Open mike 26/08/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, August 26th, 2011 - 111 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

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

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

Step right up to the mike…

111 comments on “Open mike 26/08/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Colonial Viper 1
    26 August 2011 at 8:07 am

    Free Trade Agreements mean Australian Firms can sell any alcohol they like to NZ Teens

    Yeah our sovereignty as a country is screwed, thanks Free Traders, we can’t even regulate the kinds of alcopop drinks that our kids get smashed on. Who the hell are our politicians and business leaders working for again?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10747476

    …the alcohol industry is considering ignoring any regulation through the Transtasman Mutual Recognition Arrangement, which states goods produced in or imported into Australia can be sold here.

    “There is no need to circumvent anything – that’s the bilateral trade agreement signed by both Governments,” said Thomas Chin, chief executive of the Distilled Spirits Association of NZ.

    Similarly, any ministerial ban on alcohol novelty products – such as vodka mouthwash or alcoholic chocolate milk – could be ignored under trade laws.

  2. Deadly_NZ 2
    26 August 2011 at 9:16 am

    “Prime Minister John Key told United States diplomats all New Zealanders have a “socialist streak” and they secretly thought he was a “natural politician”,

    How full of himself can he be? At first I could not believe my eyes, then I woke up, and yep it was real. Hopefully he will get a huge reality check in November.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5509870/Wikileaks-Key-said-Kiwis-have-socialist-streak

    • Tigger 2.1
      26 August 2011 at 9:36 am

      He says ‘socialist streak’ like it’s a bad thing…

      As for him knowing what we ‘secretly think’ remember all those Nats have the ‘sense’ of the community – clearly National is full of mind-readers and psychics. Perhaps they should start up an 0900 psychic hotline so we can phone them up to ask where the lost keys are and whether Aunt Magnolia’s operation will be a success…

    • William Joyce 2.2
      26 August 2011 at 9:38 am

      You have to wonder about this guy’s motives.
      He always wanted to be Prime Minister, and now that he is, he spends his time getting his photo taken at several ops a day and going overseas to be seen with as many famous people and world leaders as possible and getting photos for his album.
       
      He’s using us.
       
       

  3. vto 3
    26 August 2011 at 9:24 am

    Lake Ellesmere, NZ’s most polluted lake, is getting $12 million spent on restoring it to its natural state.

    The pollution is the result of farmers activities within its catchment.

    The cleanup however is being paid for by the local ratepayers Canterbury wide, and by NZ’s taxpayers, to the tune of $11 million, and $1 million by Fonterra.

    So how does that work?

    Why is there not a charge on the farms, through rates, within the catchment? And what about the farmers who did this simply paying to clen up their shit? Why am I and my kids paying for it? And at the same time paying the absolute maximum price for milk that dairy farmers can find in the entire world?

    It is a step in the right direction by ffs it has hardly registered along the fairness pathway. Stand up farmers. Come on. Being the backbone and broad shouldered non-nonsense tell-it-how-it-is types. Pay your way.

    • ianmac 3.1
      26 August 2011 at 9:33 am

      And Smith said that some farmers will get compensation paid for their lost land and expenses. What! So if I dump a load of manure off my trailer in Queen Street, Smith will clean it up and pay me compensation for my trouble. Wow!

      • grumpy 3.1.1
        26 August 2011 at 9:54 am

        It’s not the farmers on the lake edge causing pollution – their land is required to plant a filtering wetland to aid the cleanup. The main contributing waterways are the Halswell, L2, Kaituna and Little River (and Selwyn). The biggest problem is nitrates from fertiliser and livestock filtering into these rivers.

        Also, there is very klittle dairy farming on the banks of the lake – it is too wet. God knows why it is not opened upore frequently (even permanenty) to the sea (I am told Tgai Tahu are against it).

        The lake was buggerred 40 years ago, about time it got cleaned up.

        • vto 3.1.1.1
          26 August 2011 at 10:41 am

          Yep, at least we are heading in the right direction mr grumpy. Re opening the lake I spend a bit of time there at the opening when its open. Imagine it would be near impossible to keep open permanently (the sea will always win) and if it was then the entire ecosystem would change to a more saltwater estuarine one, with all sorts of consequences biological and physical.

          If things keep moving in this direction then in a decade or two hopefully many of our waterways will be back to being super-lush again. A bit like the Ohinemuri River which drains the gold-rich Waihi area in the Coromandel. When the old style practices using arsenic and all sorts of nasties to extract the gold were underway and using the river as a drain it was dead. After a couple of decades the move back to its natural state was quite remarkable. And that river was considerably worse than any farm-affected river.

          • grumpy 3.1.1.1.1
            26 August 2011 at 11:09 am

            I think Ngai Tahu have a proposal to keep Forsyth open permanently – if they can do that then Ellesmere could be likewise managed. The lake is certainly much better when opened.

            • vto 3.1.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2011 at 11:19 am

              Yes I have been watching that proposal with interest. Lordy knows how you do it though – the amount of gravel and sediment that gets moved is gigantic and I simply fail to see how it can be controlled. Yesterday for example a large south swell that was running was moving, I would guess, a couple tonnes per 10m of coastline with every wave. A man-made structure could not control that, even if it was up against the cliffs at the eastern end. And neither could the relatively low water flow from even a combined Ellesmere and Forsyth flow. No way imo.

              And you are right in that Forsyth is even worse. Bleeargh…

        • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1.2
          26 August 2011 at 10:49 am

          Grumpy, am I right in thinking the farmers directly around the lake do not own the land but just have long term leases? Somebody told me that when I was playing golf near there a few years ago, but I can’t recall who whether he said it was Government owned or maybe owned by a trust?

          • grumpy 3.1.1.2.1
            26 August 2011 at 11:07 am

            A lot of the land is freehold and I suppose some may be leased but I don’t know from who (maybe DOC).

            DoC (Wildlife Service) bought a lot of freehold land some time ago and some of this is leased out to farmers. The proposal to “retire” land and convert to wetland is a good one. DoC have a very good native plant nursery at Waihora pretty much for that purpose.

            Then they can sort out Lake Forsyth, which for my money is much worse than Ellesmere.

    • MrSmith 3.2
      26 August 2011 at 7:54 pm

      Once again we spend a fortune on fixing some thing we destroyed, this is just more dog whistling to the dairy farmers and the Blue/Greens don’t worry fatty farmer after you have completely fucked it, then we will ask the Tax payer/rate payers and everyone else to feel good about cleaning up your mess.

    • mik e 3.3
      26 August 2011 at 9:13 pm

      VTO Green wash photo op by lizard eyes Nicolarse Smith. pandering to the green vote before the world cup cheap electioneering payed for by the tax payer outside the 100 days by a bankrupt Govt!

  4. toad 4
    26 August 2011 at 10:39 am

    I wonder if Anne Tolley still thinks that the education deal she did with the Gaddafi regime in Libya was such a great idea?

    • Tigger 4.1
      26 August 2011 at 11:17 am

      Toad, you know the answer to that. She doesn’t give a flying fig about who she whores us out to.

    • mikesh 4.2
      26 August 2011 at 4:23 pm

      I don’t see any problem with doing an education deal with the Libyans, whether they are ruled by Qadaffi or the new lot. I’m inclined to think the United Press are just playing politics and attempting, indirectly, to blacken Qadaffi’s name.

      • toad 4.2.1
        26 August 2011 at 5:42 pm

        Um, could it be any blacker? Or do you support authoritarian dictators who set their armed forces onto their own people, mikesh?

    • Deadly_NZ 4.3
      26 August 2011 at 6:26 pm

      Or it could be a message on the failure of National standards.

  5. Jum 5
    26 August 2011 at 11:15 am

    Is anyone keeping an eye on the many and varied job positions being advertised by KiwiBank?

    Are these positions to promote, strengthen and future-proof our state-owned bank or are fifth-columnists being put in strategic places to undermine the future ownership of our bank?

  6. Jum 6
    26 August 2011 at 11:46 am

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1108/S00353/festering-sore-of-alcohol-harm-to-be-tickled.htm

    What’s with the ‘we’ Family First. I certainly didn’t vote for teenage drinks to have high alcohol content. I didn’t vote for the bottles to be designed and marketed in such a teenage-friendly way. Blame that on greedy businessmen.

    It amazes me how rightwing misogynists continue to blame all of us when they are well aware that reducing the age was a National bill, which Helen Clark voted against.

    If this government is having problems because of foreign or domestic agreements to take control of the drinking problems then maybe they need to rethink giving even more drastic powers through the TPPA. Talk about stupid, greedy men.

    Have greedy stupid men actually intended for young women to drink and get drunk so that they and their offspring can now rape and batter with impunity and then blame it on those women and girls?

    Have stupid women and girls realised yet that alcohol abuse is yet another way they can be controlled just as much as the pay equity issues and the abortion issues? Or are they calling that ‘drunk positivity’ like they call sex with anyone and everyone ‘sex positivity’?

    Sex for women is great in exactly the same way as for men; just don’t confuse it with getting drunk and not knowing if you had sex or were raped, (same goes for men) not knowing the father of your child (men being too drunk to use a condom and the woman too drunk to insist on it) or getting an abortion which brings you into the orbit at abortion clinics of some seriously unhinged lunatics that seek to control not only your feminine and/or feminist freedoms but also to endanger the continued opening of abortion clinics to pregnant rape survivors, etc because it will give catholics in government or even just misogynists in government the always-present chance to close down your right to choose.

    Try to understand that many men in New Zealand just don’t like women and do not regard them as equals. New Zealand under this government is becoming America where hospitals are bought and controlled by the catholic church in many cases and then proceed to deny safe abortions or contraceptives and over the last decade (when we elected our first woman Prime Minister) the religions or religious ideologies have streamed into New Zealand with their nutty messages all of which demand control over women.

    P.S. Maybe if we organise a curfew for men women can get drunk and fall over safely. They can also die from alcoholism. Just saying.

    • clandestino 6.1
      26 August 2011 at 12:20 pm

      …or maybe alcohol helps many people feel good, tighten friendships and progress relationships, as it has done for millenia…

      The one positive that will come out of these neo-temperants new-found success will be the proliferation of home brew and distillation. Hurrah!

      But let the demonisation continue (as it always has) and focus on the negative aspects of life and it’s various pleasures.

      • prism 6.1.1
        26 August 2011 at 12:56 pm

        @clandestino One day you may have to take some responsibility to pass on values of self-respect and control over one’s life and actions to children or others. I hope you will have realised by then that those who won’t limit themselves and are continually helped by their society to recover from their unwise behaviour are taking risks of many kinds and are not acting like people who would like to be adults who stand tall and responsible in society.

        This morning a doctor talked about a couple of 18 year old women who regularly get drunk and participate in sex or are used for it by men whose identity they don’t know. One or both has had terminations. Yet they continue. Not only are they presently at risk, their future fertility may be completely damaged. It is very important to control one’s drinking, dependency is insidious and costly in money and loss of autonomy and pride.

        • Chris 6.1.1.1
          26 August 2011 at 1:02 pm

          Are the 18 year old girls happy?

          • prism 6.1.1.1.1
            27 August 2011 at 12:30 pm

            Chris How hedonistic? Sounds like a line from Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World where people are dosed on happy chemicals and are afraid to think of anything that might interfere with their positive brain functions.

            “Bottle of mine, it’s you I’ve always wanted! Bottle of mine, why was I ever decanted? Skies are blue inside of you, The weather’s always fine; For There ain’t no Bottle in all the world Like that dear little Bottle of mine.”
            – Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, Ch. 5            >

          • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.2
            27 August 2011 at 12:43 pm

            Are the 18 year old girls happy?

            Is a heroin addict happy after having secured enough product for the weekend?

            Sometimes its worth thinking a little bit deeper.

      • Draco T Bastard 6.1.2
        26 August 2011 at 1:55 pm

        …or maybe alcohol helps many people feel good, tighten friendships and progress relationships, as it has done for millenia…

        Attitudes like this tells me that our society is very sick.

      • Jum 6.1.3
        26 August 2011 at 3:02 pm

        Clandestino,

        I totally identify with home brewing; you have to work for your alcohol, you know what’s in it and you don’t have to pay exorbitant prices for the garbage in pretty bottles the big breweries throw at us. And home brew tastes so much better as well, except for the odd ‘accident’ when the red wine tastes suspiciously like vinegar. But that’s where wine vinegar comes from! And only among consenting adults.

        Better still, for the privilege of selling New Zealanders alcohol the big brewers and the retailers of it should be forced to pay a levy to reduce the cost of the damage to the consumers of it. Those who market a killing product with a rocketing alcohol content to teenagers must pay for their profits.

        The producers and sellers must have a price control on their selling to discourage them from overcharging to recoup their levy charges. They have escaped fair charges since they were able to successfully lobby governments. That has to stop. It should not affect the buyers of alcohol, the damage to their systems if they overdo will affect them sufficiently.

        Most important of all – who decided the alcohol content of these alcopops and is there a suitable jail time sorted for them – the higher the alcohol content, the higher the jail time, where a rape has occurred or a death has occurred. The guy in the plane crash that started the alcopops died. I’m sure the current czar has not reduced the content.

      • Jum 6.1.4
        26 August 2011 at 3:12 pm

        Clandestino,

        P.S. I love my wine, and malt whisky and boutique beer and gin’n’tonics and martinis.

        However, I’m not silly enough to think that I don’t have to keep a continuous watch on my imbibing and my treatment of alcohol as just another grocery item. Alcohol is not just another grocery item.

        Let’s not forget that the multi winery cabal including John Key and his vanishing winery business will be quite happy to see the alcohol passing through the supermarket doors at a great rate of knots.

        • clandestino 6.1.4.1
          26 August 2011 at 5:33 pm

          I’m not sure which planet Draco is from, but obviously he was young once, and I’d like to think he stayed at home every Saturday eating four-cheese fondue in his sweet bachelor pad, but somehow I don’t think this was the case. Did you have a drink with your mates Draco? Did you like to get together, sing and dance, play pool or watch the game, hang out with the girls at a mates place or the bar? Or perhaps missing out is the reason for such bitterness and hyperbole? That’s a genuine attempt at understanding not a dig btw.

          I’m a member of the younger generation I spose, and I get that we’ve had a long leash with cheap mass produced alcohol, but I would argue the leash remains and has gone from string to iron chains, and we have not only become the most vilified group of young people, but the most punished for the irresponsible actions of the few (hence you see the ‘us’ vs ‘them’ mentality when it comes to police, the consequences for doing something minor but foolish (opening a bottle of wine in public for eg.) are comparatively and excessively harsh. This exacerbates anti-social and anti-authoritarian reactionary behaviour like the aimless violence I see around). And yes stupid actions have consequences, but are instances of bad behaviour with respect to alcohol really worse now than 20/30/50/100 years ago?? Road stats would say otherwise, perhaps not assaults, but I believe that has deeper causes as I’ve said. Don’t even get me started on how high prices in downtown bars have led to supermarket consumption.

          Prism. I would agree with you re those girls, but why do people always extrapolate that case out to include every bloody 18-25 year old round town??? Take it for what it is, a tragic case that may need intervention. As for the rest, I’m not sure how to combat that as I don’t believe your premise to be true, because you are equating weekend/fortnightly ‘binge’ (and I could go on about definitions there) drinking with alcoholism.

          This is not to justify over the top consumption to the point of black-out, date rape with alcohol or violent and aggressive behaviour. Merely I wish to point out that what I see on a Saturday night is not all upskirt shots in the gutter or guys being predatory, but – shock, horror – many thousands of people having fun.

          *waiting for the shoot-down*

          • Draco T Bastard 6.1.4.1.1
            26 August 2011 at 5:52 pm

            alcohol helps many people feel good,

            The question is why do people need a drug to feel better? Better about what? Themselves?

            Nothing wrong with having a drink here and there but there is when it becomes a requirement for socialising and that really is where our society is at.

            • clandestino 6.1.4.1.1.1
              26 August 2011 at 6:18 pm

              How about because it expands the definitions of sensory experience (probably more relevant to drugs), or decreases the inhibitions that exist within our cultural construct and assists people to connect at a baser, instinctual level (yes sex, but also friends and occasionally family)?

              I don’t think these are bad things, maybe you differ on that.

              I agree that there is a deeper element of neediness there. Call it escapism from the drudgery of existence or simply the fact we are the only species with the ability to know we will die, so why the fuck not, eh? I don’t know how or think you would be able to persuade me that we should legislate for these and against this particular freedom-to. Which is why I am of course pro-drug reform (must be a young ‘un with little experience huh).

              As for it being a requirement, maybe for you, but you’ve got free will and the right to be different. Try ecstasy! Hehe.

              • prism …
                27 August 2011 at 12:36 pm

                clandestino I was just listening to Radionz and heard that LSD was never illegal here. Also the spread of drugs and how difficult to combat the tendency to go for a quick buzz with drugs and kill off brain and other cells needed to cope with life as a functioning adult.

                • clandestino …
                  27 August 2011 at 4:28 pm

                  Never illegal? LSD is class A in NZ.

                  But seriously, do you believe everything you hear with your own ears? Or do you go out to try and make the sound yourself. Function on that for a minute.

            • Jum 6.1.4.1.1.2
              26 August 2011 at 6:18 pm

              Hey Draco T Bastard,

              Remember the ‘new’ suburban housewives’ neuroses, when a trip to the doctor would fix all that with some Prozac? Doctors honestly believed that women should be deliriously happy at home alone with x no of babies/children. Not every woman is an earth mother.

              All that was required was a lifeline for women to one another and luckily, instead of turning into druggies most of them formed a combined women’s union.

              That suburban neuroses came about through idiot town planners forgetting to account for the fact that the extended family was no more; the nuclear family was in.

              • prism …
                27 August 2011 at 12:47 pm

                Jum
                Another way of coping with neurosis was to drink sherry or port I think is high alcoholic. I had a rental house once and let it to a bloke who had a wife coming out of a nursing home and he was taking care of her. She had been actually drying out and renewed her old habits when she came out if one counted the sacks of bottles after they left the house after she set her mattress on fire smoking in bed. Drunk irresponsible with an out of control habit.

                clandestino – You’re young. Don’t count on being young to protect you from all the difficult things that impact your life and getting drunk is an attempt to hang on to that careless happiness of youth where you don’t worry about your future, everything will be fine, or anything apart from yourself and your own interests. Part of being immature is trying to deflect facing problems by getting drunk or drugged as a regular thing daily or occasional binges. It makes you feel good temporarily but weakens your ability to find solutions and be clever about turning difficulties into opportunities for new directions advantageous to you.

                • clandestino …
                  27 August 2011 at 4:07 pm

                  I can’t help but think you view other people’s experiences through a prism of condescension there Prism. Like I said before, get off your high horse (pun unintended) and stop thinking of everyone who enjoys the social and dopaminal effects of drugs or alcohol with some kind of self-esteem deprived, socially incapable, life-loser. It is simply not true and you are apparently old enough to have realised that.

                  That final sentence to me proves you really don’t know what you’re talking about.

                  • prism …
                    28 August 2011 at 12:27 am

                    @ clandestino – I probably know about more cases of alcohol addiction than you do and don’t take it all so light-heartedly. Also I am looking at the problem in a macro way while I think you are viewing it from what suits you.

                    It’s a nation-wide problem and saying that everybody has done it (got drunk) doesn’t deal with what is a major social and medical problem.

          • KJT 6.1.4.1.2
            26 August 2011 at 6:35 pm

            I tend to agree.

            We’ve all done it.

            Don’t think it is much different, for young males, from when we were young. Back in the dark ages.
            Police and adults seemed to be more tolerant of stupid teenagers then.

            Binge drinking has always been a NZ problem. It would be nice if we could change that culture, but I think it is too ingrained in most of us.

            The most upsetting change, to me, is seeing very young girls, and boys, walking around sloshed on alcopops. The producers of alcohol are largely to blame, for making it easier for 14 year olds to drink.

            • clandestino 6.1.4.1.2.1
              26 August 2011 at 6:49 pm

              Thank you!

              But I will quibble with you in that perpetuating the myth of ‘binge’ drinking as a NZ problem doesn’t help. I have lived in continental Europe and know firsthand the ‘continentals do it better’ spiel we hear is almost complete bullshit. They start younger, and drink more (look at the alcohol consumption per capita for European countries especially for northern Europe but also the latin states compared to NZ). The difference is they don’t seem to have a societal guilt complex about it.

              Also, is it a ‘change’ that you see 14 year olds sloshed? I’ve noticed as I get older everyone else gets younger and I’m in my twenties. I certainly got sloshed at 14 without alcopops, with the wonderfully liberating positive and terribly educational negative effects.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                26 August 2011 at 9:10 pm

                They start younger, and drink more (look at the alcohol consumption per capita for European countries especially for northern Europe but also the latin states compared to NZ).

                But do they get drunk as often?

                • clandestino …
                  26 August 2011 at 10:23 pm

                  From my anecdotal experience, yes. That might just be the young however. You do notice a high degree of alcohol dependency, alcohol in the morning in italy with coffee is popular for example, just to wake up. Some of it is cultural, but booze is so damn cheap over there (bottle of Absolut: 8 euro) that people drink constantly.

                  • rosy …
                    26 August 2011 at 10:46 pm

                    Yes, it seems to be a topping up rather than a blotto out kinda thing don’t you think? But the glasses of wine seem smaller, the sweet spirits less frequent. Where I am a glass of wine is way cheaper than a coffee – not sure I’d have both at the same time.

    • Vicky32 6.2
      26 August 2011 at 4:27 pm

      Have stupid women and girls realised yet that alcohol abuse is yet another way they can be controlled just as much as the pay equity issues and the abortion issues? Or are they calling that ‘drunk positivity’ like they call sex with anyone and everyone ‘sex positivity’?

      I would like to think so! My nieces seem to think that getting bladdered is just “what you do to have a good time”, which is, I think, sad and mindless of them.

      “… or getting an abortion which brings you into the orbit at abortion clinics of some seriously unhinged lunatics that seek to control not only your feminine and/or feminist freedoms but also to endanger the continued opening of abortion clinics to pregnant rape survivors, etc because it will give catholics in government or even just misogynists in government the always-present chance to close down your right to choose.”

      Sorry, Jum, but I just can’t agree that abortion is freedom! It always has negative physical and psychological consequences (ask my sister who was bullied into two of them!). I know that QoT for one, simply did not believe that the group Feminists for Life was a real feminist group, but it is. (I had tried to find a link to the British or NZ group, but google has “personalised” me to American links for some unknown reason.. Also, aside from Bull English, how many Catholics in government do you know of? This not being the USA, thank God, such things are not generally known.

      Try to understand that many men in New Zealand just don’t like women and do not regard them as equals. New Zealand under this government is becoming America where hospitals are bought and controlled by the catholic church in many cases and then proceed to deny safe abortions or contraceptives and over the last decade (when we elected our first woman Prime Minister) the religions or religious ideologies have streamed into New Zealand with their nutty messages all of which demand control over women.

      For heaven’s sake, seriously! You seem to have a wee chip on your shoulder. AFAIK, America is protestant-dominated, and there’d be hell to pay if the RC church dominated there…
      Abortion is something men want. Studies have shown that, time and again, men want women to have free access to abortion. Women, not so much.

      .

      • Jum 6.2.1
        26 August 2011 at 4:43 pm

        Vicky 32

        I have read your same comments so many times; I was not swayed by them then. Nor am I now. I don’t have a chip on my shoulder. Ask the Rugby legend Frank whatsisname that used to write a column and said quite bluntly that there are many men who hate women.

        I would have to say your chip is showing if having an opinion is having a chip; not all men want women to have abortions.

        You can change ‘freedom’ to ‘choice’ but it still means the same in that women get to choose and that is a freedom.

        I could believe that Feminists for Life is a feminist group; they chose. That is feminist. There are feminists who chose to wear clothes covering their bodies; that’s a feminist choice as long as they don’t choose for me.

        I will find the link to the Catholic hospitals that refuse abortions and contraception. Be right back…

        • millsy 6.2.1.1
          26 August 2011 at 5:06 pm

          Jum – regarding your comments above ^^^

          I have to say they are underlined by the reaction by people (usually right wing types) had to the recent Slutwalks.

          It seems that the prevailing attitude, no matter how much they denied it, is that if a girl/woman was raped and she was wearing a short skirt and high heels, they somehow brought it on themselves.

          Some people still have an issue with women and seek to control them and their behaviour. The vitirol directed at mothers on the DPB is a case in point. Essentially they are loose women who beat their children and swing their legs open like a rusty gate, according to the right.

          • Jum 6.2.1.1.1
            26 August 2011 at 6:37 pm

            As for you Millsy, you should be a long-jumper, if you think I am anti women…

            Let’s change the subject matter here from female to male.

            “What’s with the ‘we’ Family First. I certainly didn’t vote for teenage drinks to have high alcohol content. I didn’t vote for the bottles to be designed and marketed in such a teenage-friendly way. Blame that on greedy business(women). Yeah right!

            It amazes me how rightwing misogynists continue to blame all of us when they are well aware that reducing the age was a National bill, which Helen Clark voted against. (No change there)

            If this government is having problems because of foreign or domestic agreements to take control of the drinking problems then maybe they need to rethink giving even more drastic powers through the TPPA. Talk about stupid, greedy (women – no, Millsy. they don’t have that much power in this government, well, any government).

            Have greedy stupid (women) actually intended for young (men) to drink and get drunk so that they and their offspring can now rape and batter with impunity and then blame it on those (men and boys)? Yeah right!

            Have stupid (men and boys) realised yet that alcohol abuse is yet another way they can be controlled just as much as the pay equity issues and the abortion issues? Or are they calling that ‘drunk positivity’ like they call sex with anyone and everyone ‘sex positivity’? (Like men even have to worry about any of that, Millsy!)

            Sex for (men) is great in exactly the same way as for (women); just don’t confuse it with getting drunk and not knowing if you had sex or were raped, (same goes for (women)) not knowing the (mother) of your child (being too drunk to use a condom and the woman too drunk to insist on it) or (the woman) getting an abortion which brings (her) into the orbit at abortion clinics of some seriously unhinged lunatics that seek to control not only (your male) freedoms but also to endanger the continued opening of abortion clinics to pregnant rape survivors, etc because it will give catholics in government or even just misogynists in government the always-present chance to close down (her) right to choose.

            P.S. Maybe if we organise a curfew for (women, men) can get drunk and fall over safely. They can also die from alcoholism. Just saying.

            In the end it’s all about men; the more women play the game men’s way the more men will win.
            A women’s political party is the way to go and then we’ll see what feathers fall out.

            • millsy 6.2.1.1.1.1
              27 August 2011 at 4:45 pm

              Wrong end of the stick there Jum.

              I didnt think you were anti-women at all mate.

              Anyway, going back to the comments about booze above, I have to say New Zealanders have a pretty screwed up relationship with alcohol. We go on and on about teenagers drinking (its like a moral panic), even though the older generation shouldnt be one to point fingers. Over 40’s can be just as bad. Go to any RSA, chartered club, food and wine festival in this country, and youll see a lot of middle aged people off their faces and trying to **** each other, then every week they complain about drunk teenagers.

              That same generation used to drive home drunk from the pub (and the local cop would turn a blind eye), build tacky booze barns, which were purposely designed to be warehouses for drunks, leave their kids out in the car with a bag of chips and a soft drink, and so on and so forth.

              Of course every 3 years they would roll up to the polling booths and vote on whether to ban the stuff outright up till 1989 — fortunately they voted no every time.

              • Jum …
                27 August 2011 at 5:23 pm

                Millsy,

                I’m more intrigued about the ****. Please explain, unless it’s going to make you blush!

                Dad used to tell me about a distant friend of the family who used to forget he’d swapped his horse for a car and used to get in, turn on the engine and go home at about 20mph, hugging the gutter; he was totally off his face. It was so acceptable in the time, but cars are faster, there’s more of them and hypocritical politicians looking for a cat to skin.

                • millsy …
                  27 August 2011 at 5:27 pm

                  Im not usually restrained like that on here, as some follow posters would attest to:

                  What I meant was **** = fuck, as in they want to get off their faces and fuck each others like rabbits in springtime.

            • prism 6.2.1.1.1.2
              28 August 2011 at 12:36 am

              @Jum “In the end it’s all about men.” Women play little games too you know, you seem to be talking as if women were always on the superior level.

              • Jum …
                28 August 2011 at 3:03 pm

                Prism,

                As the evolutionists are constantly pointing out to us, Prism, it’s all about survival of the fittest and in this case the choice of the superior being to birth the future of the race was woman.

                But I actually said, “In the end it’s all about men; the more women play the game men’s way the more men will win.
                A women’s political party is the way to go and then we’ll see what feathers fall out.”

                It is all about men, Prism. They control the world. They also want to control women’s reproduction and their very beings. Getting drunk and falling over is what men do. Women don’t need to do that to prove they are equal. The fact that they do get drunk and lose a myriad of brain cells and liver health while they’re doing so allows men to not take them seriously, to batter them and to rape them and then blame them. That is a lose/lose situation. Women are so much better than that.

                It’s almost as if women are following that near-quote from the late and highly respected Sir Paul Reeves. It is not failing that frightens New Zealanders; it is the fear of succeeding. In the case of women maybe they want to sabotage their futures; maybe they don’t want what society wants for them. If so they need to reinvent themselves, decide what they want and demand respect for their individual decisions, before religious and conservative influences decide for them. Maybe they need to do nothing at all because they want religious and conservative influences. Getting drunk and falling over is as silly for women (and vastly more dangerous) as it is for men. All you get is a headache and all your small fortune (that we all earn over decades of working) goes down the toilet. The alcohol czars are laughing even louder on their way to the bank.

                That recent rape of a young woman would not have happened if her ‘friends’ had stayed with her. Also, the bars are geared to profit not caring about people. We also need to remember that women don’t have to be totally off their faces to be raped, so blaming her rape on her being drunk is wrong. She just needs to understand that it certainly did not help!

                • prism …
                  28 August 2011 at 4:29 pm

                  @Jum

                  It is all about men, Prism. They control the world. They also want to control women’s reproduction and their very beings. Getting drunk and falling over is what men do. Women don’t need to do that to prove they are equal.

                  Women don’t need to get drunk etc, pity they can’t internalise that. As for women being equal, many are the better and brighter of the two genders. But I think women are often afraid to use their full powers. It used to be advised that girls shouldn’t appear to be too brainy and intellectual if they wanted to attract a man and I think this may still be the case, despite all that women have done to banish sexism. Perhaps that explains the plethora of deeply diving women’s necklines and exposed globes of breast. Certainly doesn’t seem intellectual, rather the opposite.

                  Unfortunately for women who want to both use their talents to the fullest and have a committed partnership, the scales of women with advanced education such as degrees are on the heavy side, and men with similar backgrounds are on the lighter side. So women may still have to concentrate on looking enticing etc. to get a mate if they are herteros, and find men attractive.

          • mik e 6.2.1.1.2
            26 August 2011 at 9:19 pm

            Ask Paula Bennett about that Jum and her daughter inter generational. The Right are the biggest hypocrites ever. Jum your Hero Dinosaur Don Bash has left solo mums in his wake!

            • Jum 6.2.1.1.2.1
              27 August 2011 at 1:25 am

              Mik e,

              You’ve got a nut screwed loose if you think I have anything positive to say about Don Brash.

        • Vicky32 6.2.1.2
          26 August 2011 at 6:01 pm

          . Ask the Rugby legend Frank whatsisname that used to write a column and said quite bluntly that there are many men who hate women.

          I think you really have missed my point, Jum. I never said there aren’t men who hate women! I know there are. And I happen to think that some manifest that hatred by promotion open slather abortion – making women into mere sterile containers for their emissions, and pseudo-males. (Lots of recreational sex, all care and no responsibility!)

          I would have to say your chip is showing if having an opinion is having a chip; not all men want women to have abortions.

          I never said all of them do! Just that, studies have shown that men support ‘freedom of choice’ as they call it, significantly more than women do. My own friends and family have shown me, that what a woman wants is not for the man to help her pay for an abortion and hold her hand afterwards, but to commit to her and the baby. Obviously, they get very upset indeed when the man says blithely in answer to “I’m pregnant”  “so do you think you’ll keep it? Or worse – “you’ll go to the clinic?” Or as an ex said to me in a hopeful tone (he knew my views) “maybe you’ll have a miscarriage?”

            • Vicky32 6.2.1.2.1.1
              27 August 2011 at 1:29 am

              Thanks Jum, although casting a cursory glance over your links shows that perhaps one of your sources might be regarded as objective! I am reading the first one, and my first comment is that bluesing along to a Catholic hospital (and they don’t hide what they are!) and asking for ’emergency contraception’ – I use the quotes because you and I both know that’s a euphemism for abortifacient, is nothing but provocative! It wouldn’t be an innocent error but a deliberate attempt to court controversy. It’s a fac t that Catholic hospitals, like all hospitals will if asked, provide a referral to where the service asked for can be found!
              Another thing you know as well as I do, is that pregnancy after rape  is vanishingly rare. However it does stir the emotions! Hard cases make bad law, says the axiom.. and Bernard Nathanson has admitted that when he was campaigning in favour of abortion on demand, he and his colleagues vastly inflated the number and proportion of illegal abortions leading to maternal death at the time. Abortion proponents now, exaggerate the number of those seeking abortion who are rape survivors.
              Your fifth link (to Religious Tolerance.org, which is of course noted for its intolerance), has a banner across the top that says: “Sterilization is evil. It is a mutilation that frustrates the purpose of the marriage act. You can’t call that health care.” Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Wenski, in the Miami Herald. ” To me, that’s quite uncontroversial!

              The main point is that Caholic hospitals (especially in New Zealand)  do not disguise themselves! No one is in such a hurry that they can’t go 2 kilometres down the road to their DHB and get what they want. If they choose not to, so that they can go to the media and weep and yell, I have no sympathy!

              • Jum …
                27 August 2011 at 1:47 pm

                Vicky32,

                http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1108/S00376/abortion-access-again-at-risk-in-court-case.htm

                another one for you, re the NZ court case, and if I had the time to waste my personal time I would link you to a thousand more perfectly good objective/anti/for abortion sites but I think I would be hunted off this site very quickly for linking to sites you could. I am still looking for that one I found originally.

                Having found that in the middle of serious scientific sites on evolution whole scripts of anti-evolution/procreationist blogs that had been cut and pasted into there I know that the people who want to control women in one way or another are deadly serious.

                One thing I did not know, and just for once you didn’t try to convince me I did, was the catholic hospitals in New Zealand.

                How many are there and I wonder how they will behave if given the chance to stop women having abortions in New Zealand through a myriad of court cases and perhaps killing doctors performing legal, safe abortions (as in America) as opposed to the knitting needle, gin baths and jumping up and down, or the illegal backstreet abortions. Can you really convince me that the same lunatic behaviour in America won’t occur here, as more conservative, religious views become the norm rather than the choices women have at present?

                In America pharmacies/chemists are refusing to hand over contraceptives or an abortion pill; if enough of those places take over enough areas in New Zealand, can you really convince me that they won’t employ exactly the same tactics as in America. This world has become a global one and it is all about the fight for women’s rights, in the face of neo-conservative misogyny, as far as I am concerned.

                Lastly, your statements:
                “It’s a fact that Catholic hospitals, like all hospitals will if asked, provide a referral to where the service asked for can be found!
                Another thing you know as well as I do, is that pregnancy after rape is vanishingly rare. However it does stir the emotions!”

                You can’t prove whether Catholic hospitals will refer on or not. Neither you nor I know for a fact ‘that pregnancy after rape is vanishingly rare’. As for stirring the emotions, I think you’re the one at risk here.

                I have not read the links I forwarded to you. I just typed in catholic hospitals re abortion and they came up. Unlike you Vicky32, I allow you to read and make up your own mind. I’m pleased that one of the links is an objective one; it proves that there is some sense of tolerance on both sides.

              • Jum …
                27 August 2011 at 1:59 pm

                Vicky32,

                PS I have never advocated abortion above contraception or the less invasive drug that performs a chemical abortion.

                I have always said there are three answers to a request for sex – No, end of conversation/ Maybe – the pressure begins, could get pregnant, could get diseased, could be disappointed, do I want to, does the person really care that much about me/ Yes – the odds on pregnancy, STDs, disappointment, made a mistake, was ditched straight after are magnified 100%.

                Rape is quite different; I doubt the Catholic hospitals, pharmacies, churches see the difference and the woman will always be blamed.

                Actually, the woman always being blamed is not just by Catholics, of course.

                • Vicky32 …
                  28 August 2011 at 4:43 pm

                  Rape is quite different; I doubt the Catholic hospitals, pharmacies, churches see the difference and the woman will always be blamed.

                  Jum, I think that you know almost nothing about Catholicism or Catholics, especially in New Zealand! You seem more than a little paranoid.
                  I recommend you try talking to a Catholic, and asking her how they see rape etc. You might get quite a shock!

              • Jum …
                27 August 2011 at 7:09 pm

                Vicky32,

                Found it:

                http://oldsite.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2408/context/archive
                you said:”The main point is that Catholic hospitals (especially in New Zealand) do not disguise themselves! No one is in such a hurry that they can’t go 2 kilometres down the road to their DHB and get what they want. If they choose not to, so that they can go to the media and weep and yell, I have no sympathy!”

                As far as I could read, this particular rape survivor did not go to the phone book, find where the next Catholic hospital was and go there. Still, who knows. Maybe the rape was the last thing on her mind; it was all about complaining to the media because the hospital would not help her.

                New Zealand is changing rapidly; it is becoming global. I hold out little hope that women will be able to stand against this onslaught from the religious masses. If only the women who don’t believe in abortion would allow other women to make up their own minds.

                Maybe the anti abortionists don’t want women to use public funds for an abortion; well I don’t complain when some rugby player gets dashed into hospital for mending or a car accident victim gets treated over a hip replacement patient, all of which can be life-threatening.

                Even the Catholic church did not outlaw abortions until the 1970s-1980s when women were beginning to demand equality and pay equity. I went looking for the date in my book by Marilyn French which is depressing in itself, because in The War Against Women she outlines many ways that the rulers of society use to reduce women to little value, and I find every time I flick through it, how little has actually changed) but am still looking for the book, so can’t say exactly what year. But, whatever it was, the church did not ban abortions per se until much later than a church which supposedly holds abortion to be a terrible sin now didn’t seem to think so then.

                • Vicky32 …
                  28 August 2011 at 4:49 pm

                  As far as I could read, this particular rape survivor did not go to the phone book, find where the next Catholic hospital was and go there.

                  Why would she? I never said “the next Catholic hospital!” I said DHB, district health board… that is, public hospital! Oh, I have just realised – you’re not a New Zealander at all, are you, or you’d have known that! Explains so much, does that…

                  Maybe the anti abortionists don’t want women to use public funds for an abortion; well I don’t complain when some rugby player gets dashed into hospital for mending

                  Well, I do! (About the rugby player, that is, not the car accident victim.)

                   

          • millsy 6.2.1.2.2
            27 August 2011 at 7:26 pm

            “(Lots of recreational sex, all care and no responsibility!) ”

            What’s with all this fuss about sex outside of the marriage/relationship context. It can be quite an enjoyable intamite and exciting act which can be enjoyed by two (or more) people who have an attraction for each either. I belive sexual stimulation by another human being can be the ultamite natural high, superior to booze and drugs, and if anything, people should be having more sex, not less (with consent, and within reasonable limits of course).

            And no, you cannot have sex without emotion. On the raw phyiscal level, the stimulation of nerve endings and the consequent release of endorphins is an emotion in itself. Its just that we tend to tie up emotions with concepts that were developed by various authors dating back to Chaucer, and Shakespeare (that does not to say I dont think ‘romantic love’ exists, Im just very pragmatic about it — ultamitely, a friendship with a good sexual element is probably what should be aimed for)

            Of course — it is a pity that 2000 years of god bothering (sorry Vicky, but hey, you guys dont exactly do yourselves credit) have totally screwed up our attitude to sexual relations.

            • Jum 6.2.1.2.2.1
              27 August 2011 at 7:41 pm

              Millsy,

              It’s high on the list of calorie reduction…

            • Vicky32 6.2.1.2.2.2
              28 August 2011 at 5:02 pm

              What’s with all this fuss about sex outside of the marriage/relationship context. It can be quite an enjoyable intamite sic) and exciting act which can be enjoyed by two (or more) people who have an attraction for each either. I belive sexual stimulation by another human being can be the ultamite natural high, superior to booze and drugs, and if anything, people should be having more sex, not less (with consent, and within reasonable limits of course).

              What a bizarre attitude, and may I say, a rather male one? You left out the most important thing that makes sex enjoyable – commitment and relationship! Yes, I have tried it both ways, so I know what I am talking about. If you’re just in it for the endorphins and won’t necessarily even recognise him/her 6 months later, why bother? Just whip one off the wrist, to use Jo Brand’s phrase. My observation is that the happier and more sexually fulfilled people I know are the married and faithful ones. Endless sexual variety with one person. By contrast, the people who have from 5-25 different ‘partners’ each year are pretty miserable buggers.

              Of course — it is a pity that 2000 years of god bothering (sorry Vicky, but hey, you guys dont exactly do yourselves credit) have totally screwed up our attitude to sexual relations.

              I have also thought that behind a lot of atheism, is sexual appetite! “I don’t like religion, because it says I can’t scratch my sexual itch whenever I feel like it, and with whomever I feel like it”. You ‘guys’ don’t do yourselves a lot of credit either – by that I mean I am assuming you’re of the ‘another notch on the bed post’ persuasion. (Or another two or three, depending on how many people and in what combination you’ve just had.)

  7. thejackal 7
    26 August 2011 at 11:52 am

    Opposition to Fracking Gains Momentum

    It’s been just over a year since the informative movie Gasland was released to rave reviews. It documented the environmentally disastrous process known as Hydraulic Fracturing or Fracking for short, in the Continental United States. Josh Fox’s brilliant movie went a long way to creating awareness of the dangerous process. The share shock value of people lighting their drinking water on fire in Pennsylvania is something not easily forgotten…

  8. prism 8
    26 August 2011 at 12:36 pm

    This morning on radionz I heard a comment on suicides as they happen in the older population.
    The speaker, a social worker, nurse possibly thought that more attention should be given to the senior group as much as to youth suicide. I am so annoyed at this too common attitude of caring being doled out to the young, reluctantly, while the older person who has already had their life chances is cossetted and encouraged to be self-centred and take the largest share of any pie that is available.

    • Vicky32 8.1
      26 August 2011 at 4:37 pm

      while the older person who has already had their life chances is cossetted and encouraged to be self-centred and take the largest share of any pie that is available.

      Your comment makes me both cross and sad, prism. A relative of mine who was definitely not a youth (!), (though not an oldie, I will say) committed suicide a few years back. I was utterly stunned, as I had heard of only one other case of a non-yoof killing themself. Yet, in the years since, I have learned that it’s shockingly common, yet no one gives a flying ****.
      In this respect at least, the old(er) people are not being cossetted, it’s the precise opposite. If an older person kills themself, the general attitude of anyone outside the family seems to be “Oh, he had his life, let’s move on. Who cares about it anyway, the problems of teens matter so much more!
      We hear constantly (especially here on the Standard, about poor unemployed destitute teens. I am not saying they don’t matter – my point is that everyone matters! Not just brown people between 15-25 years old…

      • prism 8.1.1
        26 August 2011 at 5:10 pm

        @vicky32 Get cross all you like but the saying from Orwell’s book that Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others, is true. Youth needs more help to get started, age needs help to comfortably finish. That seems a reasonable attitude which isn’t the one I hear much of at present.

        And as for brown youth I didn’t mention them I was talking generally, but you have brought them forward because you have heard of their needs and how not enough is being done to meet those so you tacitly agree with my premise about youth getting a bigger share of the pie. After all they are young, still growing and need more.

        • Vicky32 8.1.1.1
          26 August 2011 at 6:18 pm

          And as for brown youth I didn’t mention them I was talking generally, but you have brought them forward because you have heard of their needs and how not enough is being done to meet those so you tacitly agree with my premise about youth getting a bigger share of the pie. After all they are young, still growing and need more.

          Yes, youth do need a big share of the pie. But they don’t need all of it! I am not talking generally here, I am specifically talking about suicide prevention. The first time I ever heard of the suicide of a non-yoof was when I was studying a mental health module on my special education course at U of A. A fellow student talked about the shock of her father in law having eaten his gun, in the kitchen of the family home. She had called the mental health crisis team two days previously, but been told that her father in law was a very low priority, as suicide was a youth problem, and her 60 something father in law was wealthy (a farmer) and white and old, and could take care of himself. Which was seriously missing the point. Someone with clinical depression can’t even want to take care of themself! As was shown in the case of my relative who I will not identify even to the point of stating how old he was – only that he was manifestly not the youth all suicide victims are supposed by the media to be. 
          It’s all pointed up by an item on 3 News I just heard – about suicide. The expert spoken  to was Mike King, who has a programme on Maori TV about depression in youth.

          • McFlock 8.1.1.1.1
            26 August 2011 at 7:15 pm

            It’s probably a bit of a culture lag because the youth suicide rate skyrocketed 1986-1989, and into the 1990s, when the other demographic groups seemed to be trending slowly down or staying level-ish. It’s still high, but it was only in 2007 (the mortality set usually lags a couple of years for investigation and registration reasons, so 2007 is pretty much the latest data for last years report) that the 35-44y.o. suicide rate overtook the youth rate. There’s some transfer in resources accordingly (e.g. JK, rather than the rapper of the week,  talking about depression), but the public perception tends to lag behind the data or the actual efforts for a while.

            I agree suicide in general is not addressed enough, though. As an example, the mortality rate from assault is a tenth of that from suicide, but which is viewed as the more significant problem? I’d guess street violence.

  9. prism 9
    26 August 2011 at 1:03 pm

    What a good chance for the Super Fund to buy into Trademe. They can direct their cluster bomb and tobacco business share sales to investing in something that is a lively support of initiative by ordinary New Zealanders, and becoming a useful institution that seems like a never-fail company.

    • millsy 9.1
      26 August 2011 at 4:58 pm

      Every time I buy something over $100 from trademe it doesnt actually quite work.

      Mind you the sellers have been good to me and refunded my money, so that’s a good thing…

      • prism 9.1.1
        26 August 2011 at 5:17 pm

        @millsy – I wonder if you buy technology stuff privately. The stuff from the dealers, has given us no probs. I buy books and some CDs, a few plants. Books are a safe bet, good old technology and not a big cost. Most of the traders are really great, and we have the occasional chat so it’s not as distant and cold as might be expected.

        • millsy 9.1.1.1
          27 August 2011 at 7:34 pm

          Yes I do buy technology stuff, but only from dealers. One example was $190 for a 2003-04 era laptop which failed less than a week after I bought it — It was from a businmess that sells ex corporate PC’s. I had bought heaps of old PC’s from him before and they worked fine. The guy was very apologetic and refunded me.

          Another example was from a dealer who I bought a Chinese-made portable music player which turned out to be completely crap. I got my money back of them as well, even if they were a bit reluctant.

          And of course there was a DVD recorder that wouldnt record. I still have it somewhere. I might see if I can have another look at it….

          Stuff that I have been happy with from TM include hard drives, flash drives, and PC componentry, ie PCI expansion cards, RAM, etc.

  10. The Voice of Reason 10
    26 August 2011 at 1:20 pm

    The coolest Chilean since Allende? 
     
    “Why do we need education? To make profits? To make a business? Or to develop the country and have social integration and development? Those are the issues in dispute.”

    • joe90 10.1
      26 August 2011 at 7:59 pm

      Google translation of a 2010 interview with Camila Vallejo.

      What did you think education reforms announced by Piñera?
      -We believe that there is no great reform, but a deception, a media bluff. Here, Piñera only reinforces a pattern that began in the mid-’80, a model based on the market as regulator, the competence and quality assurance in funding through vouchers, which are funded for especially in demand. There is an effort to establish a solid education system, collaborative, but to foster competition, as the traffic light of education. Finally here is a reform, but reform for the best, always for excellence.

      • joe90 10.1.1
        26 August 2011 at 8:04 pm

        ^^ This too.

        How about the announcement of the reduction of hours of history in the school curriculum?

        -With a little knowledge Chairman of the story, of course not see the relevance, importance of history as forming a critical conscience, of a citizenry aware of its past to design and build their future. And that is closely related to the decline in civic education training. Today’s discussion is on youth participation in the electoral system, but there has been no substantive discussion of how we set a state policy that actually helping citizens have greater empowerment, you know what their rights and their duties. The importance of teaching history is essential in the formation of a democratic society, and that you are not seeing Piñera and Lavin. There is an effort to improve the teaching process. They are only concerned with improving indicators.

  11. Pete George 11
    26 August 2011 at 1:35 pm

    I’ve just been to see David Cunliffe doing Vote Chat at Otago.

    It’s an excellent format, giving a chance to see the person behind the media image we are usually limited to.

    I still have mixed views on Cunliffe, he didn’t change my mind, it’s not only that he’s too much ingrained as a politician, but I prefer others even in Labour.

  12. thejackal 12
    26 August 2011 at 2:27 pm

    NZSAS Combat Role in Afghanistan

    New Zealand’s involvement in Afghanistan was sold to the public on the premise that we were there to help rebuild and train, not be involved in combat missions. Effectively John Key lied…

    • Jum 13.1
      27 August 2011 at 2:33 pm

      Uke,

      It was enlightening to hear on Kim Hill this morning about the revolution of Libya starting in France in 2010 and the objective was a thousand years’ supply of water. Given that France’s Veolia private water interests were rejected by its own country and needed to get its clutches on more (apart from New Zealand’s supply) it made for very interesting listening.

      But we should all have known that it’s all about the privatisation, just like New Zealand.

      Are we lucky enough to think that in New Zealand we won’t suffer an attack in the way that the people of Libya have suffered? After all, we Kiwis have just rolled over and said ‘nice John Key take it all’.

      What stuns me is that New Zealanders can’t seem to grasp the fact that this privatisation plan is happening globally and that John Key is our cuckoo and in 2008 45% of Kiwis adopted his greed and fed it. The question is how many % of Kiwis will be responsible for letting him sell off our nest-eggs next year.

      It is highly unlikely I will be able to enjoy the same kind of friendship I used to have with my National supporter friends, for the simple reason that they will have betrayed the whole reason most New Zealanders feel proud to be called New Zealanders and more intimately, Kiwis – a sense of fairness and a share in the pie which makes New Zealand tick over.

      The wealthier ones among them will be able to take my extended family’s future assets and make more money.

      Those living on the bones of their arses will get nothing; the Kiwisaver purchases that Key keeps mentioning are essentially run on a sell off to the highest bidder for the best price and won’t stay in New Zealand’s hands and let’s not forget the elephant in the corner – we all own them already.

      Key does not own more than his one share, yet National voters will mandate him to own all shares in all assets.

      I will purchase none of Key’s bloodied offerings. It makes me sick to the core that some New Zealanders can sell their country’s future off and that they cannot understand that in voting for Key this year, they will finally destroy what is left of anything that’s good in New Zealand.

      • uke 13.1.1
        27 August 2011 at 5:05 pm

        Hey Jum – Yeah, I did hear that Kim Hill interview this morning. The water motive was new to me. With all these US/Nato/EU wars, it is always enlightening to follow the money. It was also pretty stunning to hear that the military “rebel” commander in Tripoli was a well-known Al Qaeda figure! I knew they were involved in the “rebellion”, but not that they were in such high positions of control.
         
        Agree with your comments re. Key & the new political divisiveness in NZ. One has to fight on and stick up for what you believe in, even if it’s a minority view. In the worst case scenario, those power companies can be nationalised next time Labour gets in.

        • Jum 13.1.1.1
          27 August 2011 at 7:28 pm

          Uke,

          Sorry to disappoint you but if Key gets in again he will sign off the TPPA, which will mean that the obvious buyers of our assets will have megabucks behind them, will demand half the board members be from their side and they will use the international courts to sue the government if we try to reverse what they have done. A lost case will cost us zillions and all sorts of financial suffering through the global networks and the credit rating agencies in the pockets of Key’s backers.

          We can’t then just do what Cullen did with Kiwirail anymore. We can’t then tell the Canadian Pension Fund to piss off and leave our airport alone.

          New Zealanders’ votes this year have never been so important. Maybe just for once they’ll actually think about where to put the tick and what they may end up with.

          If Key gets back in, New Zealand will be a very different place. Why do you think the backers went to such a lot of trouble to find Key? New Zealand is the door to the Pacific and to the mineral riches to the South of New Zealand. It produces food and it at present, or it did, protect the ocean life around New Zealand. Everyone thinks we’re such a wee country on the arse of the world but our value is beyond measure and we’re just handing it to the backers on a plate.

          Go figure, Uke.

          • millsy 13.1.1.1.1
            27 August 2011 at 7:37 pm

            I consider it quite disgusting that companies can effectively veto legislation passed by a democratically elected parliament.

            • Jum 13.1.1.1.1.1
              27 August 2011 at 7:43 pm

              Millsy,

              “democratically elected parliament” now there’s a quaint sentiment.

              • KJT …
                28 August 2011 at 7:36 pm

                I strongly suspect that if people were given an open choice, as to who was in parliament, they would not choose anyone who is there currently.

          • uke 13.1.1.1.2
            28 August 2011 at 9:01 am

            Well, that depends on whether the TPPA does actually get ratified. There’s still plenty of uncertainty about that one, including the state of the US economy and the lobbying-power of US dairy.
             
            Good on the Greens for getting the TPPA in the news this year – and shame on Labour not making it more of an issue.

            • Jum 13.1.1.1.2.1
              28 August 2011 at 12:39 pm

              Uke,

              In the House, during debates I have heard Labour MPs speaking out against it but not in your face so much, unfortunately. Jane Kelsey is doing a great job. Labour need to be warned that the last thing they want to be is PERCEIVED to be on the side of Key and English when the fruits of TPPA are found to be hazardous to our health.

              I do know that once the Americans invited themselves in a cosy little Pacific trade agreement went right out the window and quite frankly, if the secret handshakes on selling out our Kiwi rights are in the fine print with any of these deals, who damned well needs them. What did Key just give away to Australia recently? What a shame it wasn’t him!

              Our country and its strategic environment is extremely valuable to the world.

              As long as it is firstly producing food for its people and its land not being turned over to foreigners who turn it into golf courses for the rich or its bounty being sent overseas and the cleanup left to Kiwis we need to remind ourselves we owe other countries nothing.

              We have given our sons and daughters to war because we expect support if we are caught up in war, we have lost many of our economic assets due to bad voting choices in the 80s, 90s, and this decade, and we have given refuge to many including our own. Enough handwringing already.

              When are we going to stop saying we’re just a little country; that’s always the first step to allowing bigger sharks to come and take us over. And I’m sick to death of Key and English blaming New Zealanders for not saving when the whole strategy of the right for growing the economy is to import more of what we don’t need and brainwash us into buying it over the decades. Blame yourselves Key and English, Douglas and Joyce, Richardson and Brash. Your greed is bringing New Zealanders low, not mainstream New Zealanders.

              We should see ourselves as the gatekeepers against global excess not the agents of it.

              And by watching The Hollow Men on Maori TV tonight is surely giving us the best evidence of John Key’s cunning, especially the last part which brings him back to Crosby/Textor’s fold. But will Kiwis learn from that with their shallow attitude towards Key – possibly not, but they will certainly learn if NAct is allowed to remain in government.

              Let’s start a 2011 mantra – “time for a strategic change of government’. The misogynists got rid of Helen Clark so they should be happy; the rich got richer and can always go overseas to the other hellholes they’ve made with their greed to get their rocks off and then come back for their free health care, the women who hate women leaders can slaver over Goff who has far more gravitas than Key ever will, tv is full of fishin’ and huntin’ and cookin’ and sexin’ and religion is once more putting the legirons on women. ‘Let’s change now before Key and backers’ fine print comes into force’. ‘Let’s change now before our sovereignty, our working rights, our sense of fair play has completely disappeared’. ‘Let’s change now before the area south of us which we are the guardians of is ruined by greed beyond repair’. ‘Let’s change now, before it’s too late’.

              • prism …
                28 August 2011 at 9:30 pm

                @Jum – I have decided that thinking too much drives one mad. No wonder people love to be alcoholic topers. It is a potent mix – the sadness of seeing our country that has missed so many opportunities always floundering, the backward conservative social thinking of so many people who have clawed or been elevated to the top, the lack of commitment to starting plans for the future etc. So don’t use up all your bullets today – save some to keep up a regular fire to keep the predators from the door.

  14. thejackal 14
    26 August 2011 at 7:32 pm

    It’s Official – Hone Harawira was Setup

    You might recall the hullabaloo around comments reportedly made by Hone Harawira regarding the death of Osama Bin-Laden. Well it turns out that he was misquoted, and the National Business Review article contained inaccuracies…

  15. Vicky32 15
    28 August 2011 at 6:50 pm

    Jum, I can’t find your post that I was just notified of, so I am replying here. I wasn’t talking about your link, I was talking about your quoting me as having said the “next Catholic hospital”. It seems to me you know absolutely nothing about Catholics in NZ, but I do – you need to realise that NZ is not (yet) the USA, and further, your equating freedom for women with the “right” to a late-term abortion is a huge mistake! As has been pointed out, early feminists considered that abortion was a not freedom for women, but for men – for women, it’s just another way of being controlled.
    I won’t be around in 50 years, I can guarantee that 100%, but even if I would be, I still wouldn’t take your bet. Of course Catholic hospitals won’t be offering late-term abortions, and there’s no reason why they should have to. Why do you want them to have to? You should be asking yourself that.. Freedom of choice is only for people you approve of, hey?

    • Jum 15.1
      28 August 2011 at 7:27 pm

      Vicky32,

      You’ve written little replies all over the place so I thought I would consolidate them.

      Stop making things up. I said nothing about late-term abortions. You just introduced that. I also don’t ‘bet’ on women’s lives. The 50 years, I believe, is the legal time limit on keeping information secret.

      I’ve started wondering if you are even a Vicky or a Victor, or even No 32 robotoid replacing the other 31. Did they run out of batteries? But I won’t continue with that. You ‘sound’ genuine in your angst.

      You could tell me how many Catholic hospitals there are in New Zealand.

      I certainly agree and understand where you are coming from with the use by men of women’s freedom/choice to abortions, but as always that must be left to the women involved to come to terms with. Eventually everyone rebels under legirons, even women – I think!

      Late term abortions are only a problem for people who think life begins at conception. That’s always a minefield. If people don’t want unwanted pregnancies start telling men to zip it or take some responsibility or wear condoms. The Catholic Church are noticeably lacking globally in that thought. I hope, finally, they realise the damage they have done in Africa, e.g. with the aids epidemic when the Pope refused to allow the men, many carrying the aids virus, to use condoms.

      I don’t have to ask myself about late-term abortions. That is up to the people who experience them.

      • Vicky32 15.1.1
        28 August 2011 at 7:49 pm

        Stop making things up. I said nothing about late-term abortions. You just introduced that. I also don’t ‘bet’ on women’s lives. The 50 years, I believe, is the legal time limit on keeping information secret.

        What a deeply unpleasant little man you are! You said all the things I replied to, then deleted your post, probably because you’d misquoted me – now I look like a prat for replying to your deleted post. I have the text of the post you deleted, in my email, so I can find it if I have to… I am sure you’d rather I didn’t!
        I have had it up to my back teeth with you and your obsessions and your distortions and lies. I didn’t ask you ask anyone about their late-term abortions, I asked you to ask yourself why you want the Catholic church to have to make its hospitals act against Catholic principles! 
        Do us both a favour – have a cup of tea and a lie down. Have some St Johns Wort tea for preference, and lay off the booze. Or, get yourself some glasses so you can read what I actually say and not what you wish I said. I am not playing your reindeer games any more.
         

        • Jum 15.1.1.1
          28 August 2011 at 8:27 pm

          Vicky32

          LOL

          This is surreal to say the least. Please do find this post in your email and display it in this thread.

          Thank you very much. This is priceless. Why are you leaving me; could it be because The Hollow Men are on Maori; Mamma Mia is on 3, The Jackal is on 4 and Bliss is on 1. Surely not.

        • Jum 15.1.1.2
          28 August 2011 at 10:56 pm

          Vicky32,

          Was this the post? I deleted it from its place because I wanted to put it at the end; I guess once you delete you cannot repost it. Luckily I usually keep them on file. I’ll try posting it again with extra words around it.

          ‘I’m so pleased Vicky32.
          You are saying that in New Zealand women will never have to undergo the same sort of treatment suffered by that rape survivor in that American/Catholic or Catholic/American hospital.

          Do read carefully, I said ‘this PARTICULAR rape survivor’ did not go to the phone book, find where the next Catholic hospital was and go there…’ in reply to your comment about rape survivors. Either you did not read the link I sent you or you are getting a bit hyper yourself. It was about a rape survivor in America. They don’t have DHBs there.

          My intention was to warn that if everything else from personality politics and neo-conservatism as well as religious ideology was emanating from America then no doubt the controls over women’s freedoms/choice (call it what you will) will be under attack too in New Zealand.

          But you’re saying that Catholics, the Catholic Hospitals and the Catholic Church in New Zealand are such wonderful people and institutions and totally unlike their American offshoot that the attacks on women’s choice could not possibly happen here. You must also be saying that the Catholic hospitals in New Zealand would be accepting of performing abortions here. Is that correct?

          Will that (still) be the case when Key’s government opens up the public health system to private purchase?

          If so, I’m so pleased Vicky32. You obviously have the inside knowledge on everything the Catholic Church and its administrators do in New Zealand, and no way would they turn away a rape survivor. Wonderful. Just put that down in writing and sign it will you, and in 50 years time we’ll have a look at it and we’ll find out if you were right or whether you were just peddling mischief to women.

          Belittling my New Zealand citizenship will lose you any chance of me listening respectfully to rants from you in future. I will just attack.’

          I have no problem with Catholic hospitals not doing abortions but only if they do not attempt to take control over the public hospitals and thereby remove the facility of abortion support for women.

          I think you will find I said nothing in any of my posts about late term abortions until you raised the issue. As for the conversation over the DHB comments try reading my text again and you may just discover that you actually took my words out of context. Happy reading.

          • Vicky32 15.1.1.2.1
            29 August 2011 at 1:33 pm

            That’s it more or less – although you’ve continued to leave out the original wording of “and in 50 years time we’ll have a look at it and we’ll find out if you were right”… you originally “bet” that in 50 years time Catholic hospitals would still not be offering late term abortions… which you then realised was an absurd statement. That’s why I asked you to ask yourself why it was so  desperately important to you that Catholic hospitals should be forced to go against their principles when there are plenty of state hospitals that will provide abortions, contraception and disguised abortifacients such as the ‘morning after pill’. (There are heaps of girls who don’t even realise that it’s an abortifacient, and actually a very strong and potentially dangerous chemical cocktail that should not be available without prescription, as it can make the woman gravely ill if  taken without supervision.) Brothels probably hand them out, I wouldn’t know, but they shouldn’t.
            Your statement that if they are different from American ones they must then perform abortions was deliberately provocative and again, absurd. Now, I don’t think you’re actually stupid, I do think however that you think with your emotions. That’s the only explanation I can come up with for the fact that you ignore, misinterpret and misquote what I say. The reason I believe you are a man, is that in my experience it’s men who think with their gonads emotions, and men who go in for ad hominem arguments such as your passionate insults against me.
            Take a chill pill as my niece says!

            • Jum 15.1.1.2.1.1
              29 August 2011 at 10:44 pm

              Look right above your ‘ 15.1.1.2.1
              29 August 2011 at 1:33 pm’ post Vicky32. You will see the very words ‘Just put that down in writing and sign it will you, and in 50 years time we’ll have a look at it and we’ll find out if you were right or whether you were just peddling mischief to women.’

              There was nothing about a ‘bet’ that word was invented by you. There was nothing in any of my texts about late term abortions until you introduced it Vicky32.

              Please stop lying.

              I repeat ”If so, I’m so pleased Vicky32. You obviously have the inside knowledge on everything the Catholic Church and its administrators do in New Zealand, and no way would they turn away a rape survivor. Wonderful. Just put that down in writing and sign it will you, and in 50 years time we’ll have a look at it and we’ll find out if you were right or whether you were just peddling mischief to women.’ You say you still have it on email – go and look and if you want perhaps The Standard still has the original on hard drive.

              Either way you are accusing me of lying Vicky32 and you are really starting to piss me off.

              YOU said (15.1.1.2.1) : ‘That’s why I asked you to ask yourself why it was so desperately important to you that Catholic hospitals should be forced to go against their principles when there are plenty of state hospitals that will provide abortions, contraception and disguised abortifacients such as the ‘morning after pill’.’

              I had already said (15.1.1.2) : ‘I have no problem with Catholic hospitals not doing abortions but only if they do not attempt to take control over the public hospitals and thereby remove the facility of abortion support for women.’

              As long as Catholic hospitals don’t control our secular hospital care in New Zealand, we don’t have a problem Vicky32. Only you do.

      • Adele 15.1.2
        28 August 2011 at 11:13 pm

        The Mercy Hospital is a private hospital originally established by the Sisters of Mercy – a catholic order of nuns. At one time they would not perform abortions, tubal ligations or vasectomies – in keeping with its catholic ethos.

        I was raised a catholic, and I actually entertained the thought of becoming a nun, until a realised nun sex really meant none. Not even a quick rub in the vestibules could be had without an eternity of purgatory and damnation to follow.

        Nowadays, I am simply into Te Ao Maaori.

        • Jum 15.1.2.1
          29 August 2011 at 10:49 pm

          Adele,

          Vicky32 will tell you that the Catholic church is so much more inclusive and generous in its judgment these days. But perhaps you have made the better choice.

  16. prism 16
    28 August 2011 at 9:33 pm

    Intermittent signal # August 2011/5 (last 16/7)
    Sunday morning Radionz – can be downloaded. Some more outstanding examples offering a possibility for a viable future NZ for all.
    11.05 Ideas: Entrepreneurism
    If there’s one thing that most economists agree on it’s that entrepreneurs are a key ingredient of economic growth. But how do you grow entrepreneurism? Ideas asks: Serial entrepreneur and spokesperson for the Productive Economy Council Selwyn Pellett; Grow Wellington’s chief executive Nigel Kirkpatrick; and, Ken Erskine of Auckland business incubator, Icehouse.
    Presented by Chris Laidlaw
    Produced by Jeremy Rose