Open mike 26/10/09

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, October 26th, 2009 - 18 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

mike

We’re trying a daily “Open mike”.

This is a place for anyone to post comments on topics that might be of interest, and for any discussion following up on the comments. Over to you…

18 comments on “Open mike 26/10/09 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. RedLogix 1
    26 October 2009 at 9:07 am

    Shameless copy and paste, but it got me a small chuckle and I had to share:

    This is one Massive Lie too many. I can’t keep up. I refuse to become righteously indignant over this latest Massive Lie because it would compromise my indignation over the GISS Massive Lie, which itself detracts from my outrage over the SST Massive Lie, which diminishes my lather over the 2nd Law Massive Lie on and on, until I can’t even work up a decent snit over the MWP conspiracy.

    It’s no wonder that the entire world science commuity is involved in the coverup, given the sheer number of Massive Lies that have to be maintained. As a government scientist, I’m holding up my end of the conspiracy, but it’s getting harder as the annual budget shrinks. For FY10, I’m funded to tell Massive Lies only through August, after that it will have to be Small Lies or even The Truth until FY11. The real tragedy is that I don’t have a project number for conspiracy maintenance, so it ends up getting billed as Administrative Overhead.

    (From a RealClimate comment thread)

    More construstively I found this as well The Social Organisation of Denial

    • Draco T Bastard 1.1
      26 October 2009 at 3:14 pm

      From an article in your second link:

      In other words, by promoting intrinsic values we can promote a society which is more caring, happier, and more environmentally sustainable. Materialistic values and motivations, on the other hand, cannot take us to sustainability.

      Looked at like this, it seems clear that the green/environmental movement needs to understand, without equivocation, that we are engaged in a vital struggle with those such as right wing political parties who advocate for competitive, materialistic values and goals. Hopefully the struggle will be non-violent (at least here in our democratic society), but make no mistake: it is a struggle with life or death consequences for many of the planet’s human poor, and for many non-human species.

  2. Doug 2
    26 October 2009 at 9:36 am

    You should start a Donation fund for Labour so they can pay for Polling.

  3. JD 3
    26 October 2009 at 10:16 am

    I’m not expecting a post on the standard anytime soon on the issue.

    Just another indication of Goff’s incompetence to keep his troops in line. Hopefully the terms of the official inquiry will wide enough to avoid having a rigged outcome to exonerate the accused like Clark attempted to do with the Taito Phillip Fields’ corrupt behaviour.

  4. Dan 4
    26 October 2009 at 11:46 am

    I think it’s time for a decent round of push polling. It worked a treat last time until they were found out. Did they say who they were? Brash didn’t know, and the Brethren were embarassed mightily to be found out.

    • George D 5.1
      26 October 2009 at 12:20 pm

      I know I shouldn’t take pleasure in the misfortune of others, I really shouldn’t….

    • felix 5.2
      26 October 2009 at 12:29 pm

      hahahahahahaha indeed!!

      Did anyone not see that coming a few months back when Corky decided to become a D-list celebrity?

      Laziness thwarted by narcissism.

    • Killinginthenameof 5.3
      26 October 2009 at 2:53 pm

      Something that is interesting in regards to his claim that he’s “not a bludger, instead was prudent and took out insurance blah blah blah”

      As I understand it, usual policy for insurance companies is to provide a top up on what ever percentage of your income ACC will pay, to what ever the prescribed income replacement is in the policy.

      Maybe he’s troughing the welfare system after all?

      • felix 5.3.1
        26 October 2009 at 3:32 pm

        The following sentence from the article:

        It rankled with the National Party activist, son of a former party president, to be a beneficiary of the welfare state to which he was ideologically opposed.

        seems to imply that he is indeed “troughing the welfare system”, but it’s not written very clearly.

        • the sprout 5.3.1.1
          26 October 2009 at 3:36 pm

          Now who would have thought that a rabid rightwing propagandist would turn out to be a MASSIVE fraud?

          And it looks like even the merry band of bog dwellers are gunning for him at a ratio of about 3:1. Guess even they’re smart enough to recognise blatant hypocrisy when it smacks them in the mouth:

          http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/whale_vs_fidelity.html

          • Zorr 5.3.1.1.1
            26 October 2009 at 4:58 pm

            I think that is the first time I have ever read through any of the comments on DPF and definitely the first time I have ever read anything by WhaleOil.

            All I have to say is “wow, just wow”. Do these people have their ideological blinkers on or what?

            A few things from that:
            1) If Cam has been on $100k for the past 5 years at 75%, that meant that when he was running his business previously he was paying himself $133k or so. The big problem here is with the nature of self-employment, he could technically jack up the numbers however he wished so as to get maximum payout from the insurance company. Personally, if I wanted to rescue my failing company I am sure a personal income cut of $50k – $100k would definitely provide some breathing room. However, from his comments, it seems that his spending greatly outweighed his means.

            2) I would be greatly interested to know at what point does income save a failing marriage? I can imagine the conversation along the lines of “Here you go hon, take 1/2 my pay check. Just never leave me okay?” “Sure dear, as long as you make sure I get $60k p/a you have me”.

            3) When you submit to being in the public limelight, get used to this kind of scrutiny when your actions bring you to the attention of the media (and, through them, the country). Now, if you wanted to stop people abusing you, maybe you could just release your exact financial details on your blog in the interest of transparency ? That way we could all have a well informed discussion over how you have handled this situation appropriately.

            Somehow, I don’t think that last one will ever happen, but one can dream.

          • Zorr 5.3.1.1.2
            26 October 2009 at 5:02 pm

            Forgot to add this in as well. Consider this an addendum.

            If it is good enough for Paula Bennett to release the earning information of families stuck on various benefits in the interests of making her case, wouldn’t it be appropriate for you to release your own details in the interest of making your case?

            (directed at WhaleOil of course)

          • felix 5.3.1.1.3
            26 October 2009 at 9:35 pm

            Now who would have thought that a rabid rightwing propagandist would turn out to be a MASSIVE fraud?

            LOLz.

            Also I note that Farrar reproduced his selected highlights of the SST article – in his usual style – yet managed to avoid reproducing the sentence quoted above which refers to Corky as a “beneficiary of the welfare state”.

            How strange – he usually likes to include the more provocative quotes. Just ran out of room I guess.

  6. BLiP 6
    26 October 2009 at 2:28 pm

    I wonder if the “prudent underwriter test” will be applied by the Australian insurance companies lining up to gouge ACC. Certainly would explain the $200 million windfall John Key’s old company is promising.

  7. Ianmac 7
    26 October 2009 at 5:41 pm

    I missed the discussion on National Testing while I was away.
    Does anyone know if the Private Schools (that John Key’s kids go to though beyond Primary.) have to carry out National Testing?
    If not then since National Testing is supposed to expose underperforming schools/teacher (and it won’t), then how do you know how well Private Schools do?
    They do get taxpayers money don’t they.
    If they are exempt then that’s at least hypocritical or worse.
    (Given the advantaged intakes, many Private School kids underperform.)

  8. Ianmac 8
    26 October 2009 at 5:54 pm

    And did everyone enjoy Bill English’s Party Political Broadcast advertising the coming TV 7 Economy whitewash?

    • Dan 8.1
      26 October 2009 at 8:42 pm

      I thought someone had called an early election!
      Maybe that’s the plan. Find a sufficient distraction to warrant an early election, and cash in on their high poll ratings. It gets English off the hook, and they would be able to pass all their neanderthal policies in their second term, as they promised.
      Be warned!!

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.