group’s founder, Zainah Anwar, said on its website: “I find the burqa really disturbing.

    “There is enough literature to show that the face veil is not a requirement in Islam.

    “In a conservative, patriarchal Muslim context, face veiling really symbolises women’s invisibility and inferior status.

    “That a woman should not be seen and heard, and should she venture into the public space she must be as invisible as possible, is an affront to human dignity.”

    As I tried to point out in an earlier thread, this kind of dress code is more cultural than religious. It is not a question of ‘religious freedom’.

    Nor do most Muslims either wear damn things.

    • prism 1.1
      21 July 2011 at 9:55 am

      I think I heard about a religious sect where the men wear some sort of bag over their heads to prevent strangers from seeing their face which would diminish their life force. Oh I have a doubt, I think it was a line by a stand up comedian.

  2. Secret Squirrel 2
    21 July 2011 at 7:33 am

    Epsom electorate nudges, winks and open arrangements, have been called undemocratic. That’s nonsense. Parties should be free to arrange whatever they want to. Voters decide for themselves what they like and who they will vote for.

    It will happen in other electorates. Maori and Mana are open about trying to arrange electorate versus party votes – and Maori electorates have been quite successful at it in past elections.

    But I’m sure we will keep hearing about Epsom assaults on democracy.

    • mickysavage 2.1
      21 July 2011 at 8:31 am

      Epsom electorate nudges, winks and open arrangements, have been called undemocratic. That’s nonsense. Parties should be free to arrange whatever they want to.
       
      But SS you ignore the background.  ACT once was a distinct separate proud political party albeit with really weird ideas.  Then National decided that it probably would not make the 50% level of support in the election and that it needed partners.
       
      It looked to its right and saw that ACT was on its death bed.  Its leader, a supposed perk buster, had turned out to be a huge rorter of public money and its law and order spokesperson had stolen the identity of a dead baby.  The party was clearly mysoginist and its deputy leader was bullied.  Its newest member was and remains really weird.  It was and is a bunch of hypocritical mysoginist misfits.
       
      So National did what all good corporates do, it staged a takeover.  With the help of money and paid operatives it installed its ex leader as the new leader and an ex National cabinet member as ACT’s Epsom candidate.  None of the ACT members complained, self preservation does that to people without principle.
       
      Don’t you think that the use of money and power in this way is appalling?  And don’t you think that National’s setting up of a patsy party on the right to increase its own power is utterly undemocratic?
       
       
       
       
       
       

      • Secret Squirrel 2.1.1
        21 July 2011 at 8:51 am

        You’re making a lot of assumptions and accusations. You must have proof of all that or you wouldn’t be making the claims? Have your got legal advice on that?

        Or maybe you need to see your paranoia doctor a bit more often.

        Democracy is parties doing what they want, how they want, and voters making their own choices.

        • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1
          21 July 2011 at 8:54 am

          You’ve now gained enough points to apply for the resident Right Wing apparatchik position

          • Secret Squirrel 2.1.1.1.1
            21 July 2011 at 9:04 am

            Maori Party are right wing? Mana Party are right wing? The Anderton Party is right wing?

            If you think Labour wouldn’t make electorate arrangements to try and give themselves a way of cobbling together a coalition you’re as nuts as micky.

            • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1.1.1
              21 July 2011 at 9:06 am

              Meh, point me to one electorate any where in the country where LAB is doing anything of the sort.

              LAB is going to fight this election fair and is going to fight in every electorate tooth and nail.

              You are full of shit and now the one making plenty of “assumptions and accusations”. Hypocritical apparatchik that you are, I knew you would be qualified for the job.

              • Secret Squirrel …
                21 July 2011 at 9:22 am

                CV – if Labour could I’m sure they would, it’s just that every other party senses blood in the red water and are preying on picking up votes from the entrails. So it’s unlikely Labour has anyone willing to do deals.

                • McFlock …
                  21 July 2011 at 1:29 pm

                  Oh, so they’re all as bad as each other, Labour’s just slightly more incompetent?

                  SS, if everywhere you look in the world is self-centred and malevolent, perhaps you’re simply projecting a little bit?

            • prism 2.1.1.1.1.2
              21 July 2011 at 9:58 am

              ss I thought you had all the nuts. Are you sharing them out now.

        • mickysavage 2.1.1.2
          21 July 2011 at 8:55 am

          AAaaarrrrggghhhh
           
          PeteG you are in trolling mode.
           
          Try googling “david garrett dead baby identity court” and see what you come up with.  Then argue the accuracy of my comment.
           

          • Secret Squirrel 2.1.1.2.1
            21 July 2011 at 8:57 am

            Your posts are really spaced out this morning. Calm down and slow down.
            A new definition of trolling – upsetting ms before he’s taken his meds.

            What David Garret did some time last century is behind this right wing plot?

            • lprent 2.1.1.2.1.1
              21 July 2011 at 9:10 am

              Thank you for reminding me. My little cocktail of beta blockers, aspirin, and the like nearly got forgotten this morning..

              Now you were saying?

            • Deadly_NZ 2.1.1.2.1.2
              21 July 2011 at 10:40 am

              Oh dear Bludger has got his knickers in a twist over nothing yet again. Spin little squirrel spin

            • mickysavage 2.1.1.2.1.3
              21 July 2011 at 4:55 pm

              Squirrel
               
              What David Garret did some time last century is behind this right wing plot?
               
              Ah so you can google.  Care then to reconcile my comment about him with your comment
               
              You’re making a lot of assumptions and accusations. You must have proof of all that or you wouldn’t be making the claims?
               
              Sure do.  So is what I said about Garret correct or not?  If it is correct then identify what other statements I made that are incorrect.
               
              Go on …
               
               
               
               
               

              • Secret Squirrel …
                21 July 2011 at 5:11 pm

                You’re spaced out again.

                Not according to Garrett:
                http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/07/general_debate_21_july_2011.html#comment-854525

                I’m well aware of Garrett’s passport stuff. It doesn’t mean he is printing money to fund National operatives to take over the party he belongs to.

                • mickysavage …
                  21 July 2011 at 5:19 pm

                  You are such a crack up squirrel.  Tell me do you actually think that anything you say is true or are you just on one big piss take?

                  • felix …
                    21 July 2011 at 6:03 pm

                    Performance art?

                  • Secret Squirrel …
                    21 July 2011 at 6:10 pm

                    You’re the one making bizarre accusations.

                    And yes, taking the micky isn’t very difficult.

                    • felix …
                      21 July 2011 at 7:08 pm

                      Telling the truth about bizarre people and events is not the same thing as making bizarre accusations.

                      What is it that mickey wrote that you think is a bizarre accusation?

                      Have you been living in a cave for the last couple of years?

                    • mickysavage …
                      21 July 2011 at 7:21 pm

                      Go on SS point out one mistake, just one, any one will do.

                    • Secret Squirrel …
                      21 July 2011 at 7:39 pm

                      Your first two paragraphs, allowing for a bit of dramatic license, are in the ball park.

                      “None of the ACT members complained”

                      That’s wrong. I saw Act members complaining plenty.

                      The rest, unless you have any proof of it, I don’t buy, sounds most like a desperate conspiracy theory. And I think if you had any proof you wouldn’t just be bouncing it around this blog, where frequent and excessive over the top claims render it’s credibility very suspect. I’ve seen enough here to be very skeptical of anything that has no proof.

                      Why don’t you get some legal help, put together a demonstrable accusation, and go to the media with it? If it’s as you claim it could be a big story. But parties can, within the law, operate as they want to.

                    • Ianupnorth …
                      21 July 2011 at 8:03 pm

                      What brand of Kronik do you smoke?

                    • mickysavage …
                      21 July 2011 at 8:33 pm

                      “None of the ACT members complained”

                      You are right.  I should have said that none of the ACT MPs complained.  I am glad that you acknowledged that the first part which was most of what I said was correct.

                      And the rest?  Well google Simon Lusk and see what you come up with.  And you should realise that information concerning Simon has come from unusual sources.  Just ask Trevor.

                      Legal help?  Nah I am fine thank you.  But thinks for caring … 

                • Colonial Viper …
                  21 July 2011 at 5:27 pm

                  What, is ACT about to recycle another has been old white guy?

          • felix 2.1.1.2.2
            21 July 2011 at 9:55 am

            It’s not a mode.

          • mik e 2.1.1.2.3
            21 July 2011 at 4:21 pm

            They can use the old dog whistle Brash to soften nationals image but without this big majority they,ve been cruising toward it could back fire . and the soft middle could dessert them

      • Ianupnorth 2.1.2
        21 July 2011 at 9:32 am

        On a side note i was thinking this yesterday; are the maori wards detrimental to having truly democratic representation in parliament?
         
        Bear with me on this one….
         
        OK, take the following three mainstream electorates – Rotorua, WBOP and East Coast.
         
        Rotorua was Steve Chadwick’s after a long time as a Nat (Max Bradford) seat. It takes in the very deprived Kawerau and Kaingaroa Village, where people are predominantly Maori and are on the maori roll. In the last election Rotorua ended up with the awful waste of space Todd McClay. Needless to say he has done nothing for those communities, so by having an electorate MP (main roll) who is primarily voted in by white middle class Maori shoot themselves in the foot by being on the Maori roll.
         
        Places like Te Puke end up with Ryall and the East Coast Tolley – both areas which have big Maori populations. Makes you think.

      • Sam 2.1.3
        21 July 2011 at 10:51 am

        Obvvously you never saw Jim Anderton “party” as anything underhand then?
        Seems a severe case of pots calling kettles black.

        • felix 2.1.3.1
          21 July 2011 at 11:09 am

          You’ll need to explain how they’re similar examples.

          Jim won his seat when he was a member of the Labour Party.

          When he left the party he continued to win the seat.

          Who ever had to step aside for him to get into parliament?

          • Secret Squirrel 2.1.3.1.1
            21 July 2011 at 11:25 am

            The big Labour names contesting Wigram to compete head on with Anderton:
            2008 Erin Ebborn-Gillespie – third on 15.15% (Labour 40.19%)
            2005 Paul Chalmers – third on 19.12% (Labour 47.95%)
            2002 Mika Mora – 2nd on 26% (Labour 45%)

            Labour got the help of two Progressive seats in 2002, just Anderton since then.

            The Labour candidate this year is Megan Woods, ranked 47th on Labour’s list.

            • felix 2.1.3.1.1.1
              21 July 2011 at 11:36 am

              You think Labour could take the seat off Anderton?

              By running who, exactly?

              Whereas National could take Epsom back any time they like.

              • felix …
                21 July 2011 at 12:04 pm

                ps not that I think Labour do want to, or even that they should.

                As you say, parties can make whatever arrangements they like and people can vote accordingly. I also believe that if parties try to make arrangements to provide outcomes not favoured by the electorate in question, they’ll be punished on polling day.

                However if you’re suggesting that Anderton – who has won and held the same seat under two different electoral systems and at least three different political parties – is somehow not the genuinely preferred representative of the voters of Wigram…

                …or that his situation is analogous to ACT, who only exist in parliament because National step aside for them…

                …then you’re Pete George.

                • Secret Squirrel …
                  21 July 2011 at 12:52 pm

                  Anderton most likely would have won Wigram from a strong Labour challenge – but we’ll never know because it never happened. It was convenient for Labour to just leave it to Anderton.

                  And in another handy arrangement, Anderton retires and hands Wigram to Labour.

                  “I will be throwing my support firmly behind Labour’s Megan Woods in my current seat of Wigram.”
                  http://www.progressive.org.nz/latestnews/files/7edbf6342cc3ae907fc7a04d1bb0598a-187.html

                  • felix …
                    21 July 2011 at 1:06 pm

                    Then I guess you can’t paint Megan as a no-hope patsy candidate anymore, seeing as you think the voters of Wigram are going to welcome her to represent them.

                    She can’t be both.

                    Rather inconvenient for your conspiracy theory about the previous Labour candidates too.

                    Which means you still haven’t explained how Anderton and ACT are analogous, seeing as how ACT only exist because National step aside for them whereas Jim has been continuously selected by his electorate since 1984.

                    And according to you, he’s so popular in Wigram that whoever he anoints will be the next MP, despite them being a low-ranked no-hope patsy earlier this morning.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      21 July 2011 at 1:24 pm

                      S.S. thinks Wigram is equivalent to the situation where we saw Rodney Hide “resign” from Epsom to retire after many long years of service, gracefully “handing over” the electorate (and the party) to Brash and Banks.

                      Don’t you mate.

                    • Secret Squirrel …
                      21 July 2011 at 1:54 pm

                      Don’t be so dopey, you get a bit carried away with your bullshit expansions.

                      Epsom and Wigram are quite different – but they are both examples of one party accommodating another for mutual benefits.

                    • felix …
                      21 July 2011 at 5:59 pm

                      “you get a bit carried away with your bullshit expansions”

                      Instead of just replying to my comment with venom and repetition, how about showing why it’s factually inaccurate. ‘Cos you haven’t yet.

                  • lprent …
                    21 July 2011 at 2:16 pm

                    Anderton most likely would have won Wigram from a strong Labour challenge

                    Bullshit. There have been a series of good candidates in that electorate who have never made much traction against a competent incumbent MP. Electorates will tend to support an incumbent local MP over multiple elections if they work the electorate. Look at Peter Dunne (how many years has he been fighting off both Labour and National after that seat?) or Winston Peters (until he annoyed his electorate).

                    But that is quite different to Epsom where the only thing that has been keeping a Act MP in there was complicity from National with a series of useless candidates.

                    Anderton retires and hands Wigram to Labour.

                    You mean because the Progressives decided to drop their party?

                    But I guess you prefer your dumbass explanations that have bugger all to do with reality..

                    • Secret Squirrel …
                      21 July 2011 at 2:24 pm

                      “bugger all to do with reality”

                      I thought for a minute you were revealing Labour’s new election slogan.

                    • lprent …
                      21 July 2011 at 2:36 pm

                      I just looked at your list of the past three candidates for the seat from Labour. Personally I don’t bother with much of the politics or the people. But two of them are pretty damn high profile inside Labour that I know (and I ignore most people). One is a political operator and not someone you’d waste in a seat as a candidate if you could use them as a campaign organizer.

                      What your statements do reveal is that your comments are the result of self-obsessed politics. Long on self-congratulation at getting imaginary results, short on analysis of technique because no-one else assists, and with a complete lack of appreciation of the advantages of practice in the real world over navel gazing.

                      Or in short – the splattered excreta of a political wanker…

                    • Secret Squirrel …
                      21 July 2011 at 3:43 pm

                      “Long on self-congratulation”

                      I’m tempted to comment on that, but best left as it is.

              • Jum …
                21 July 2011 at 12:22 pm

                Felix “Whereas National could take Epsom back any time they like.”

                National already have.

  3. Lazy Susan 3
    21 July 2011 at 8:14 am

    So Act may agree to stand down in National marginals

    On the face of it this may seem like gaming the system to assist NAct in gaining extra seats.

    However, this ignores the fact that under MMP it’s the party vote that determines the make-up of Parliament – not the number of Electorate seats. Act standing down in marginals does nothing to increase the total NAct party vote – in fact quite the contrary it may well decrease that total vote for the following reasons:

    1) No Act canditate in some electorates to campaign for them

    2) Soft National and undecided voters not liking the game playing and somewhat too cosy relationship with Act.

    3) Hard right Act voters being hacked off for them being too cosy with National.

    4) Draw out more of the centre left vote in those marginals to keep NAct out

    Of course under FPP this sort of game-playing would work so it seems NAct have just highlighted another very good reason for keeping MMP.

    • Secret Squirrel 3.1
      21 July 2011 at 8:43 am

      Yes, I agree that using MMP (“game playing” it) is a good reason to keep MMP, there are more party and voter options.

      • Lazy Susan 3.1.1
        21 July 2011 at 8:53 am

        I wrote

        under FPP this sort of game-playing would work

        i.e. under MMP it does not work

        As usual the squirrel choses (or refuses) to read what was written before comitting nonsense to keyboard. Perhaps you’ll be able to throw in a few irrelevant links as well, as you did the other day when debating? English’s crap numbers.

    • Lanthanide 3.2
      21 July 2011 at 10:08 am

      Yes, in the electoral calculus, this move ultimately hurts their total seat majority.

      The total party vote determines the number of seats you get in parliament, and both Labour and National always get multiple list votes to top up their electorate winnings. Purely in terms of seats, winning more electorates for Labour or National just means fewer list members.

      Act need to do everything possible to increase their party vote, especially when they’re under the 5% threshold, as it effectively goes towards creating an overhang (in their favour) in parliament. Standing people in marginal electorates may cause National to lose them (which doesn’t ultimately affect their seat total one jot), but it would also have the effect of increasing Act’s profile and hopefully gaining them more party votes than they would otherwise. Party votes are what Act needs, so having them not stand in these electorates ultimately isn’t in their best interests, except where they can make deals over it (Brash gets a good ministerial position, instead of just a lame associate one, for example).

  4. Ianupnorth 4
    21 July 2011 at 9:34 am

    Israeli spies – call me cynical, is this a manufactured Key diversion, takes the debate well away from economics, cost of living and CGT and focuses on him in the US as our great I can fix everything leader? maybe we should let this drop and bring the debate back to real issues.

    • prism 4.1
      21 July 2011 at 10:24 am

      Inorth – It is intriguing (literally) though isn’t it, this thing about the Israeli travellers. Radionz talked to the father of a young man who lost his life. The father must be well off with lots of contacts and pull if he could find a group of experts to drop their business so they could travel here on his behalf, and who paid their travel and accommodation bill? Did he or they pay out of their huge bank accounts and the goodness of their hearts? It seemed necessary he said as we appeared slow and incompetent compared to other countries.

      I guess Israelis are used now to getting things their own way. Their leader goes to the United States and addresses a large group which gives him a standing ovation. I wonder whether ours will get a few smiles and nods. This link gives a youtube video of his 24 May 2011 speech to congress and you can see the sycophantic response to his every remark. Then when you’re tired of the repetition of hand clapping you can read the transcript below.
      USA and Israel

      • freedom 4.1.1
        21 July 2011 at 11:11 am

        can you imagine how long it would take Key to say that speech

        “I speak (looks down, reads, looks up) on behalf of the (looks down, reads, looks up) Jewish people and (looks down, reads, looks up) the Jewish state (looks down, reads, looks up) when I say to you”

        • felix 4.1.1.1
          21 July 2011 at 11:51 am

          “I’m akshully speaking for behalf the Jew, people and the state, vis a vis I’m having said that I say it to you. I love lamp.”

  5. Anne 5
    21 July 2011 at 10:13 am

    Can’t agree Ianupnorth. To manufacture a spy scandal as a diversion would be fraught with problems. To start with, your intelligence and defence agencies would cease to trust you with information. Anyway, his initial response suggests he was taken by surprise and tried to wriggle out by using his stock answer “it’s not in the National Interest for me to comment”. What he means of course is that it’s not in his interest to comment. 😉

    • Ianupnorth 5.1
      21 July 2011 at 11:38 am

      I am not saying it’s necessarily made up, just handy and convenient to deflect the press from the inflation figures and assets sales.

      • felix 5.1.1
        21 July 2011 at 11:45 am

        Either way, Anne’s analysis stands. It’s not the kind of distraction that’s helpful to Key whether he instigates it or not, there’s just too many ways he can come out of it looking bad. Too risky.

        The distractions Key likes are all about him winning and laughing, not about him being connected in any way to the murky world of espionage.

  6. felix 6
    21 July 2011 at 11:16 am

    CitRats (National) councillor and all-round tory fuckwit George Wood has a solution to Auckland’s housing problem:

    Trailer parks.

    Not even kidding. http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/mnr/mnr-20110721-0726-councillor_offers_trailer_parks_as_solution_to_housing_shortage-048.mp3

    That’s the tory vision in a nutshell: Them living in luxury and the rest of us in fucking trailer parks.

    These dinosaur elitists have to go.

  7. Jum 7
    21 July 2011 at 11:38 am

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/rupert-murdoch/5318708/News-Corp-structure-questioned

    ‘In a three-hour hearing, committee member Adrian Sanders invoked the 2001 collapse of Enron, asking whether the Murdochs were familiar with the term ”wilful ignorance”. ”It states that if there is knowledge that you could have had and should have had but chose not to have, you are still responsible,” he said.’

    Is John Key guilty of ‘wilful ignorance’ in that as a moneytrader working in America with a spider’s web of networks that he continued to return to visit during his latest sojourn to New Zealand, he never warned New Zealanders that there was a huge financial collapse that would endanger New Zealand fiscally, because if he didn’t know then his credibility as a financial whizz is shot to hell. He’s back there now getting his latest instructions and selling off New Zealand’s sovereignty with his rush to push the TPPA through.

    No wonder he and his mates tried to bully Labour into giving tax cuts and thereby seeking to make our financial position suicidal instead of just uncomfortable.

    No wonder the business fraternity under his guidance and Phil O’Reilly’s spin, sought to sack workers (bringing some back at lower wages and no benefits) soon after winning the election and reducing workers’ rights to fair treatment.

    Their current plan to sell off assets New Zealanders already own to foreignors or rich business interests would have carried even less weight than it does now. They could only seek to do that by refusing to fund coach building in New Zealand by New Zealanders because that would empower Kiwis. They could only seek to do that by making New Zealanders poorer or insecure.

    Apply this thinking to many of this government’s ridiculous and disloyal decisions and you will begin to understand their reasoning.

    Key is America’s man, not ours.

    He is not worthy of New Zealanders’ trust. After this election if he gets back in, New Zealand is gone.

  8. Ianupnorth 8
    21 July 2011 at 1:33 pm

    After reading this http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/81961,people,news,jk-rowlings-multi-million-harry-potter-thank-you I was thinking maybe Mr. Key is expecting the same from Warners after The Hobbit comes out?

  9. Treetop 9
    21 July 2011 at 2:06 pm

    I agreed with Banks this morning, he said the country was flat broke. Someone from the right is finally telling the truth.

  10. Ianupnorth 10
    21 July 2011 at 7:18 pm

    Historical quote….

    “The working classes may be injuriously degraded and oppressed in three ways:

    1st When they are neglected in infancy
    2nd When they are overworked by their employer, and are thus rendered incompetent from ignorance to make a good use of high wages when they can procure them.
    3rd When they are paid low wages for their labour “. (Robert Owen , 1818)

    For more common sense from nearly 200 years ago see http://www.robert-owen.com/extracts.html

    • Bored 10.1
      21 July 2011 at 8:08 pm

      He forgot to mention a fourth way….when the worker is denied a cycleway despite the promises of his political masters.

      • Ianupnorth 10.1.1
        21 July 2011 at 10:46 pm

        Very good 🙂

        Amazing to think someone 200 years ago actually had a clue and actually wanted to help better people, especially the most disadvantaged.

  11. Morrissey 11
    21 July 2011 at 9:27 pm

    Thursday 21 July 2011
    Some questions about media “coverage” of the Israeli spy story

    1.) Why was the Israeli spy story only on Page 2 of the New Zealand Herald this morning?

    2.) Why did both TV1 and TV3 reporters (including even the normally excellent Patrick Gower) both refer to Israel by the erroneous black propaganda term “the Jewish state”?

    3.) Why did TV1 and TV3 autocue readers both say “the Jewish community” is “outraged” by the New Zealand police committing these “attacks” on Israel?

    4.) Why did both TV1 and TV3 autocue readers both quote and show inflammatory, absurd headlines from the extreme right-wing Jerusalem Post and not report or show anything from the liberal and internationally respected Haaretz?

    5.) Why did neither TV1’s CloseUp nor TV3’s Campbell Live spend even one second on this story tonight?

    6.) Could NewstalkZB have found three more grossly biased or lamentably ill-informed people to discuss this scandal than Larry Williams, Bill Ralston and Jock Anderson?

  12. M 12
    21 July 2011 at 9:36 pm

    Love Max and Stacey:

    Max: ‘… Marx predicted capitalists would sell themselves the noose to hang themselves’

    Interesting interview about Bitcoin.

    • Draco T Bastard 12.1
      21 July 2011 at 9:40 pm

      Can’t watch Keiser – his voice grates like fingernails across a blackboard.

      • Colonial Viper 12.1.1
        21 July 2011 at 10:31 pm

        LOL. That guy (Keiser) needs to be head of Treasury

        I think a day a week will get the job done just fine. (Don’t know what the hell all those neoliberal office rats are doing there now Mon-Fri except no good)

    • felix 12.2
      22 July 2011 at 12:41 am

      Is it just me or do they both look really high?

  13. Jum 13
    21 July 2011 at 10:13 pm

    It was excellent to see Justice being intelligent; yes, there was nothing to stop Hannah Tamaki from pursuing a presidency over the Maori Women’s Welfare League but don’t bother to use the votes from the ten ring in groups.

    Destiny are nothing if not cunning. The canny Maori Women’s Welfare League are nothing if not caring of all their people. I hope they get what they want, not what agenda Brian Tamaki wants.

  14. M 14
    21 July 2011 at 10:56 pm

    Bill nutshells it again: