Open mike 24/03/2011

165 comments on “Open mike 24/03/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Bored 1

   24 March 2011 at 6:36 am

   On a morning when America is obsessing with the death of actress Liz Taylor, they might also shed a tear for the death of another American dream. The latest US census records that Detroit, the city that brought us Motown, big bumpers and chromed grills has lost 25% of its population in 10 years.

   http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/us/23detroit.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=detroit&st=cse

   A case of self inflicted wounds. Liz Taylor died a natural death after a good life, Detroit is dying from a malady called globalisation where good jobs are exported to cheap labour countries. No matter how much celebrity gloss Hollywood smokescreens their country with the American dream dies with Detroit.

   RIP Liz.
2. outofbed 2

   24 March 2011 at 7:31 am

   How come you never can seem to get a pie in Thorndon
   • TightyRighty 2.1

     24 March 2011 at 9:40 am

     try the Gar-fare on the quay. pretty good pies. for more exotic food, try the paddington bakery, also on the quay
3. U 4 United 3

   24 March 2011 at 7:31 am

   Detroit is dying in part due to its atrociously bad and cold climate. The mean average temperatures in the City have plummeted since the 1960s. I, for one, would never live there…again! I was born there in 1952.
   The industries in Detroit have struggled since 1950s, not through the new woolly term of”globalisation” but due to rampant unionism and a drug induced collapse of work ethics. It is a sad indictment of avaricious unionism.
   • millsy 3.1

     24 March 2011 at 7:40 am

     Are you some kind of tea party type.

     It was the union movement that delivered decent living standard for workers.

     Piss off
     • PeteG 3.1.1

       24 March 2011 at 7:45 am

       It was the union movement that then delivered indecent demands.

       Jobs pissed off.
       • millsy 3.1.1.1

         24 March 2011 at 7:47 am

         So you think slavery should be brought back Pete?

         How much homelessness do you see in a unionised economy?
         • PeteG 3.1.1.1.1

           24 March 2011 at 7:52 am

           So you think support of slavery is a rational accusation?

           How much joblessness do you see in an over-unionised economy?
           • Bored 3.1.1.1.1.1

             24 March 2011 at 12:14 pm

             Good question Pete…1974 NZ a compulsory unions / arbitration, unemployment less than 100….2010 NZ voluntary unionism individual wage bargaining, unemployment 100s of thousands. A selective answer i know, works for me. QED
             • mcflock …

               24 March 2011 at 1:52 pm

               Still not as selective an answer as blaming factory relocations to Mexico on US unions rather than NAFTA.

               But then NAFTA is a free trade agreement = globalisation = good, so it can’t have been that /sarc
       • Pascal's bookie 3.1.1.2

         24 March 2011 at 8:02 am

         What ‘indecent’ demands? Healthcare?
         • felix 3.1.1.2.1

           24 March 2011 at 11:59 am

           Liveable wages.

           Pete has previously expressed a view that a society has no responsibility for providing a minimum standard of living for its citizens.

           However low the market will go , that’s that.
           • PeteG 3.1.1.2.1.1

             24 March 2011 at 12:07 pm

             I haven’t expressed that view. It is your spin (again attributing falsely) re me questioning where the $15 per hour minimum comes from, and what justifies that as the optimum minimum.

             On unions, in response to bizarre suggestions of what I might think, my opinion is that unions have done a lot of good for workers but some have pursed ideological idiocy and shot their own workers in the feet.
             • felix …

               24 March 2011 at 1:44 pm

               Do you want me to dig up the thread? It’s not the one you’re referring to.
               • PeteG …

                 24 March 2011 at 2:08 pm

                 Please yourself – you’ve already confirmed that what you stated I expressed was just your interpretation from memory (presumably you wouldn’t make stuff like that up) rather than what I’ve actually said.
                 • felix …

                   24 March 2011 at 2:47 pm

                   http://thestandard.org.nz/selling-assets-vs-revoking-tax-cuts-for-richest-1/#comment-292436

                   The starting position for any adult should be to earn at least enough to cover their expenses, not to expect that a “decent wage” is automatically owed to them.

                   Many poor people are not helped as much as they should be – partly because other “poor” people abuse and overuse the assistance of others.

                   Ugly.
       • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.3

         25 March 2011 at 8:46 am

         It was the union movement that then delivered indecent demands.

         Jobs pissed off.

         More frakking bullshit

         Major corporate shareholders decided that they could make more money (for themselves) by laying off millions of US workers. Firing their neighbours, their family members, laying off whole communities.

         The corporates then offshored those jobs and expertise to China.

         Replacing each US worker with one who would work for $5/day, with no benefits, no overtime, no breaks.

         Oh! I see, that’s what you’d like all of us go back to Pete.

         (Did the unions contribute to the problem in some senses – in specific cases perhaps. But the decision makers were major shareholders and boards of directors, the same parties who made huge sums of money by laying off Americans).
         • PeteG 3.1.1.3.1

           25 March 2011 at 9:04 am

           Globalisation is a bugger isn’t it. Local labour prices itself off the market, jobs move to poorer countries for poorer people – pitttances are at least an improvement on piss-all.

           How would all those jobs have been created in the first place, like in the auto market, without big money and big companies? They may be seen as evil, but they’re a necessary evil if we want the consumerist standard of living we squander.
           • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.3.1.1

             25 March 2011 at 9:12 am

             Globalisation IS a bugger you are right. And it was pushed through by those who wanted to set up free markets in capital and free markets in labour. So that major shareholders – the most wealthy of the wealthy – could profit from the family misery and unemployment in their very own backyards. At the same time, from about 1979, the wages of the American worker dropped to zero growth, while the income of the top 1% in US society climbed by several times.

             They may be seen as evil, but they’re a necessary evil if we want the consumerist standard of living we squander.

             Again this is bullshit.

             I personally think that $150,000+ p.a. is a decent income. Only problem here is that 50% of full time NZ workers (and I deliberately exclude pensioners and beneficiaries here) earn less than $40,000 p.a. due to ongoing wage suppression tactics applied to the labour market.

             What “consumerist standard of living” exactly do you think that this pitiful pay level brings to the working poor?

             How would all those jobs have been created in the first place, like in the auto market, without big money and big companies?

             Via an economic system of democratic socialism, not pure free market capitalism.
             • M …

               25 March 2011 at 9:23 am

               Amen CV, it’s so tiring that the people with brass think those less well off should bow and scrape for every morsel.

               I have the greatest respect for the bin men who collect my recycling and household waste – try going a couple of weeks without rubbish collection and see how sweet life smells, but to someone well off in many cases they’d be viewed as some dumb lug nut to be avoided or ignored.
     • apples are yum 3.1.2

       24 March 2011 at 10:28 am

       Hmm. To be swayed by someone who lived there or the angry cliché slogans of the left. Which to choose..?

       anti spam: doubts
       • Bored 3.1.2.1

         24 March 2011 at 11:43 am

         Hmmm indeed. Angry cliche slogans, lets see….slavery, joblessness, healthcare, decent living standards, cheap labour, globalisation……versus I lived there and it was cold………
         • apples are yum 3.1.2.1.1

           24 March 2011 at 12:42 pm

           well I suppose some blindness (and comprehension skill) depends on whether you have both eyes open or not.
           • Bored 3.1.2.1.1.1

             24 March 2011 at 12:46 pm

             And tinted glasses on,,,
   • freedom 3.2

     24 March 2011 at 7:51 am

     Over the eighties and nineties, almost every car manufacturer relocated their factories out of Detroit into Mexico and other low wage communities. For Detroit this meant losing a couple of million jobs as the support services for those factories also were forced to close, and you are saying the resulting poverty had no discernable impact?
   • Bored 3.3

     24 March 2011 at 8:54 am

     U4, I can sympathise with you over the climate in Detroit. As far as it being an indictment on avaricious unionism are you confusing gangster unionism and gangster employer strike breaking tactics with real unionism?

     More importantly the woolly term “globalisation” is not new, it has come in various guises since before the industrial revolution. The Romans undercut their local grain farmers with slave farms in Sicily and Nth Africa. Laissez faire, remember that? What has really accelerated it has been the ability of capital and technology to move freely since the erosion of tariff barriers and financial regulation in the 70s. Cheap labour and no safety regs etc trumps unionised places every time.

     Seems to me the people who got rich on the back of the labour of the industries in places like Detroit have deserted their own communities. Very American.
   • south paw 3.4

     24 March 2011 at 10:50 am

     Yeah right, and the Great Financial Crisis was not the result of right wing, ‘free’ market mumbo jumbo.

     It was avaricious unions, made up of lazy, crack addicted workers ( especially the black ones! ) , who sabotaged the US economy and made it look like it was the hard working rich ( mostly white ) in government and the corporate sector.
   • Colonial Viper 3.5

     24 March 2011 at 12:41 pm

     The industries in Detroit have struggled since 1950s, not through the new woolly term of”globalisation” but due to rampant unionism and a drug induced collapse of work ethics.

     1950-1970 was the golden age of the American auto industry. Also rapidly rising middle class wages 9thanks to unions). US car companies expanded hugely through that entire period too.

     You are clearly full of shit.
4. PeteG 4

   24 March 2011 at 7:35 am

   It seems widely accepted Goff was dumb keeping the Hughes investigation a secret – even within Labour party – but I think a claim he made deserves more scrutiny.

   Complaint leaked from Beehive: Goff

   Labour leader Phil Goff does not know if a complaint against one of his MPs is politically motivated, but says it was leaked to news media by a Beehive source.

   He hasn’t provided any substantiation of this. I presume if he had recognised a hand written address on the letter to the media he would have given details.

   In the absence of any evidence this just looks like a repeat of one of Goff’s biggest failings – he seems to be programmed to lead with “the Government’s fault” on just about any issue. The same old blame game sounds lame, every time. Especially on this.
   • Pascal's bookie 4.1

     24 March 2011 at 7:59 am

     Mr Goff says he was told by journalists that information about the complaint was leaked to the media by the Beehive.

     Prime Minister John Key said there had been some talk about Mr Hughes at the start of the week, but does not believe staffers from his office alerted the media.

     Emph mine.

     http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/71085/goff-stands-by-labour-mp-at-centre-of-allegations

     To follow your lead in reasoning, I presume that if the PM was confident that it wasn’t a beehive leak he would have given a much more forthright, and less specific denial, and the fact that he is obviously not that confident tells us something. Especially seeing that it seems widely accepted that Worth was fired for something like this, in spite of the PM’s denial that this was the case. Which means we should take his word on these sort of issues very lightly indeed.
     • mickysavage 4.1.1

       24 March 2011 at 8:19 am

       Prime Minister John Key … does not believe staffers from his office alerted the media

       What a fecking weak denial. Of course he may actually believe as in know thay National staffers from outside his office alerted the media.

       I wish the media would ask the right questions.
       • TightyRighty 4.1.1.1

         24 March 2011 at 9:42 am

         such as?

         hows this:

         “Mr Goff, if you have known for two weeks of the nature of the allegations, why did you not hold mr hughes to the same standards you have demanded of National ministers in the past, until the allegation was made public?”
     • Lanthanide 4.1.2

       24 March 2011 at 10:01 am

       “Especially seeing that it seems widely accepted that Worth was fired for something like this”

       I wonder if Worth was doing the dirty with another man? That would lend another reason for why Key might want to keep it secret.
       • TightyRighty 4.1.2.1

         24 March 2011 at 11:24 am

         A classic Crosby rector misdirection line. You lot are learning
         • lprent 4.1.2.1.1

           24 March 2011 at 11:25 am

           😈 I’d agree with that. It was.
         • Lanthanide 4.1.2.1.2

           24 March 2011 at 12:20 pm

           I wasn’t trying to deliberately spin anything. The thought just occurred to me when I read pb’s post, so figured I’d share it.

           Since Key hasn’t told us the reason, all we can do is speculate. This would make a good reason not to mention it in public (eg, Worth doesn’t want it known), but at the same time if it ever did come out in the future that that was the actual reason, Key would be in for a world of hurt for homophobia.
           • Pascal's bookie 4.1.2.1.2.1

             24 March 2011 at 12:26 pm

             Since Key hasn’t told us the reason, all we can do is speculate.

             Yep, all we know is that whatever he did, it was enough that a former wall st banker found it to be, quite literally, unspeakably vile.
             • felix …

               24 March 2011 at 1:46 pm

               Jeez, that puts it in some fucking perspective, innit?
5. PeteG 5

   24 March 2011 at 8:16 am

   the fact that he is obviously not that confident tells us something.

   Maybe that he can’t be sure what every one of his staff may have done?

   It’s quite feasible that the media could have found out themselves – it’s even possible (but unlikely because hardly anyone seems to have been told) from within Labour. If Key had “heard rumours” then it’s quite possible others outside the beehive had heard them too.

   Goff blames the government for so many things we should take his word on these sort of issues very lightly indeed.
   • mickysavage 5.1

     24 March 2011 at 8:21 am

     Maybe that he can’t be sure what every one of his staff may have done?

     If that is the case he should not rule his staff out of leaking the news.
     • Herodotus 5.1.1

       24 March 2011 at 8:50 am

       Same logic- then Phil should not comment regarding that “but says it was leaked to news media by a Beehive source” unless he is aware of who that source was. Still Just displays that the Red and Blue right wing parties have more in common. Both await for this type of thing to break instead of front footing it. Just shows that again the Lab strategy team/senior MP’s fail in how to deal with a minor issue and have allowed it to feaster and increase in its damage. As displayed by the reported crisis meeting the night before this broke (reactive) and that there is a trail of denials pre-dating the official release. Can not anyone in politics get it that if there is bad news control the story get yours out there first. The story is now beyond any management from Lab, and the “Labour closing Ranks” headlines reinforces that Lab has lost control of the story and will continue to feed the story.
       • Bored 5.1.1.1

         24 March 2011 at 8:57 am

         Hi Herodotus, I was thinking you might change your name to Cicero, the original dissinformation propogandist.
         • Herodotus 5.1.1.1.1

           24 March 2011 at 9:35 am

           Like to keep one name for consistency. Well what is wrong with the above? Even for someone not trained in politics I thought control of the message was a 101 principle, and Phil and Co have lost control of the message.
           The Helen Clark left overs are displaying how important Helen, Michael and a couple who retired before the last election were to the cause.
           • Bored 5.1.1.1.1.1

             24 March 2011 at 9:49 am

             Cant fault you on that…bugger.
   • Jim Nald 5.2

     24 March 2011 at 8:25 am

     Haha ! Spoke with my National-voting friend who chuckled and said the best kind of assassin does not use his own hands but ‘outsources’ !
     • lprent 5.2.1

       24 March 2011 at 9:01 am

       That would be my bet as well. It is interesting to speculate how it could have been leaked credibly.

       It would have probably been done by staffers in another ministers office. To do anything else would have been stupid of Key as he is their only real political asset.

       The same thing really applies to any MP. Getting your hands dirty is very dangerous. You always put in a cutout in any operation like this.

       The staffer would have had to have had credibility about knowing it for the journo to accept it. That really only leaves one place. Judith Collins office. A staffer in the Minister of Police’s office would have convinced a jouno that they had the real knowledge and weren’t just generating rumors. Perhaps the journos should ask Collins for a statement
       • Steve 5.2.1.1

         24 March 2011 at 10:42 am

         Tutt tutt Lynn,

         I think Steven Joyce can be considered a political asset. Regardless of your thoughts on his policy agenda, some of which i agree on, other areas i do not, he is a clever chap.

         Watching him of close up the other night, he looked every bit the consummate politician.
         • lprent 5.2.1.1.1

           24 March 2011 at 10:45 am

           Except for his habit of thinking that the world is still in the 1960’s?

           Ummm there is something on that which is coming up I hope.
           • Colonial Viper 5.2.1.1.1.1

             25 March 2011 at 12:17 am

             Tutt tutt Lynn,

             I think Steven Joyce can be considered a political asset.

             Nope.

             Joyce is an asset as a pollie, bit this copper/criminality stuff is not his gig. Collins’ crew is still the most likely.
             • lprent …

               25 March 2011 at 12:51 am

               I was referring to his views on transport, which I have been looking at for the last couple of days.
   • Pascal's bookie 5.3

     24 March 2011 at 8:32 am

     Almost as weak as Key’s lawerly denial.

     You can make up all sorts of scenarios. I don’t think much of your theory that journalists somehow just reasoned it out inside their heads that maybe the police were investigating a Labour mp, ran a story as if it were true, got lucky, and Hughes owned up. Gracious, what luck! I think something involving pixies would be more feasible.

     More feasible still, is that someone told the journalists.

     Goff claims journalists, (who would know of course), told him the leak came from inside the Behive. Key hasn’t denied that as far as I know.
   • RobC 5.4

     24 March 2011 at 8:39 am

     Yeah right, it came from Labour – Goff’s staff didn’t even know about it FFS
     • Jim Nald 5.4.1

       24 March 2011 at 8:49 am

       Kiwileaks!
       Ask Don Brash about Nat Party leaks?
     • PeteG 5.4.2

       24 March 2011 at 8:56 am

       Some have said they didn’t know. Anyway, I said it’s unlikely it would have come from there. But if Key had heard rumours then it’s quite feasible others had heard the same rumours, including media.

       If in this case Goff is right and someone in the Beehive leaked to the media then he’s only got himself to blame if most people rolled their eyes when he blamed the government.
       • grumpy 5.4.2.1

         24 March 2011 at 9:04 am

         Just a minute! If Goff knew 2 weeks before but “none of his staff did”, we are expected to believe that Key’s staff knew!
         Either Goff is telling lies or Key has better staff than Goff with a much better ear to the ground.
         Either way, Goff looks bad.
         • Jim Nald 5.4.2.1.1

           24 March 2011 at 9:13 am

           With this leak, all press gallery roads lead to Key.
           Erm, count in alleyways and back streets.

           Keep trying.

           If you had a choice to select your boss, you would not want Key who hedges and trades against you behind your back while smiling and supporting you in your face, but you would have a boss who has done what Goff has done – due process.

           Btw, what was Simon Power’s relationship like with his boss?
6. RobC 6

   24 March 2011 at 8:26 am

   Someone in Labour’s back-room staff really need to start doing some work on exploding the myths that English and now Key are pumping out regarding average after-tax wages.

   The exchange in Parliament yesterday really pissed me off because it’s smoke and mirrors but I don’t have the time to unravel it all. From the transcript of Q1 yesterday, Key said:

   If I go to Statistics New Zealand again and look at after-tax average wages, they increased in the last 12 months from $39,518 to $42,214, which was an increase of 6.8 percent.

   Well that’s bullshit. Statistics NZ don’t put out releases that have anything to do with after-tax wages. It’s put out by Bill English’s office as explained here

   Obviously after-tax wages increased in 2010 due mainly to tax cuts but supposedly were fiscally neutral with the GST rise. Further, even according to Stats NZ if you want true measures of how well NZers are doing financially, the Household Economic Survey should be used, not the Quarterly Employment Survey.

   National cherry-pick their stats (including Labour’s tax cuts of Oct 2008 and claiming them as their own which also is disingenious) and Labour seem incapable of responding, allowing it to get to the stage where Key can mislead in Parliament. Labour, FFS lift your game.

   As a postscript, after Key’s comments Goff wanted to table a Stats NZ release and wasn’t allowed, with the Speaker remarking: “the Prime Minister appeared to be quoting from a Statistics New Zealand release”. He most definitely wasn’t.
   • Bored 6.1

     24 March 2011 at 9:43 am

     Well said RobC, there is just so much evidence of bad times that the stats must be to readily available. Failure to present a picture of this is an indictment of Labour, their MPs, and their staff. And then you get the Hughes incident.

     Goff must go, and the list has to change. My suggestion is that the list is used to recruit high profile people who are already seen as left leaning leaders in their field, be it education, health, military, policing etc etc. I dont give a monkeys about whether people are gay, religious, feminist etc etc, the labels need to be secondary to the issues that affect all of us.
     • Lanthanide 6.1.1

       24 March 2011 at 12:23 pm

       Being a politician requires certain qualities that not just everyone has. I’d suggest that a lot of left-leaning leaders in their fields aren’t politicians because they don’t want to be.

       I certainly couldn’t hack it – I’d come out looking like hugely more of an emotionless robot than even Key does (I think I’m marginally on the asperger’s spectrum).
       • Bored 6.1.1.1

         24 March 2011 at 12:26 pm

         Correct LAN, most dont want to be politicians…which is the tragedy of our system. maybe they are just the right people to do it precisely for that reason.
7. Dan 7

   24 March 2011 at 8:27 am

   The problems in Detroit go way, way back, and resulted in a climate where everyone played it fast and loose. I think Toyota entering Nascar was really the nail in American motoring’s coffin more than anything else. Sure, the unions could have been more flexible than they were during the restructuring periods, but Ford could have been more honest in its pension fund accounting too. Everyone played their part in the downfall. Sooner or later though, people will need to realise that there’s just not the money there used to be for things like retirement schemes and so on.
   • Bored 7.1

     24 March 2011 at 9:10 am

     I read Lee Iacocca (Fords GM in the 70s) book, between the lines the madness you describe is very visible.
     • Dan 7.1.1

       24 March 2011 at 1:53 pm

       Bored – I suggest you read Robert Lacey’s FORD. It’s a brilliant book, extremely cheap online. Fascinating stuff. Amazing how one man’s genius and not-so-welcome ideas managed to dictate the direction of an entire culture for so long, despite the thuggishness and overwhelming hypocrisy they used to get their way.
   • south paw 7.2

     24 March 2011 at 11:05 am

     “Sooner or later though, people will need to realise that there’s just not the money there used to be for things like retirement schemes and so on.”

     You mean for the bosses? They seem to get more and more transferred to their pockets.
     • Bored 7.2.1

       24 March 2011 at 12:05 pm

       There is a saying that the best way to rob a bank is to own it.
     • KJT 7.2.2

       24 March 2011 at 2:37 pm

       84% increase in Labour productivity. 15% increase in wages. Where again did the money go?
       • KJT 7.2.2.1

         24 March 2011 at 4:13 pm

         84% increase in Labour productivity. 15% increase in wages. Where again did the money go?

         NOT TO MENTION financial Services from 18% of the economy to 60%.
   • Colonial Viper 7.3

     25 March 2011 at 12:23 am

     Sooner or later though, people will need to realise that there’s just not the money there used to be for things like retirement schemes and so on.

     Bullshit.

     The US has almost 1000 billionaires now.

     The money is there.

     And it’s all going to be the cream on the top, at the same time workers are being told to suck it up and suffer.

     KJT has it right.
8. chris 8

   24 March 2011 at 9:00 am

   I love the fact you are going about who leaked it – thats not a huge issue regardless of what some of you will say.

   The BIG issue is what the 8th ranked labour person may have been doing to young men that is bad enough to require a named police investigation, search warrants, and multiple interviews.

   I have no idea what they are investigating, but it does sound very serious. This is NOT the kind of thing goff should have kept hidden (even from Andrew Little ::Tui::).

   I would personally hope that its a mis understanding – but if he is guilty then labour are closing ranks and supporting the wrong person here. Its like field all over again – only 1000 times worse.
   • lprent 8.1

     24 March 2011 at 9:06 am

     The matter is in the hands of the police. Not much can be done about it until they release their findings.

     The leak on the other hand is of quite strong political interest. The questions that the reporter asked Goff’s staffer were quite specific. If they had leaked out of the police or the Ministers office, that would be a political matter, don’t you think?
     • joe90 8.1.1

       24 March 2011 at 9:28 am

       A query lprent, WRT yesterdays comment about Hughes and subsequent deletion by Farrar I notice this morning that the comment has also gone from the google cache.
       Is the deleted comment removed automatically by google when the bots upgrade the snapshot?.
       • lprent 8.1.1.1

         24 March 2011 at 10:53 am

         Nope. It got trashed by another moderator before I got to do anything about it (I tried to edit it and it told me it’d been moved to trash). Subsequently I found that it was the subject of an e-mail by yet another moderator asking for someone to delete it.

         What made you think that a comment that had been destroyed on Kiwiblog would be able to survive here? Our moderation standards when it comes to police investigations are somewhat more strenuous.
         • joe90 8.1.1.1.1

           24 March 2011 at 11:13 am

           Thanks for the forbearance and I do accept that to post the actual comment was a lapse of judgement on my part and I apologise for that but I’m still none the wiser about the cache issue.
           • lprent 8.1.1.1.1.1

             24 March 2011 at 11:22 am

             I’m not sure about google cache – I haven’t used it much so I don’t know what their policies are. Or for that matter what the search engine optimization is at Kiwiblog.

             However based on what happens here. This site informs google (and a number of other search engines) that particular pages have changed. A change is every time that a comment is added, edited or deleted. That the page has changed is sent to google et al within 15 minutes. It is also happens immediately every time that the post itself is edited.

             I usually expect to see the search engines coming in and picking up the page a very short time after that (typically minutes afterwards).

             I’d guess that google updates the cache from that pickup.

             BTW: Don’t thank me. I’d have warned you. Your thanks for the forbearance should go to whoever trashed the comment
     • Roflcopter 8.1.2

       24 March 2011 at 10:50 am

       By all means, pursue that angle rigourously, because preception being what it is it’ll be seen and portrayed as H.Fee all over again.
9. nadis 9

   24 March 2011 at 9:22 am

   Judith Collins on radio live said she had no direct knowledge of investigation but within the last 2 days had heard rumours around parliament.

   The leak is a red herring unless it came from Collins based on information she obtained as Police Minister, a scenario that she has unequivocally denied on the Radio. She explicitly said there had been no information from the Police to her and she would expect the Police not to inform her given the political role of Darren. This would become public at some time anyway – enough people have been interviewed, Goff has known for 2 weeks, numerous police must be involved, lawyers will have been briefed. Why would anyone expect or assume this story would or should be kept private?

   In my view the real failings are the handling of the matter both from Hughes and Goff. Potential scandal is best met head on by fronting up (well done Shane Jones). Phil Quins blog is incredibly sensible reading. From a strategy sense, Goff has opened himself up to the double standard jibe. The perception is there and locked in. Debating whether it is really justified is losing the debate, and publicly blaming the National Party? Cry baby.

   Are Goff’s advisors secret national party sleepers or just incompetent?
10. chris 10

    24 March 2011 at 9:23 am

    Actually – the questions sounded more like they had read the comments about DH [deleted] as reported in some blogs. Asking if there had been accusations like this before (which it seems there may have been).

    Again – you guys focus on the wrong things – but thats just your hatred of key clouding your judgement.

    But – hey thats OK. Look at all the headlines in the MSM this morning – and its not about the leak. Take from it what you want – but the voting public are not going to be impressed the goffice and labour over this one.

    Does anyone here actually believe that labout will poll HIGHER after this incident (alleged) ?

    [lprent: Link or reference required. I suspect you’re talking about Whale, so it’d have to be a reference. That is hardly a credible source as he is well known for simply lying to enhance his fictions. And I’m speaking for personal experience here. ]
    • gobsmacked 10.1

      24 March 2011 at 10:40 am

      @Chris

      I asked you on the other thread, but you didn’t respond.

      Do you think that if (hypothetically) the Police Minister abused her powers, that would be a major cause for concern?

      If not, why not?
11. chris 11

    24 March 2011 at 9:30 am

    Here is a new one (yeah right) – LABOUR are leaking storys about him now:

    “Sources within the Labour Party have told Radio New Zealand News there have been previous occasions when his private activities have caused concern and his judgement is now under question.”

    oh dear – a serial whatever possibly. So the party had an idea that there was a problem and sat on it until it got so bad a person had to complain to the police.

    And despite his private actions being a concern promoted him to the education portifilio?

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/71135/political-career-of-hughes-in-the-balance

    wow!
12. Adrian 12

    24 March 2011 at 9:44 am

    Oh yeah, and what are your chances of “stumbling upon a police car ” outside a suburban house at 2 am when all spare police are in Chch and patrol numbers are drasticly reduced. Forewarned perhaps?
    • nadis 12.1

      24 March 2011 at 9:56 am

      Yes Adrian – you’ve cracked it. It was a sting operation set up by Judith Collins and the black ops unit of the national party. The police car was circling the block for four hours before the secret agent could get Hughes to just the right level of compromising behavior.
      • Kevin Welsh 12.1.1

        24 March 2011 at 11:00 am

        Maybe it was a “beartrap”…
13. chris 13

    24 March 2011 at 10:21 am

    Perhaps – with the labour party members linked to above that forewarned the police Adrian – I would guess it was one of them – since they are the ones that have already commented that his private activities ’cause concern’.

    Perhaps when they saw him take a teenager home they had cause for concern knowing his past and decided to ‘do the right thing’?

    Who knows./
    • lprent 13.1

      24 March 2011 at 10:41 am

      You really are a bit of an idiot who doesn’t think things through. Look at the reporters question which I understand was specific to a police investigation.

      How would have such a theoretical labour party person have known that DH had a complaint laid against him by the police? You’re postulating a class 1 + 1 = 11 style of thinking that is so characteristic of the readers of Whale.

      I swear that reading that guy generates idiots that can’t think (or possibly I’m mistaking cause for effect).
    • Kevin Welsh 13.2

      24 March 2011 at 11:01 am

      ‘Do the right thing’

      Meaning what? If it was a male-female situation, would that still apply?
14. chris 14

    24 March 2011 at 11:02 am

    “How would have such a theoretical person have known that DH had a complaint laid against him by the police?”

    I dont know – a few of the labour party knew of it since DH told them.
    • lprent 14.1

      24 March 2011 at 11:13 am

      More 1 + 1 = 11 thinking. Have you ever tried using Occam’s razor as a logical technique?

      From what I have been hearing it was news for the Labour caucus (that they didn’t want to hear). Which incidentally kind of knocks Key’s ‘rumor around parliament ‘ on the head – rumors in parliament are kind of ubiquitous – they travel everywhere. Goff explicitly said that it’d only been known to a few people in Labour. There doesn’t appear to be a motivation for them to leak.

      As I said the leak can have really only come from a few sources. If it wasn’t the complainant, then who is left?

      Personally, my guess is that someone in National leaked it to journo(s), and probably also leaked it to Whale to provide plausible deniability. The latter probably explains all of the clustering of the known apologists for Whale here around the question of who leaked.
      • higherstandard 14.1.1

        24 March 2011 at 11:27 am

        Lynn I have it on very good authority that it was via Wellington uni to a certain person in the press gallery and then like wildfire though parliament.

        Just another example of politics in Wellington – too much boozing and cavorting by people who should know better, disappointing really I thought Darren was one of the better ones amongst the useless 120.
        • lprent 14.1.1.1

          24 March 2011 at 11:48 am

          That wouldn’t surprise me either. But there was quite a lot of surprise around the Labour people about it which tends to indicate that the rumor was rather selective.

          But I’m really just having some fun poking the sensitivities of the members of the pod who are over here. Just at present it is like fishing in the Kaipara for breakfast. You throw a line out and something bites. It comes out of the water with a upset expression before being gutted and tossed in the frying pan.
        • lprent 14.1.1.2

          24 March 2011 at 6:11 pm

          From the herald article.

          A student, who did not want to be named, said the complainant was keeping up “his usual, confident personality” and had not discussed the incident at all, except with police.

          So the question of where the leak came from is still wide open.
          • Carol 14.1.1.2.1

            24 March 2011 at 6:28 pm

            But also highlights for me, why it may have been a good idea for Goff & Hughes to try to keep it quiet. I think I’ve worked out the name of the boy. It means nothing to me, but would make him relatively easy to identify for people who know him, even if they don’t know him well.
      • Vicky32 14.1.2

        24 March 2011 at 5:52 pm

        Just an aside… why does The Standard use American spelling and grammar? From what I have seen 99% of websites are American, but I didn’t think this one was!
        • lprent 14.1.2.1

          24 March 2011 at 6:15 pm

          Because we’re too lazy to change the spell checkers in the browsers? Not that the aussie one is up to much. It lets through all of the Yankee spellings.

          I gave up some time ago because all of the programming interfaces I write in are written in American. After you’ve had to recompile because you wrote Colour instead of Color for the umpteenth time, you find you cannot be bothered any more.
15. Chris 15

    24 March 2011 at 11:04 am

    Good grief have we learnt nothing. Politics 101 1/ Attacking Key and the Nats. does not work!. Why don’t we understand this?. The energy and time that is wasted on that is unbelievable. Energy and time that could be spent in promoting Labour and is own policies and directions esp. with an upcoming election – that’s what the voters want to see – not character assassination as that turns voters off – basic psychology 101. Has Labours polling gone up by this method? – No.
    2/ Manage risk – this has clearly not been in the DH scenario – then ‘blaming’ the Nats. and worrying about where ‘the leak came from’ is utter BS. It happened it was going to get out and it should have been managed form the start.
    3/ What’s the headline on the Standard ‘English and Key on rebuilding costs’ and the apparent division – who reads it ? is this going to suddenly revitalise the latest polling results for Labour ? Why are the headlines not outlining Labours bold new policies plans for economic grow, plans for employment, plans to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, plans for social reform and a socially equitable New Zealand ?.
    Labour will be stuck on the backbenches for another 3 years and we only have ourselves to blame if we don’t change.
    • Green Tea 15.1

      24 March 2011 at 11:34 am

      Chris, Labour attacks John Key because, well, Labour is effectively National Lite. You can’t attack low wages and poverty when you spent your last term in government happily promoting them. The Hughes incident means Labour have lost the major platform they had to attack the government with.
    • KJT 15.2

      24 March 2011 at 4:19 pm

      LABOUR ARE SLEEP WALKING THEIR WAY TO DEFEAT!

      When are we going to see Labour repudiating the whole Neo-liberal mess.

      Unfortunately their defeat will result in the total gutting and robbery of NZ by NACT.

      Do Labour actually care??
      • RobC 15.2.1

        24 March 2011 at 4:56 pm

        I think they do care, I also think they are semi-afraid of inheriting an economic mess.
        • lprent 15.2.1.1

          24 March 2011 at 6:47 pm

          That is traditional. Labour always inherits economic messes from National, at last they have since I got interested in politics
        • KJT 15.2.1.2

          24 March 2011 at 7:49 pm

          It always happens. The left sorts it out and the right comes along and sells us out. Then the left comes back and makes it worth something again.
          I’ve come to the conclusion that the only reason the powers that be let the left back in again is so there is something for them to rob next time.

          If NZ managers were actually capable of starting businesses , they would not need the State to start them, so they can steal them.
16. Anne 16

    24 March 2011 at 11:06 am

    Remember the Colin Moyle Affair anyone? Back in the mid to late 1970s, Muldoon revealed that Moyle had been “picked up by police late one night on a street in Wellington known to be frequented by homosexuals”. He was released later that night and charges were never laid. But the fallout saw Moyle resign from parliament. He returned a few years later and became one of the most successful Agriculture ministers we’ve had – and that came from Federated Farmers themselves.

    What was he doing in that street? It transpired much later he had been lured there by a phone call to his parliamentary office earlier that night. The caller claimed he had evidence of corruption inside the Defence Service. The hoaxer never turned up of course but the police did. Years later I discovered the identity of that hoaxer but it was too late to do anything about it. And that’s another story.
    • higherstandard 16.1

      24 March 2011 at 11:09 am

      I remember it well Anne but what has that got to do with anything in 2011 ?
    • mickysavage 16.2

      24 March 2011 at 11:09 am

      Years later I discovered the identity of that hoax caller

      Please tell more Anne.
      • Anne 16.2.1

        24 March 2011 at 11:24 am

        It’s a long story and can’t be told here ms. Maybe elsewhere 😉

        @higherstandard
        Use your brain and maybe you will recognise there are some similarities- at least at this stage.
        • higherstandard 16.2.1.1

          24 March 2011 at 11:28 am

          @ Anne – eh eh eehhhhhhhhhh ?
        • Bored 16.2.1.2

          24 March 2011 at 11:37 am

          @Anne Wrong sytax error error…..its oxymoronic asking HS to use what he lacks.
          • higherstandard 16.2.1.2.1

            24 March 2011 at 11:46 am

            @bored not all of us can inhabit the blogosphere all day long, every day, to become as blogingly erudite as yourself.
            • Bored 16.2.1.2.1.1

              24 March 2011 at 11:53 am

              OK I take it back, it was a bit mean.
        • JS 16.2.1.3

          24 March 2011 at 12:50 pm

          Anne, are you suggesting this is a sting? It sounds suspicious that a police car just happened to be outside the house at the time.
          • Anne 16.2.1.3.1

            24 March 2011 at 2:53 pm

            No JS. I think that it’s simply a set of circumstances that has been used for political purposes by the Nats – aided and abetted by the MSM of course. The Moyle affair all those years ago was exactly the same.

            Note the difference in the reporting of the Worth and Hughes affairs. The former was handled in such a way that no serious aspersions were cast on Key even though his handling of the Worth affair was abysmal and dishonest. On the other hand, within 24hrs criticisms are being aired about Goff in the MSM even though – as far as I can tell – he has behaved in an exemplary and fair manner to all concerned.
          • the pink postman 16.2.1.3.2

            24 March 2011 at 4:22 pm

            I blame Crosby-Textor. Reason ? Nats under pressure over the economy, so what to do ? Give the great unwashed a bit of tittle -tattle . It aways works, and Crosby-Textor are masters at this type of sleaze.
            • grumpy 16.2.1.3.2.1

              24 March 2011 at 4:24 pm

              Yup, Crosby Textor it is.

              AntiSpam : lying (this guy is brilliant)
    • mikesh 16.3

      24 March 2011 at 7:30 pm

      Labour’s Gerald O’Brien was assaulted in a publc toilet in the early seventies. This may have been a setup. O”Brien was later forced out of parliament by Bill Rowling, though probably for other reasons.
    • Rosy 16.4

      24 March 2011 at 8:32 pm

      Yes, I immediately thought about what Key’s hero did to Colin Moyle. I’ll bet Hughes has been on the ‘persons susceptible to discrediting’ for a long time. Key probably couldn’t believe his luck (assuming here that Hughes did nothing wrong).
17. pollywog 17

    24 March 2011 at 11:14 am

    If anyone should stand down for the good of the party, it’s Goff.

    When’s he gonna realise he hasn’t got a shit show of being PM ?…the day after Key wins the election and uses the victory and the “mandate” from it to sell off state assets to his mates ?

    fucken roll him and before the end of next week…please
    • Bored 17.1

      24 March 2011 at 11:26 am

      Hey Polly, cant see them getting rid of him. We may have to engineer it another way…..if we were to let Al Quaeda know that Goff is secretly harbouring Salman Rushdie….(thats just as believable as some of the crap Nact comes out with on economics).
      • Carol 17.1.1

        24 March 2011 at 11:29 am

        Maybe King should go, given her vicarious involvement in the DH issue, making way for Cunliffe as Deputy… give him a chance to show more of what he’s capable of.
        • Bored 17.1.1.1

          24 March 2011 at 12:01 pm

          I have met her a couple of times and think King is a very charming and intellegent lady. She is funny and as sharp as a razor, and has all the credentials BUT she is woefully misplaced as deputy leader. Labour needs Kings experience and skills, but it needs to use her properly and not as a front bench leader.
        • Lanthanide 17.1.1.2

          24 March 2011 at 12:27 pm

          Apparently Labour have a rule that Leader and Deputy must be opposite sexes, much like the Greens have their co-leaders.

          Hence Clark/Cullen and Goff/King. I don’t think we can have Goff/Cunliffe, so it’d have to be Cunliffe/?? (King?).
          • Bored 17.1.1.2.1

            24 March 2011 at 12:41 pm

            Dyson, Street, Moroney, Daziel, Mackey, Adern, Mahuta, Chadwick, Fenton, Chadwick, Curran, Sepuloni, Pillay…she looks pretty safe. Apart from Dalziel and maybe Adern there do not appear to be any options. If only Turei was Labour.
            • grumpy 17.1.1.2.1.1

              24 March 2011 at 4:22 pm

              Street – obviously.
              • pollywog …

                24 March 2011 at 5:59 pm

                Cunliffe and Street it is then…

                …make it so captain !
                • the sprout …

                  24 March 2011 at 6:56 pm

                  i’d vote for that, for sure
            • Oscar 17.1.1.2.1.2

              24 March 2011 at 7:51 pm

              Pillay’s leaving this election.

              My pick would be Cunliffe/Curran. “The Curnts.”
18. ianmac 18

    24 March 2011 at 11:44 am

    Millhouse pointed me to this on Yahoo: “It’s been revealed the Government began investigating partial state asset sales well ahead of announcements made at the end of last year.” and “But Cabinet strategy documents released under the Official Information Act show the Government was considering the issue as early as last March. ”
    http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/9065379/govt-looking-at-soe-sale-since-march-2010/
    • KJT 18.1

      24 March 2011 at 4:39 pm

      As I am sure that the only reason Key is here is to obtain as much of our assets for those who put him there as possible. The decision to sell assets was made long before.

      Don’t know how Key can sleep at night. Accepting 300k a year to sell us all out.
19. ianmac 19

    24 March 2011 at 11:52 am

    Posted a comment three times and each time it disappeared. It was re a Yahoo item about the timing of Asset Sales Plans.

    [lprent: The spam engine didn’t like it. Probably the raw link. When they just silently disappear like that it is usually the spam engine. You just have wait until one of us lets it through.

    If it actually fails to post you’ll get a error on screen from your browser. I have a new comment editor sort of finished (has errors in old IE versions – so I need to add a opt-out), that hopefully I’ll get time to finish sometime this week.

    I let through the first one and put the others in trash ]
    • Alpha Sud 19.1

      24 March 2011 at 12:03 pm

      Me too, my comments are disappearing completely.

      [lprent: You need to read your previous comments for the ban. When I was reviewing comments last night I checked your previous warnings and found that you’d been warned several times about not putting in links when you quote people. ]
      • Alpha Sud 19.1.1

        24 March 2011 at 12:39 pm

        LP when I quoted comments last time they were all from Standard threads and were easily googlable. I didn’t include links to them because I assumed the links would put the comment in anti-spam. All the quotes were direct quotes by people here at the Standard and were very verifiable.

        If you’re going to ban me at least be honest. It’s got nothing to do with not referencing, because you don’t require that of anybody who shares your general view. You are only using it as an excuse to ban me because my opinions are uncomfortable to you when your political party is in complete shambles.

        Never mind LP I will be back again very soon using a different IP and a different name so as far as this name is concerned, good luck to you and the election later in the year. I hope you get what you deserve, but you won’t be hearing from this login again.

        [lprent: Out of the IP ranges you’ve used so far? I think not.

        We ban for particular behaviors, so if you don’t change that, then the same thing happens again. You get warned, and if you don’t read it and modify your behavior then the ban happens on the e-mail AND the IP ranges you’ve used. Getting another IP range – fine. But it means that you’ve had to exert some effort unproductively.

        Because it is your behavior that I’m wanting to modify, I don’t particularly care if you make the effort and come back provided your behavior changes. What I care about is conformation to the policy on this site. And I’m infinitely patient about making sure that happens to whatever identity you are currently carrying.

        Of course you could just make the effort to put in the links to make it less effort for other people to check that what you’re saying is correct. I realize that this might restrict you to actually asserting things that are actually true and therefore to differentiate between between what is fact and what is in fact your opinion (which you seem to confuse rather a lot). But that is the point really as far as the site moderators are concerned – isn’t it.

        Reading the warnings that the mods give you is also less effort. Plus having to read responses to your comments would also help you respond to other commentators rather moving on with fire and forget trolling. It is this concept called ‘engaging’ with the other commentators. After all that is what this comments section is for. If you merely wanted a place to scrawl graffiti, then I’d suggest gotcha.

        Everyone has to conform to the policies on this site regardless of what their views are. That includes you. Somehow I suspect you’d prefer not to do that, so the same thing will keep happening. ]
    • Lanthanide 19.2

      24 March 2011 at 12:29 pm

      Spam engine might be acting up, as one of my comments that had no links, just text, got put in the bin too. I didn’t know where it went, so I posted another one with almost the same content. Original one came back so I deleted my second one.

      Incidentally, after posting the second one and deleting it, it no longer let me ‘edit’ my original one. A result of the deleting, or a result of being released from spam?
      • lprent 19.2.1

        24 March 2011 at 12:35 pm

        Yeah I saw that. I’ll keep an eye on it.

        Akismet is a online check at wordpress. If the comment is unable to be checked then the current plugin behavior seems to be to put it into spam for a later check. I think that it now does a automatic recheck, but I’ll need to check that.

        Not sure about the editing. I’ll send a mail to myself to have a look at the behavior in the plugins code when I get some time.
        • Lanthanide 19.2.1.1

          24 March 2011 at 1:17 pm

          You should consider a better system than just sending emails to yourself.

          I used Hiveminder when I moved into a new flat to sort out everything I needed to do. It’s quick and easy.
          http://hiveminder.com/splash/

          captcha: suitable
          • lprent 19.2.1.1.1

            24 March 2011 at 2:27 pm

            I’ll have a look at it.

            e-mail isn’t a bad choice, especially with IMAP and its filters, and since I run my own server I have complete control. It has been around forever (my archives go back quite a way), so all of my various devices know how to talk to it. I have a web interface if something doesn’t. And I’m not reliant on any third party.
20. Olwyn 20

    24 March 2011 at 1:03 pm

    Turiana Turia and others have put forward a goal for making NZ some free by 2025. It is a goal, not a plan, and those who support it understand it may be thwarted, hindered or delayed by various contingencies that may come up, but that it will be taken seriously and genuinely pursued. My question is; why can we not have a goal to toward NZ having sufficient, affordable, secure housing and a genuine living wage by a foreseeable date? Such a goal would also face obstacles, but it would also feature seriously in what was planned, endorsed, encouraged, rejected and so on. It is as if this whole area has been declared a no-go zone, and can only be referred to in carefully nuanced ways, by showing concern for children, though not their parents, for instance.
    • Olwyn 20.1

      24 March 2011 at 1:11 pm

      I meant “smoke free” and missed the edit period.
    • apples are yum 20.2

      24 March 2011 at 6:39 pm

      Probably because what would need to happen politically for these things to be pushed through, past and over obstacles is some form of dictatorship. One select group at the top deciding morals and life decisions of millions of people – a la East Germany. It starts with… oh yes but it’s smoking and ends with oh yes but they’re black, jews, poor, uneducated…. The road of social intiatives is a slippery slope.
      • Olwyn 20.2.1

        24 March 2011 at 8:01 pm

        I was only using the anti-smoking plan as an example: if you can have such a plan (and there is one in play) why can you not have a plan to improve people’s lives, in terms of secure housing and a living wage? That was my question, although I may have buried it under a pile of verbiage. I certainly did not envisage a dictatorship, and am no great fan of the smoking initiative, since I think people actually face far more compelling problems. I see the righteousness about smoking in much the same light as I see the righteousness about gin in 19th century London – a chance to “do something” without addressing the fact of poverty.
21. chris 21

    24 March 2011 at 2:28 pm

    [deleted]

    [lprent: If you are going to quote someone then you have to put a link or reference in so others can read it and make up their mind if your opinion is valid.

    You have been warned twice under this handle previously, but only in the last few days – so you don’t get a ban until after the election. Next time it will be until after the election. BTW: I suspect you were astroturfing last election looking through the IP’s, but I can’t be sure. It’d be inadviseable to try it here this election..

    You can now rewrite that comment appropriately in a week when the ban finishes. If you wish to continue write comments here then it would pay you to read the responses and warnings on comments and conform to the guidelines in the policy. ]
    • Roflcopter 21.1

      24 March 2011 at 2:42 pm

      lol, waaaaaay too late for that admission and it just makes him look even more desparate.
    • gobsmacked 21.2

      24 March 2011 at 2:44 pm

      Chris, how about you respond when people on these threads pick you up on your ‘cut and paste’ parroting and ask you questions? It’s happened repeatedly now. You don’t want to debate in good faith, so you’re really just wasting everyone’s time.

      If all you can do is dump and run, it clearly shows how weak your arguments are.

      And if you constantly attack others but can’t justify anything you say, people might accuse you of “hyprocicary”.

      [lprent: And that as well… ]
22. PeteG 22

    24 March 2011 at 2:39 pm

    I think this is a major step forward for Goff, he’s still got a lot of ground to make up, but for a change this sounds genuine. So, good, he’s admitted mistakes and rectified as much as he can do at this stage. He’s got nothing much to lose from being sensible and being himself, not get blown about trying to follow everyone else’s advice.
    • gingercrush 22.1

      24 March 2011 at 2:54 pm

      I think its terrible he’s just dripping more and more and making the story even bigger.
23. Chris 23

    24 March 2011 at 3:39 pm

    I think we need to stop deluding ourselves. Goff has clearly mismanaged this. Goff is now saying [deleted]! The media and National will continue to exploit this episode to the max. Goff and King knew two weeks and they sat on it.. King also would appear to be compromised due to her relationship with Hughes. Labour are now in severe damage control when there are major issues to do with the economy that need to be discussed. We are now being severely side tracked by a clear lack of senior leadership and risk management skills. The ‘leaders’ – esp. Goff – need to go. Any one care to differ ?
    [Chris not chris]

    [lprent: I did back-check. 😈
    But you should put in a link if you’re going to quote something or you could suffer the same fate. ]
    • Anthony C 23.1

      24 March 2011 at 3:46 pm

      Gods, he admitted he was wrong to attack Key….

      He needs to go, they are insulated by their salaries and investments and MP’s super, they’re not feeling what’s going on at the moment, and won’t when things get worse in National’s next term.

      F*ckwits, they’re not even trying to beat National and are content to let a lot of people suffer for it.
24. interesting 24

    24 March 2011 at 4:00 pm

    Whale is claiming that David Parker is planning to topple Goff.

    see here: http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/?p=21876

    Does anyone think that there is any truth to this claim whatsoever?

    Would Parker be any good?

    On another note, but similar….I thought it was nice of Phil Goff to admit that he was wrong in making demands of the Prime Minister to sack richard worth like he did without letting the investigation take its course….Phil said hindsight, as well as the Hughes issue, had showed him he was wrong to make those demands. Link: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10714682

    [lprent: It didn’t disappear – the spam engine got it. Perhaps you should read the FAQ on how to do simple HTML. Raw links frequently get regarded as spam. I haven’t coded for it, but it looks like whales handle gets it more than usual. Rather appropriate I’d say. ]
25. interesting 25

    24 March 2011 at 4:04 pm

    So, i post a comment…and it doesnt appear at all, not even saying it is in moderation? where has it gone?

    [lprent: If it disappears without a trace, the anti-spam engine probably ate it. In this case probably because raw links (although the name whaleoil is possible as well – it is commonly regarded as being spam). Read the FAQ on how to hide raw links with simple HTML. ]
26. interesting 26

    24 March 2011 at 4:07 pm

    what my disappearing comment said was….whaleoil is claiming that David Parker is planning to try and roll Goff. (wont post link to it incase that is why it didnt get through.)

    Also i said….Nice to see Goff admit he was wrong to make demands on Key over Richard worth and that he has now, in hindsight as well as due to the hughes incident, realised he was wrong to do so. see link: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10714682

    Very mature of him.

    [It was in the spam queue, no need to panic. — r0b]
27. joe bloggs 27

    24 March 2011 at 5:28 pm

    I’m inclined to disagree Interesting.

    Goff has stood up and admitted he was wrong to call for Prime Minister John Key to sack Richard Worth.

    Fair enough – it’s a mature, honest and sensible mea culpa – almost leaderly – but it’s also a pity that Phil knew about this issue for two weeks and chose to do nothing before the whole affair was sprung yesterday.

    Smacks of desperation and another step towards falling on his sword.
    • lprent 27.1

      24 March 2011 at 6:06 pm

      I never thought I’d say this, but thank you joe bloggs.

      Over the past few hours, I’ve banned one person and had to warn several for quoting from that news report. Not because of what they said, but because they were too lazy to put the damn link in.

      I think that we’ve had a pod of the stupid in here over the last couple of days. They appear to be unable to see warnings on their messages and are functionally incapable of understanding why not linking to what they are quoting is going to get them moderated and banned if it is persisted with.

      Personally I’m tired of cleaning up after them. I think I’ll start getting a bit less tolerant. It’d reduce the amount of warnings I have to write.
      • joe bloggs 27.1.1

        24 March 2011 at 9:02 pm

        You’re welcome. Some of us RWNJs are even house-trained.

        You’re a little bit more inside the Leftie Loop than I am – so when’s Phil resigning?
28. logie97 28

    24 March 2011 at 6:00 pm

    Seems to me that the polls indicate the swinging voter in New Zealand just doesn’t like his conservative little world being changed.

    It will probably take several generations for homosexuality to be acceptable in their minds. Equally, physically correcting minor’s behaviours is still apparently precious to them.

    Both reforms were passed during Labour administrations. The strange thing is that they were supported through parliament by the conservative opposition parties, but the “blame” for change has been constantly sheeted home to Labour.

    Labour now seems to be hamstrung and with a very vague philosophy, not wanting to upset the Business Round Table. The great unwashed do not appear to have a strong voice any longer. And they are not interested in a group of politicians who appear to be concerned only about the rights of minorities. They need someone like a Kirk to realign them.

    Perhaps it is indeed time for a new left of centre party to form, one that does not carry any baggage (controversial sitting MPs), has members who are not frightened of their own shadows and will call a spade a spade. To be led by someone with fire in his/her belly, and who can talk to the voters from the heart and not from auto-cues.
29. Mark 29

    24 March 2011 at 6:01 pm

    3 more years fellas … 3 more years …

    The upcoming election is going to be an absolute walk over for National. Geez, where’s the competition? [Not needed….RL]
30. Mac1 30

    24 March 2011 at 6:21 pm

    And is that the best you can do, Mark, with your final remark in its bigoted, homophobic and rancorous nature?
31. Santi 31

    24 March 2011 at 6:43 pm

    Thank God for having the inept Phil Goff as opposition leader. The election is already lost by a landslide.
32. Chris 32

    24 March 2011 at 6:58 pm

    Can some one name a replacement for Goff ? From where I look it is not looking good. Too much of a poisoned chalice maybe.
33. chris73 33

    24 March 2011 at 7:09 pm

    Does anyone know if there are any factions in Labour that are deliberately to lose this election?

    Seriously whats going on with Labour?
34. about 34

    24 March 2011 at 7:18 pm

    Commission staff member in hate speech row in stuff today
    but it dont seem to mean what the paper says it does…
    “In the latest example, the staff member wrote on a public page ‘David Rankin – pokokohua! I can’t wait to tell him to his face!’ This translates as wanting to boil my head, which is one of the most offensive statements any Maori can make to another Maori.”

    maori dictionary = fucking hell! fucking bastard! fucking arsehole! fuckwit! bugger!

    not a thing about boiling a head
    • Pascal's bookie 34.1

      24 March 2011 at 7:32 pm

      Here’s a link for that:

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4805883/Commission-staff-member-in-hate-speech-row

      translations aside, how is that hate speech? Insult, sure; not nice, granted; hate speech, ORLY?
35. about 35

    24 March 2011 at 7:54 pm

    thanks PB its not hate speech its rude and not what the Human Rights Commission get paid to do
    • Pascal's bookie 35.1

      24 March 2011 at 8:05 pm

      Yeah nah, insulting people isn’t a HRC duty as far as I’m aware. But it was on the staffer’s facebook page.

      Going on that, and unless the context had something to do with the HRC, then it looks like bullying on Rankin’s part to me. PC gone mad mate.

      Crazy Grandpa of the nation, Garth George, reckons the way we should stand up to bullies these days is give ’em a blood nose, or dislocate their jaw for them.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10714531

      Not too sureabout that myself, but it’s a democracy right and all the “It’s not ok” stuff got voted out, so what the fuck would I know?

      It’s crazy, people need to watch themselves.
      • pollywog 35.1.1

        24 March 2011 at 8:52 pm

        here is something ya can’t understand. how i could just kill a man.
        • Pascal's bookie 35.1.1.1

          24 March 2011 at 9:34 pm

          The I-Don’t-Give-A-Fuck committee’s just arrived with millis and fifty-fives

          I can see ol’ dirty garthstard in rotovegas now. Real old school.
          • pollywog 35.1.1.1.1

            24 March 2011 at 10:06 pm

            eh!…so much for the ‘no provocation’ defense

            …but sir, i was bullied
            • ianmac 35.1.1.1.1.1

              24 March 2011 at 11:54 pm

              Yes Pollywog and just after the worm turns, the authority arrives and sees the end of the retaliation and the evidence is therefore against the bullied. “Your Honour I am a witness to the fist into the face of the poor lad (the bully) and he suffered a broken tooth and dislocated nose.”
              “Aha. Guilty and it is no use whining that he bullied you and that you were provoked.”
        • felix 35.1.1.2

          24 March 2011 at 10:54 pm

          Jeez p, at least give us the ‘ridgy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d12EI3xNiqE
36. logie97 36

    24 March 2011 at 11:24 pm

    If Labour do not change their leadership, those here predicting a landslide could well be right. Wouldn’t mind betting though that it will be a on a record low turnout. National / ACT will not get anywhere near 50 pcnt of registered voters support.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS