Open mike 22/12/2012

87 comments on “Open mike 22/12/2012 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Morrissey 1

   22 December 2012 at 6:46 am

   Pro-Israeli apologist-comedians angry about human rights protest
   Claim Israeli films “in no way a propaganda arm” for Israeli regime

   Just over three years ago, a few months before the murderous Israeli assault on Gaza’s captive population (“Operation Cast Lead”) human rights and justice activists protested against the Toronto Film Festival allowing itself to be used as a theatre for a cynical propaganda exercise by the Israeli state. Upset at this outrageous display of democratic dissent, a group of extreme supporters of the Israeli state went public with their love for the Holy State….

   Seinfeld, Sacha Baron Cohen and Natalie Portman slam Toronto Film Festival protest
   Jewish actors sign letter in L.A. Times and Toronto Star against protest of festival over homage to Tel Aviv.
   by Itamar Zohar and Natasha Mozgovaya | Sep.16, 2009 | 1:29 AM |
   http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/2.209/seinfeld-sacha-baron-cohen-and-natalie-portman-slam-toronto-film-festival-protest-1.7828

   WASHINGTON – A number of Hollywood stars circulated a letter Tuesday protesting a petition calling for a protest over the Toronto International Film Festival for its Tel Aviv-themed event.
   The letter, which appeared simultaneously in the Los Angeles Times and the Toronto Star was signed, among others, by Jerry Seinfeld, Sacha Baron Cohen, Natalie Portman, Jason Alexander and Lisa Kudrow.

   The letter, which was paid for by Jewish organizations in Los Angeles and Toronto, said, “Anyone who has actually seen recent Israeli cinema, movies that are political and personal, comic and tragic, often critical, knows they are in no way a propaganda arm for any government policy.”

   Film festival protesters, which included culture critic Naomi Klein, and directors John Greyson and Richard Fung, said the Israeli films presented at the festival promote Israel’s recent publicity campaign, which seeks to show Israel and Tel Aviv as enlightened, liberal places, without conducting a dialogue on their treatment of Palestinians.

   The Toronto festival’s management did not give in to pressure, and showed all ten films in the City of City event, which spotlighted Tel Aviv. Among them were Ephraim Kishon’s “Big Dig,” Assi Dayan’s “Life According to Agfa,” and Keren Yedaya’s “Bride of the Sea.”

   Meanwhile, Jane Fonda, who had initially opposed the spotlight on Tel Aviv at the festival, Tuesday released a statement that she had changed her mind.

   “I signed the letter without reading it carefully enough, without asking myself if some of the wording wouldn’t exacerbate the situation rather than bring about constructive dialogue,” Fonda wrote on the huffingtonpost.com. She added that the suffering of both sides should be articulated.

   http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/2.209/seinfeld-sacha-baron-cohen-and-natalie-portman-slam-toronto-film-festival-protest-1.7828
   • Morrissey 1.1

     22 December 2012 at 7:58 am

     And Jane Fonda, as usual, was simply bewildered.
2. JK 2

   22 December 2012 at 7:43 am

   This is worrying. Govt querying whether Chief Justice Sian Elias should hear the Maori Water rights claim. Fran O’Sullivan in NZ Herald 22.12.12. I speculate this will be just the start of a govt move to disregard any result from the hearing if it is positive for the Maori Council claim.
   Note also Bill English starting to query the legitimacy of the Maori Council. All part of a pr build-up which will allow the Govt to ignore a positive outcome for the Maori Council !

   “Should Chief Justice Sian Elias recuse herself from the upcoming Supreme Court hearing on the Maori water rights claim? ………..
   “It would be a big call to challenge the Chief Justice, who has (in fact) presided over at least three Supreme Court hearings in which the Maori Council has been a plaintiff without facing any challenge from the Executive. But Cabinet ministers are understood to have asked Crown Law to look at whether grounds do in fact exist for a challenge, or a request to be made to her to stand aside…………….
   “She successfully acted for the council on several high-profile Treaty of Waitangi claims against the Crown in the late 1980s through to the mid-1990s.
   “Some Cabinet ministers take the view that because of this strong and lengthy relationship as one of the council’s prime legal advocates, she should recuse herself from the upcoming appeal by the Maori Council against High Court judge Ron Young’s judgment effectively clearing the way for the Government to sell down its shareholding in Mighty River Power.
   “At first blush it would seem unlikely Elias would take this step.
   …………………………………
   “But there have been few …. who have dared to publicly question her role in presiding on such cases.
   “When Elias has stood aside it has been when a direct personal conflict has arisen. For instance, when she scratched herself from a Supreme Court case involving jockey Lisa Cropp who had been riding one of the judge’s horses……….
   “The water rights case will go straight to the Supreme Court for a full-court hearing on January 31. The single ground for appeal is whether Young was right to dismiss the council’s application to review the Government’s decisions on the sell down of Mighty River Power because of outstanding claims to water rights.
   “At Government level there is also concern over the very legitimacy of the Maori Council.
   Cabinet ministers such as Bill English – who was second respondent in the council’s High Court action – are sceptical over the council’s standing.
   “He contends that it doesn’t really represent the Maori leadership of today…………..”
   ” The asset sales are a major part of the Government’s fiscal programme………..”
   • Foreign waka 2.1

     22 December 2012 at 10:05 am

     There are three issues here really.

     1/ the legality of asset sales, as the owners consent was not sought (all tax payers -referendum)
     2/ any validity of building fixed assets around natural resources which is anchored in the treaty regarding access. Is access guarantied under private ownership? And what does this mean in small print?
     3/ and really most important, does the government of the day has the right to override the law of the land? Does this then constitute a dictatorship (as they had in eastern Europe not so long ago)?

     As citizen of any country these questions would be utmost important. Surprised that the judiciary does not provide advise to parliament before this hits the headlines.
     • NoseViper (The Nose knows) 2.1.1

       22 December 2012 at 3:14 pm

       Foreign waka 2.1

       and really most important, does the government of the day has the right to override the law of the land? Does this then constitute a dictatorship (as they had in eastern Europe not so long ago)?

       We have seen our country’s governance overturned in large measure, and under constant assault by whatever the latest government is. In this modern age can we have the same approach to democracy and government that we started with in the 1800s??

       Since then quite a lot of history and technology has passed by us and through us, like the incessant neutrinos, which we didn’t know much about till recently. We know a lot of new stuff – are we capable of applying that information and fostering some new thinking quickly before all that we built in the past has been carelessly dismantled by the tunnel-visioned and ideology- driven conmen and women who are putting themselves forward with confidence.

       It’s not enough to step up to the country having been groomed like a show horse and announce that ‘You can trust me to do the right thing because I look good, and I have confidence in myself and my party. Vote for me even if I have never explained in understandable language what I think is The Right Thing” Our democracy is a sham and not resilient and robust enough to prevail against the being and getting obssessives – their obssession – wealth and consumer goods and power.
       • Foreign waka 2.1.1.1

         22 December 2012 at 7:36 pm

         Agree that democracy is fragile, not just here in NZ. Having a lot of new technology is not necessary new knowledge. It just means doing the same faster, more efficient, more accurate etc. (looking towards novopay….. 😉 ). As for the show horse bit, any front person is just that. We all should know that by now. New technology gives any party the means to survey where they stand ever so faster, thus enabling promise answers before we had time to formulate our questions. Yes, this is also happening everywhere.
         However, the one institution that ought to keep everything above board, the process clean and fair is the judiciary. The difference between so many consume driven democracies to this new development is the ease with which the law of the land is being called into question and at the same time nibbled on to favor special interest. THIS is a big worry, my friend. Because it is the living law that safeguards democracy. Even the “wild west” was won with a sheriff in town.
         • NoseViper (The Nose knows) 2.1.1.1.1

           23 December 2012 at 5:31 pm

           Foreign Waka
           the law of the land is being called into question and at the same time nibbled on to favor special interest. THIS is a big worry, my friend. Because it is the living law that safeguards democracy. Even the “wild west” was won with a sheriff in town.
           Agree. You know how to dig the spurs in pardner.
3. The Al1en 3

   22 December 2012 at 7:58 am

   As promised yesterday (I always keep my word), the song I sent to Clare Curran.
   I wrote it in a couple of hours after work one evening, and whilst not really being about her, it’s relevant and perfectly captures the moment in time I knew 100% I would never party vote Labour again.
   Of course, I wouldn’t ever publish her reply. 😉

   I can’t sing or play a note on any instrument, and until last April, never written a proper song.
   I’m the idiot savant with arguably more idiot than savant, so click the link – It’s only a little quickie. 2.16 of your time. You might even like it.

   Track four from the album Human (R)evolution @ http://www.al1en.org

   Chemical Drift

   You’ll know that I’m right and you’ll wish I was so wrong.
   The feelings you’ll get, like regret, they last far too long.
   I can’t give you any more clearer lines.
   I can’t give you any more clearer signs.

   Could you feel it? The chemical drift. The chemical drift away.
   Could you see it? My chemical twist. My chemical drift away.

   I know what it’s like to be right and be so wrong.
   The feelings you get, to forget, just takes so damn long.
   So I don’t take any more some other time.
   I don’t take any more deleted lines.

   Did you feel it? The chemical shift. The chemical drifts away.
   Did you see it? My chemical drift. My chemical drifts away.
   You couldn’t steal it. The chemical gift. The chemical drifts away.
   Now you’ve freed it. My chemicals drifts. My chemical drift away.
4. Te Reo Putake 4

   22 December 2012 at 8:09 am

   I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night, Alive as you or me.
   Says I, “But Joe, you’re ten years dead,”
   “I never died,” says he.
   “I never died,” says he.

   Ten years ago today Joe Strummer died. The foundation set up in his name, Strummerville, works to give young musicians in third world countries a voice. Today would be a good day to make a small donation, if readers felt inclined. Cheers.

   http://www.strummerville.com/

   DJ and friend Don Letts is also doing a show in Joe’s honour:

   http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0072pzt

   “if you’re after getting the honey, then you don’t go killing all the bees”:
   • Morrissey 4.1

     22 December 2012 at 8:17 am

     “if you’re after getting the honey, then you don’t go killing all the bees”:

     Although, for some people, “killing all the bees” is a laughing matter….
     
5. Polish Pride 5

   22 December 2012 at 8:20 am

   10 signs that you are fully awake…..
   http://www.activistpost.com/2012/09/10-signs-that-youre-fully-awake.html
   • Colonial Weka 5.1

     22 December 2012 at 8:36 am

     Not a bad list, but number 1 is bullshit. No difference between ACT and Mana/Greens? Pull the other one.

     Number 9 is just embarrassing. No wonder the mainstream doesn’t take people like that seriously.
     • VindowViper 5.1.1

       22 December 2012 at 8:51 am

       errrm … I was thinking that neither ACT nor Mana/Greens are MAJOR parties.

       No. 8 is indeed the logical end-game. All the big problems facing the world are global in nature, therefore their solutions have to be global as well.

       At this point most people are still understandably frightened of this.
       • Colonial Weka 5.1.1.1

         22 December 2012 at 9:07 am

         Except that under MMP small parties are major parties. Look at the power that Peter Dunne has been wielding in recent years.

         But even if we just look at Labour and National, I have to quote you to yourself 😉

         “My younger brother who has a life-long disability (and while he can paint roofs, you would not wish what he has on your worst enemy) says he can always tells when National is in power because WINZ or it’s equivalent of the day, go from being merely depressing to deal with … to utterly miserly, malicous and mind-fucking.”

         http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-15122012/comment-page-1/#comment-563096

         That’s a significant difference. I know what people are trying to do when they say there is no difference between left and right anymore. But I think it is a flawed strategy, partly because it denies the reality of people like your brother, and partly because it’s dishonest.

         And #9?
         • VindowViper 5.1.1.1.1

           22 December 2012 at 9:17 am

           Yes there is a difference … you are quite right to quote my brother’s observations. They certainly go about the business of government differently.

           But at a fundamental level there is not as much difference as they would like to pretend … Labour for instance shows no sign of being willing to reduce our carbon use by 10% the first year they get into power.

           Nor challenge the power of money.

           #9. Yes. Wrong and silly interpretation of something else more interesting.
           • Colonial Weka 5.1.1.1.1.1

             22 December 2012 at 10:13 am

             nice summation of #9.

             I guess my problem with the line that left and right mainstream parties are the same is that it stops us from understanding what is different and the usefulness of still voting on the left. It also encourages people to not vote at all.

             The other area where the difference is notable is community based funding. Lots of funding dries up under NACT, and returns under Labour. I think even more so under Labour/Greens. Making change is easier under a left wing govt than a right wing one.

             I think it would be better for people to be more complex in what they say. I’ve found the recent discussions on ts about Labour, the left/right struggle within the party, and the degree to which different Labour govts are to the left or right of others very helpful. Understanding those subtleties helps us make decisions.
             • Polish Pride …

               22 December 2012 at 12:53 pm

               regardless of who is in power (small medium or large parties) the real problems never get fixed. All you have is a shift of a few degrees to the left of to the right every 3 years. I will no longer vote as in the big picture it is not going to fix the real problems. Why? I now realize that ‘the current System’ is the problem and the barrier to do what is required to fix things.
               • One Tāne Viper …

                 22 December 2012 at 1:07 pm

                 “…the current System’ is the problem…”

                 Increased life expectancy, social security, universal education etc etc demonstrate that elements of the current system are in fact the solution. I would need to be pretty well convinced that what you are serving up is at least as good as what we already have in terms of ability to deliver good outcomes.

                 Fomenting discontent about “the system” is counter-productive when it is “the system” that has produced a range of positive changes already. As for future changes, put in the hard yards that transform a progressive idea into an act of parliament.
                 • RedLogix …

                   22 December 2012 at 1:13 pm

                   The best analogy I can think of is what happened after the Roman Empire collapsed.

                   While at one level there was an objective reduction in the standard of living for a small minority of very wealthy Romans and their minions in the colonies who supervised the inlet end of the various ‘wealth pumps’ of the empire … for the vast majority of peasants and slaves nothing much changed.

                   And what came after was not a complete reversion to what came before the Romans and Greeks before them. Latin and the Classics were not forgotten. The Christian and Islamic empires various built upon this legacy … eventually resulting in the modern world.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     22 December 2012 at 3:20 pm

                     The difference is the level of technological advancement that we have achieved.
                     As an example (albiet a little simplistic admittedly) …The entire world could move to using completely renewable energy but Money and its role in the current system is a barrier to doing this. Remove money and you still have the resources and technology to do this.
                 • muzza …

                   22 December 2012 at 1:15 pm

                   Yeah its a fair comment bloke, and one which has been evident while getting into the current state the world is now in. Unfortunately of current course that same system will be inverting on itself for many, and currently is in front of our eyes, and will continue to eject more people into, then from the bottom layers!

                   The system will eat itself, or should I say eat those, who the system does not want to cater for any longer!

                   I do agree that the present system, could be helpful if harnessed, but I do not see how that is possible, given the driving forces!

                   Spose we could all just keep voting every three year and hope for a miracle!
                   • Polish Pride …

                     22 December 2012 at 3:23 pm

                     If nobody votes the system fails.
                     Does govt have a mandate if only 30% of eligible voters vote and of that number the winning party receives 16% of the vote?
                   • Colonial Weka …

                     22 December 2012 at 3:37 pm

                     As far as I know 30% turnout is a legitimate way to form govt.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     22 December 2012 at 4:47 pm

                     It would be a difficult term if you are trying to push through policies with a mere 16% public support. It also shows up yet another flaw in the system
                 • Polish Pride …

                   22 December 2012 at 2:59 pm

                   you can have all of those things and more under a new system but you can add to the list
                   massive reduction in crime
                   elimination of starvation
                   people having more free time to do the things that they are passionate about and spend more time with that are important to them (friends and family).
                   ‘The system’ that you have so much faith in is the only thing man has ever build that he must then work for in order to survive. All other things that man has built make life easier not harder.
                   It is time we evolved again
                   Their are certain things that everyone on the entire planet should have an inalienable right to, all culminating in the ability to lead a happy and fulfilling life.
                   Food
                   Clothing
                   A safe loving home
                   an education
                   Money has evolved within the system it is time we evolved from needing to use it.
                   It has now become a barrier in order for people to be able to obtain the tings that they want and more importantly need to live the happy and fulfilling life that we ALL need.
                   If you designed the system from scratch around what people need and want with a view to having mechanisms in place to supply those things you would not even have money in the equation.
                   You would have a govt in an administrative role that is there to serve the people. Not to dictate to them as we have now.
                 • Polish Pride …

                   22 December 2012 at 3:16 pm

                   The system has served its purpose but is no longer doing so
                   (perhaps with the exception of Gay Marriage)
               • Draco T Bastard …

                 22 December 2012 at 1:48 pm

                 I will no longer vote as in the big picture it is not going to fix the real problems. Why? I now realize that ‘the current System’ is the problem and the barrier to do what is required to fix things.

                 Can’t change the current system without voting. Of course, you need to have a political party that will change the present system and there doesn’t appear to be one of those around.
                 • Polish Pride …

                   22 December 2012 at 3:30 pm

                   I believe that the system has been changed many times throughout history without voting 🙂
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     22 December 2012 at 7:21 pm

                     Revolution can work. Gets a little bloody though.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     22 December 2012 at 8:18 pm

                     agreed revolution does get a little bloody – it would be easier for an influential party to understand what is possible and provide a vision on how to get their. Certain smaller steps would need to be taken first to ‘adjust’ the political landscape. Such a party could introduce policy like feeding kids in schools thus helping to ensure the get a good education. Then perhaps a policy around housing to ensure that there are affordable homes and to get the message out that everyone should have the opportunity to have their own home… 🙂
               • Colonial Weka …

                 22 December 2012 at 2:05 pm

                 “I will no longer vote as in the big picture it is not going to fix the real problems. ”

                 Well thanks mate for abandoning the most vulnerable people to a NACT future. Actually, forget thanks, fuck you.

                 It is much easier to make change under a left wing govt. If you choose to not vote, you are essentially acquiescing to NACT and allowing them free reign. You think it’s bad now? Give them another term or two.
                 • Polish Pride …

                   22 December 2012 at 3:07 pm

                   The things I want to see fixed will not be fixed under a left wing govt either. The things I want to see fixed are fixable but not within the current system.
                   Furthermore the govt is their to represent the will of the people. There are many instances on both sides L&R where the complete opposite is true. If a party were advocating a move away from the current system to a new constitution and were to give people back the power (direct democracy) then I would vote. Until then you will remain forever locked in a cycle of shifting a couple of degrees to the left and then a couple of degrees to the right.

                   If I vote I am responsible for the mess they create and perpetuate as are you and whoever else votes and thus by doing so perpetuates a broken system.
                   • One Tāne Viper …

                     23 December 2012 at 9:23 am

                     Cry-baby. If you don’t vote guess what? You’re still “responsible”.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     23 December 2012 at 10:25 am

                     I’m in no way responsible. I didn’t vote them in. In fact by not voting at all I didn’t support and therefore perpetuate the system unlike those who did vote.

                     I see you still haven’t learned the simple art of posting a comment without making a snide remark or name calling OTV…..
                   • One Tāne Viper …

                     23 December 2012 at 12:32 pm

                     I see you are incapable of discussing politics without whining, like Bart Simpson that “I didn’t do it.”

                     Of refusing to participate unless we do things your way, and packing a sad when we don’t.

                     Cling hard to the purity of that driven snow you’re clutching.
                   • One Tāne Viper …

                     23 December 2012 at 12:43 pm

                     PS: I feel your pain, PP. I really do. I used to clutch at the driven snow too. It melted. I got wet.

                     Eventually I cottoned on to the fact that the rules of the game weren’t going to change to suit me.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     23 December 2012 at 1:43 pm

                     Not clutching anything… more have made the concious decision to no longer participate and support something I don’t believe in.

                     If the system was an alcoholic. You are saying yoeah its not ideal whilst handing the alcholic the bottle. I on the otherhand am simply refusing to supply the bottle.

                     I have informed a certain MP what I think is needed and policy that has some out could be sheer coincidence… alternately he may have listened. I have seen many things that lead me to believe we are getting closer to the world I want to see as more and more people waake up.

                     I did once clutch at the driven snow, I too got wet. Then I dried myself, Stood back from the situation figured out why it didn’t work and am now on a different path.

                     Less and less people aare voting each time around. More and more people are becoming disenfranchised with the system. For it to change, I believe both types of people are needed. Those like me who do not participate and those like you who do. Both need to be vocal about what they feel isn’t working.
                     One of two things will then happen.
                     The system will change (slowly) – and more people like me will start participating again.
                     Or
                     The system won’t change and more people like you will stop participating and the system will come to a point where change is forced upon it.
                     Either way there will be change.
                   • One Tāne Viper …

                     23 December 2012 at 1:59 pm

                     One other thing. If the brave new world you’re advocating is based on the drivel in your “10 signs that you are fully awake” you have a problem, because I would be prepared to take up arms to defend what we have against any attempt to replace it with that bullshit.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     23 December 2012 at 2:22 pm

                     “I would be prepared to take up arms to defend what we have against any attempt to replace it with that bullshit.”

                     Wow so you would take up arms to defend the right to pre-emptive war…..

                     You would take up arms so that if you and your neighbour have fierce ideological disagreements you can consider them your enemy……

                     You would take up arms to support the global elite in implementing one world control of the planet……

                     You would take up arms to ensure that our media remains biased and would defend against having unbiased media….

                     The world I want is pretty simple it’s one that is set up to satisfy the needs and wants of those living in it in a fair and equitable manner. I
                   • Polish Pride …

                     23 December 2012 at 3:41 pm

                     Are you sure your not a closet right winger….?
                   • One Tāne Viper …

                     23 December 2012 at 4:38 pm

                     The people who believe that garbage are too delusional and disorganised to ever represent a serious threat, but yes, in the vanishingly unlikely event that policy based on internet conspiracy memes and quasi-spiritual mumbo-pocus became the norm. Or any other bunch of fact-free, thought-free dogma.

                     By the way, before you can claim that I support the bogey-men you have to show that they exist. Good luck with that – your ten commandments barely even articulate the situation in the USA, let alone the South Pacific.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     23 December 2012 at 10:10 pm

                     you’d make a good politician with the way you avoided each and every question.

                     start with the book Behold a Pale Horse ….that is of course if you are open minded enough to look at the possibilities….
                   • One Tāne Viper …

                     24 December 2012 at 10:01 am

                     Avoided? Is English your second language?

                     “…before you can claim that I support the bogey-men you have to show that they exist.”

                     I’m not defending myself against your delusional fantasies other than to note their fantastical nature.
                   • One Tāne Viper …

                     24 December 2012 at 10:28 am

                     PS: Start with the book “The Art of War”, that is of course if you are open minded enough.
                   • Polish Pride …

                     25 December 2012 at 11:04 am

                     already read it but I didn’t see it as an instruction manual on how I should live my life…..
                     The path that has lead me to the conclusion that the ‘Bogeymen’ as you put it exist has been through research in reading books and the application of common sense and logic. None of it has been gleaned from websites. Their is much information and evidence to support it, you only have to look. Unfortunately doing so for many shatters their nice comfortable reality of what they think they know about the world. In fact the global elite and shadow govt count on the fact that you won’t want to step outside your comfort zone and have a look and then make up your own mind.

                     As for not understanding english OTV I asked…….

                     Wow so you would take up arms to defend the right to pre-emptive war…..?

                     You would take up arms so that if you and your neighbour have fierce ideological disagreements you can consider them your enemy……?

                     You would take up arms to support the global elite in implementing one world control of the planet……?

                     You would take up arms to ensure that our media remains biased and would defend against having unbiased media….?

                     but I guess in the original I did leave off the question marks so if you need an out to answer than there it is, but the questions were not about whether the global elite and shadow govts exits, They were exactly as stated:

                     Question – So you would take up arms to defend the right to pre-emptive war? etc. etc. The normal and expected response is that you would either confirm that Yes you would take up arms for this or No you would not…….
                     Given that you haven’t supplied such a response the onlything we have to go on
                     is your orginal somewhat surprising statement.

                     “If the brave new world you’re advocating is based on the drivel in your “10 signs that you are fully awake” you have a problem, because I would be prepared to take up arms to defend what we have against any attempt to replace it with that bullshit.”

                     Which by itself is a resounding Yes to the questions I put to you and certainly not something I’d expect from someone that appears to support the left although to be fair I have never seen you state that either.
               • Geoffcartwright …

                 22 December 2012 at 2:25 pm

                 A few months ago grant Robertson signalled at an environment event with cunliffe that uncompromising dogma must change.
                 Shearer signals for a new direction.
                 Cunliffe states too loudly about fundamental change needed due the forth coming systemic problems.
                 Now we have Helen Clark commenting about climate change.
                 These people deal in facts not dogma by their nature, life history and education.

                 Now we have the weight of the Fabians guiding hands linking reputable academics and economist to the powers within labour.

                 We have in my local community rise of intra connected organisation all realising we need a new direction away from dogmatic ideology from within the left block and from the current paradyme.

                 The electorate is waking up to the need for a new direction, a new paradyme, a transition to a new system of equality, fairness and opportunity for all not just a few well connected.
                 It’s not socialism or Investment capitalism both are failed polarised systems.
                 labour need unity, harmony and reconnection to the electorate as fore front party in the red green brown coalition.

                 In true modern labour we must trust as time is pressing….too many starve now.
                 • Polish Pride …

                   22 December 2012 at 3:10 pm

                   Then perhaps Grant has listened after all…..
                   • Geoffcartwright …

                     22 December 2012 at 3:23 pm

                     To understand a polli or any person one need historical reference to that person past and present to understand or predict future statement of viewpoints.
                     I think deep down within labour is a pragmatic progressive heart with a long tern vision or pathway.
                     Look for the next two years for labour to slowly signal change and adapt the electorate to what is needed….can’t scare the voter by radicalised messages that the imbedded tories and captured msm can manipulate.

                     Question.
                     Which labour poli was a teacher and union rep and promoted SOE to expand invest offshore?
                     Which party must capture both the centre voter and also the marginal turned off voter in the long term.
     • muzza 5.1.2

       22 December 2012 at 9:40 am

       Hi Weka,

       1: While it was an american slant, it did say major parties, of which Mana are not, and none of the NZ parties are going to challenge the system. Waiting to hear talk about controlling our sovereign monetary system/supply….waiting…waiting…waiting…

       9: What can you offer evidentially, that says there is not – I always wonder whats up with people are unable to think past what has been the *agree/understood* limits of human knowledge!

       Agree that the wording is not great, but certainly the points of interest around any such subject matter, numerous.
       • Colonial Weka 5.1.2.1

         22 December 2012 at 1:11 pm

         1. yes muzza, that’s a given. You missed my point though. I think framing the issue in that way marginalises the already marginalised by denying their reality, and fudges over what is a complexity. I’m not suggesting that people say the parties are significantly different, I’m saying we should be looking at the differences as much as the similarities.

         9. “What can you offer evidentially, that says there is not – I always wonder whats up with people are unable to think past what has been the *agree/understood* limits of human knowledge!”

         What evidence can you offer that you are not a figment of my imagination?

         And if you think that I’m in agreement with the mainstream with regards to consensus reality you are mistaken.
6. alwyn 6

   22 December 2012 at 9:50 am

   There was a letter in the Dom/Post this morning from a Keith Williamson of Raumati Beach.
   It was about Hekia Parata and says, among other things that “List MPs shouldn’t be eligible for Cabinet roles”.
   My first thought was, in effect, “How stupid can you be”.
   Then I thought about it and decided that it was a great idea and that it should be applied retrospectively.
   Look at the advantages. Winston Peters would never have been Foreign Minister. Michael Cullen would never have been Minister of Finance. We must immediately recover any money they were paid as ministers and declare any laws put through the house under their lead as being null and void.
   Even better is the effect this would have in the future. No Green MPs will be eligible for Cabinet office!
   • Geoffcartwright 6.1

     22 December 2012 at 3:02 pm

     Cullen was electorate mp in Dunedin but to free up time and concentrate his effort on the treasury bench he became. List mp.
     • alwyn 6.1.1

       22 December 2012 at 3:18 pm

       Yes, and Winston was member for Tauranga.
       I was just trying to point out, sarcastically, how silly the letter writer was when they argue that losing in Poriru meant she has no mandate.
       I simply do not understand the mind processes of people who argue that, in an MMP Parliament, losing in an electorate contest should disqualify one from Parliament.
7. felixviper 7

   22 December 2012 at 9:50 am

   Apologies if this has already been posted, but jeebers: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/20/bernstein-murdoch-ailes-petreaus-presidency
   • muzza 7.1

     22 December 2012 at 10:26 am

     Hey Felix,

     Nice work, you’re cottening on.

     Needless to say these *stories* are the lower end shennagigans which occur when the various intelligence/military centered factions, who control the show, then decided to outwardly exhibit the arm twisting and blackmail that goes on at the highests levels, by *outing* Petreaus, and his phillandering ways.

     Kind of like how Hillary *apparantly* fainted, concussed herself, but didn’t go to hospital, or some shit like that.

     Quite how anyone imagines humanity will slow its own decline with this foot on its own throat, I do not know!
   • karol 7.2

     23 December 2012 at 6:58 pm

     Yes. Thanks for this, felix. It is another one for my collection. And still government’s don’t seem to see the problem of concentration of the news media ownership by big corporates – or they like it.
8. muzza 8

   22 December 2012 at 11:19 am

   Hard to know what to make of this, but the usual players are involved, and it fits the trend of behaviour

   In a day that has seen news reports of poverty stricken kiwi’s in their hundreds lined up outside charity food depots and conversely politicians, the likes of Prime Minister John Key, holding out their hands for unwarranted pay-rises, another sinister story involving the evasive and forgetful John Key has surfaced.
   • Bill 8.1

     22 December 2012 at 11:52 am

     Watched the vid in the link and the story those guys relate sounds absolutely plausible.

     The moral of the story being to never take a politician at their word…never mind one who has a track record for being fast and loose with promises. And expect members of a Goon Squad to behave like goons.
     • Morrissey 8.1.1

       22 December 2012 at 12:29 pm

       “The moral of the story being to never take a politician at their [sic!] word…”

       Your sentence is politically correct in an absurd and discredited way, but a grammatical nonsense.

       Your message is excellent, however. Keep it up!
       • Te Reo Putake 8.1.1.1

         22 December 2012 at 1:10 pm

         Ok, then, point out the error in construction and rewrite it correctly, Moz. The only potential grammatical problem I see is the word ‘to’, which is not needed, but doesn’t hamper the sentence structure unduly.

         ‘their’ is spelled correctly, btw, so your ‘sic’ is an error. Nothing worse than a failed pedant, pal!
         • Morrissey 8.1.1.1.1

           22 December 2012 at 3:47 pm

           What renders the sentence nonsensical is the use of the word “their” instead of “his”.

           But you know that, of course.
           • McFliper 8.1.1.1.1.1

             22 December 2012 at 5:29 pm

             No, it applies to all politicians. Believe they’ll do something only when they actualy do it, not when they promise it.

             And the use of the plural in the English language is an accepted way of avoiding needlessly gender-specific language. Otherwise, we would not be also cautioned against accepting the word of female politicians, just male ones.
             • Morrissey …

               22 December 2012 at 6:54 pm

               Standing up for the politically correct mangling of the language, our good friend McFliper writes that “the use of the plural in the English language is an accepted way of avoiding needlessly gender-specific language.”

               Of course, such punctiliousness is a sign of nothing but good intentions. However, people who care about the language and don’t want to see it hijacked by spurious gender-equality fanatics will find a way to write the same sentence without being badgered into using ridiculous and pathetic “alternatives”.

               So instead of poor old Bill conscientiously and absurdly writing “never take a politician at their word”, which is patent nonsense, he could with just a little effort have come up with “never take the word of a politician”.

               It’s easy if you try.

               Alternatively, of course, you can keep observing the LooneyFem dictates from the 1970s.
               • felixviper …

                 22 December 2012 at 8:06 pm

                 Bullshit Morrissey, “their” is applied to the indefinite singular to denote possession. It’s nothing to do with gender or feminism or the jews.

                 FFS if you’re going to lecture people on grammar you could at least learn some.
                 • karol …

                   22 December 2012 at 8:17 pm

                   If it was good enough for Jane Austen, Lord Byron and Charles Dickens it’s good enough for me.

                   http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html#X1a
                   • Morrissey …

                     23 December 2012 at 7:27 am

                     Fair enough. As they say in parliament, I withdraw and apologize.
                   • Bill …

                     23 December 2012 at 8:47 am

                     Did you have to apologise with a bloody ‘z’ though? 😉
                 • Morrissey …

                   23 December 2012 at 10:03 am

                   I make a point of writing clearly and simply, my friend, and you know that perfectly well, having followed my oeuvre for the last couple of years.
               • mike …

                 23 December 2012 at 2:30 am

                 I don’t think so, ‘never take a politician at their word’ sounds like commonly accepted usage to me. Usage defines language, not the other way around. This phrasing has been around long before people started feeling they should use he/she or his/her where gender is indefinite.

                 Personally I find ‘never take a politician at their word’ more elegant than ‘never take the word of a politician’. Bill always has a very nice and clear writing style to my eyes, whereas I find yours a little wordy. A rather conspicuously and abradingly verbose and prolixious style or, perhaps more accurately, if you will, a jejune grandiloquence which is both imperceptive and injudicious.
                 • Morrissey …

                   23 December 2012 at 7:25 am

                   After, rightly, upbraiding me for flying off the handle and injudiciously challenging Bill’s use of “their” as a catch-all, our friend mike then has a go at my writing style….

                   Bill always has a very nice and clear writing style to my eyes, whereas I find yours a little wordy. A rather conspicuously and abradingly verbose and prolixious style or, perhaps more accurately, if you will, a jejune grandiloquence which is both imperceptive and injudicious.

                   Reading that friendly but stern admonition, I am sure I am not the only one to immediately recall the story of the Austrian emperor taking Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart aside and advising him that his music had “too many notes.”
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     23 December 2012 at 9:13 am

                     I don’t give a monkey’s what some toff told Mozart. Orwell said to write simply and that’ll do for me.
                   • mike …

                     23 December 2012 at 2:18 pm

                     “I am sure I am not the only one to immediately recall the story of the Austrian emperor taking Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart aside and advising him that his music had “too many notes.””

                     I’m sure you are the only one. (The Mozart of blogging you ain’t.)
                 • Rogue Trooper …

                   23 December 2012 at 2:24 pm

                   and moi brother? (before i take take the slater to task)
                   be quick (quick and the Dead); only got a wee credit. (and obviously, I can find you; I fought the Law… and I won) ha ha ha
   • bad12 8.2

     22 December 2012 at 2:18 pm

     Typical Slippery, the little shyster probably got a huge thrill out of the whole unsavory little episode made all the more delicious in that psychopath’s pea brain by Him having engineered the whole thing with His big mouth,

     Personally, and not wanting to be overly critical of the judiciary, i think the judge got it wrong with placing both these 2 individuals on alcohol bans, christ sakes they are both unemployed and voted for the Slippery little shyster, a more fitting bail condition would have been for the judge to have them placed in the stocks and publicly stoned…
9. Morrissey 9

   22 December 2012 at 12:50 pm

   WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF WHALEOIL
   Slater dishes it out to Standard regular

   This morning I ventured out of my comfort zone and signed onto the notorious “Gotcha” blog run by Cameron “Whaleoil” Slater.

   Within minutes I was cowering in the ditches, having drawn hostile fire after just four posts….

   “Well if you don’t like my readers, or my blog you can fuck off.” —Whaleoil

   Gotta say: that guy is no L. Prent.

   http://gotcha.co.nz/
   • AwakeWhileSleeping 9.1

     22 December 2012 at 2:16 pm

     Stop giving him any link love (even no follow links help him) then by making sure you don’t type in the URL without breaking it up.
     • Morrissey 9.1.1

       22 December 2012 at 3:47 pm

       “LINK LOVE”.

       I like it!
10. vivaciousviper 10

    22 December 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Just thought i would drop abit of info from one of our young people and how he views NZ’s
    financial situation, this young guy was 20-25, we were waiting in que at the warehouse,
    they were busy as, we got talking politics and the state of nz’s economy this young guy
    said he just wants our debt to be paid and he did not like either national or labour,but he
    thought Winston will have his vote in 2014, he said he is the only one that talks sense and
    he is more experianced, he also said his friend was a teacher and also had trouble with
    no-no-pay and he thought they should just go back to the old system, ,but good on him,he has a great handle on the political scene, we wished each other merry christmas and we were both off into the big blue yonder.
    We should have more faith in our young people,they really are our future,they may have
    limited voices, but they are watching and understanding politics.
    • Zorr 10.1

      22 December 2012 at 5:43 pm

      First of all:
      “we got talking politics and the state of nz’s economy this young guy
      said he just wants our debt to be paid and he did not like either national or labour,but he
      thought Winston will have his vote in 2014” — this provides no context to try and pass on any idea that this guy has any political understanding beyond, potentially, watching the 6pm nightly news. When his chosen solution to the current mounting unemployment, the selling out of our social contract etc etc is to ‘continue to reduce debt’ then he is merely parroting those wonderful guys who got us in this hole in the first place… and then to say he will vote Winston?

      *sigh*

      If you are going to try and tell a story about how our youth are engaging with politics, at least provide examples in context rather than just saying “we done talked the politic stuff and he seemed like he was capable of stringing some words together that weren’t ‘John’ and ‘Key'”
      • vivaciousviper 10.1.1

        22 December 2012 at 6:59 pm

        There was no story, it was an interesting encounter, i believe our young people have a voice, as i did when i was that age,it was interesting listening to him, he seemed capable of having his own views,if he wants to vote winston, surely, that is his democratic right,
        Your attitude to my post is one of dismissing what could be a valuable insight into how
        someone of that age group thinks and views politics.
        Obviously the time was short and not all topics could be discussed.
        It is important to hear and listen to the young potential voters,this is good politics.
        Wishing you a nice christmas and all the best for 2013.
        • Anne 10.1.1.1

          22 December 2012 at 7:54 pm

          I think the point vv is making : here was a young man who has recognised politics affects everybody and he is willing to think about it. He’s young and a bit naive, but he’ll learn as he gets older and wiser. Hell, he sounds like he knows more than I did in my early twenties. Good for him.
    • lprent 10.2

      22 December 2012 at 8:50 pm

      That is why I have always said that NZF has a constituency…
11. freedom 11

    22 December 2012 at 5:07 pm

    Poll question you won’t see on Stuff

    Did the PM say he was going to pay for the guys’ dinner at the Green Parrot ?
    Yes ? or No ?
    • freedom 11.1

      22 December 2012 at 6:48 pm

      sorry muzza, not sure how i missed your post above
12. Napkins 12

    22 December 2012 at 8:04 pm

    Recognition to Chris Finlayson for the Te Atiawa and Ngati Koata settlements. He’s an effective capable National Minister in action, working closely at every step with Maori. Finlayson definitely deserves his QC.
    • bad12 12.1

      22 December 2012 at 8:13 pm

      Finlayson is a mere functionary in an ongoing process and deserves nothing, as a representative of those who offended against Taranaki Maori He has been well paid throughout the process,

      The real ‘ups’ need be extended to those Taranaki Maori who have never let the flame of the torch be extinguished,those who are no longer with us but passed on the ‘take’ to the next generation never knowing whether their voices would ever be heard…
13. vto 13

    22 December 2012 at 9:05 pm

    I predict next year a brief intensification of matters and affairs. Being the last fling, already past its date.

    Strike me down if I’m wrong but there is a change in the air. A change to the peaceful and goodness

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS