Open mike 27/09/2014

72 comments on “Open mike 27/09/2014 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. phillip ure 1

   27 September 2014 at 7:18 am

   there are two pieces of (involuntary) comedic-writing in the herald today..

   ..one is from the editorial writer roughan..

   ..where he has decided to ignore keys’ admonition not to gloat..

   ..to throw that caution to the wind..

   ..and he almost orgasms all over the page..in his gloating delight..

   ..the prose gets quite purple..

   ..and funny story..in doing so he reveals so much for one who hides behind the anonymity of the editorial-writer..

   ..and of course he also reveals so much of the ethos/imperatives of that rag he writes for..

   ..and roughan sees no dirty politics..

   ..(and we can presume no need for the cavalcade of inquiries underway as a result of that book..inquiries that urgent the chief ombudsman called the allegations..if proven..an attack on our democracy..

   ..but yeah..nah..eh..?…roughan sees none of that..to his eyes it is all so clean..

   ..it sparkles…)

   ..roughan also sees no problems with mass-surveillance..

   ..the list goes on and on..

   ..and his far-right beliefs..and the prescriptions of that rag he editorialises in..

   ..are laid bare..

   ..but the laugh-out-loud/guffaw of the morning is in the latest pile of steaming horse-shit from john armstrong..

   ..it comes at the end..

   ..when after this long list of moans about labour/cunnliffe..

   ..like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a top-hat..

   ..he presents his solution to labours’ woes..

   ..and..steel yrslves…!

   ..it’s shearer…!

   (i know..!..i know..!..bloody hilarious..!..eh..?..)
   • BM 1.1

     27 September 2014 at 7:35 am

     I’d say Stuart Nash with the aim being for 2020, but I’d have a care taker leader for the next 6 months or so.

     Nash is fresh and isn’t tainted like the rest of Labours politicians so he’d probably get a much better reception by the public.

     Seems to get on really well with all sorts of people which is a real plus and he has a positive vibe to him.

     Voters tend to like those sort of qualities.
     • phillip ure 1.1.1

       27 September 2014 at 7:52 am

       hilarious..rightwinger bm comes out for/indicts..

       ..the rightwing outlier..nash..

       (he who rode into parliament on the shoulders of far-right nutjob garth mcvicar..)

       ..i am sure the ever oleaginous nash will warm to yr words/endorsement..

       ..for others..it just confirms what they already know of him..
       • BM 1.1.1.1

         27 September 2014 at 8:08 am

         What, that he’s the best choice?

         Even Martyn Bradbury agrees.
         • phillip ure 1.1.1.1.1

           27 September 2014 at 8:22 am

           @ bm..

           ..really..?

           ..do u have a link for that..?

           ..and anyway..bradbury wants labour to move to the centre/right..

           ..his logic is that will leave room for more left parties to flourish..

           ..and there is a certain logic to that..

           ..but it would render labor down to a slightly larger nz first..

           ..the other imperative of course is that minor parties on the left can bang on about ending poverty..

           ..but if labour aen’t on board..

           ..it ain’t going anywhere..

           ..this forms the basis of my thinking..

           ..that labour can both end poverty..and look after the middle class..

           ..and getting back to yr point..

           ..nash is not the one to do that..

           ..and anyway..he will lose napier next election..

           ..he got no more votes than he did in ’11..

           ..and garth mcvicar carved-off 4,500+ from the tory side of the ledger..

           ..that won’t happen in 2017..

           ..nash will be riding his fire engine right outta town..
           • BM 1.1.1.1.1.1

             27 September 2014 at 8:24 am

             There you go.

             http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/25/why-cunliffe-should-probably-just-let-nash-robertson-win/
             • phillip ure …

               27 September 2014 at 8:59 am

               not so much an endorsement from bradbury then..?

               ..more a surrender-letter..

               ..and definitely nuanced in yr claimed ‘endorsement’ of nash by him..eh..?

               “..Stuart Nash has all the ambition of a piranha in a feeding frenzy..”

               so..bm..you’re bullshitting yet again..eh..?

               ..is it a day ending in a ‘y’..?
             • David H …

               27 September 2014 at 11:16 am

               @BM. The only thing missing from Bradbury’s article was the /sarc at the end. Now did you actually read it? Or like most Trolls did you just skim the title?
               • mickysavage …

                 27 September 2014 at 12:09 pm

                 Why is it that the right wingers continuously tell the left who our leaders should be. We do not do the same to them. It is a waste of precious broadband having to download their idiot comments.
                 • Westiechick …

                   27 September 2014 at 3:27 pm

                   They really, really want Cunliffe gone and either mumbleface back or Robertson who does not command wide support. Why? They don’t care about Labour so it has to be something else.
                 • The Lone Haranguer …

                   27 September 2014 at 7:48 pm

                   Gee the other day, I asked who, in Labour, was actually better that Cunnliffe.

                   Perhaps I should apologise for wasting precious broadband with my idiot comments?? 🙂
   • bearded git 1.2

     27 September 2014 at 7:51 am

     yep i nearly lost my breakfast when he started talking about “honest journalism”.

     Pleeeeese.
   • Michael Nolan 1.3

     27 September 2014 at 8:10 am

     I see Roughan is letting his erection do the writing again today. Were those “Democracy Under Attack” headlines all those years ago actually a declaration of their intent to manufacture opinion?
   • Ffloyd 1.4

     27 September 2014 at 8:38 am

     The herald needs taking out of circulation. Are they stalking David Cunliffe.? How much did Jason Eden get paid to disappear? Do all dear leaders famous sportspeople who tweeted on election day to vote natz get fined?
     I hope Cunliffe gets to stay. If he can weather all the crap thrown at him over the last few months and not descend to gutter politics to try and counter key then he has shown great fortitude. He’s not perfect, but who is. Some of Labour’s policies were good and the country has lost out.
     John key gloated some time ago that he only been pm for so many years and had already’ seen off’ Goff and Shearer.
     Cunliffe going will only add to this perception that he is all powerful. It would be keys worst nightmare for Cunliffe to get back in with full support of EVERYONE!
     • Hami Shearlie 1.4.1

       27 September 2014 at 9:24 am

       Cunliffe has shown he has amazing internal fortitude – he’s made of pretty sterling stuff – He MUST STAY!!
       • bad politics 1.4.1.1

         27 September 2014 at 11:35 am

         Yep, Cunliffe should stay, otherwise the whole circus starts again. Nash is a bit player in the Dirty Politics book, god knows what kinda dirt Slater has on him. Opinion.
     • LynWiper 1.4.2

       27 September 2014 at 12:41 pm

       + 100
   • Hami Shearlie 1.5

     27 September 2014 at 9:21 am

     Just confirms it – John Armstrong has advanced dementia! Cos Shearer was so sparkling and effective the last time right? Shearer is the most dire leader that Labour ever had, no wonder Armstrong wants him back!
2. ianmac 2

   27 September 2014 at 7:28 am

   Watched Prime Time with Sean Plunket last night. Was very interesting with 3 Labour supporters/experts and Sean looking at a positive future for Labour.
   Unable to link to any replay but hope someone else can. It was good.
   • phillip ure 2.1

     27 September 2014 at 7:44 am

     i watched that..i thought how it was quite amusing how plunkett tried to trot out the handbag of cliches he and the corporate-media have been riffing on..

     ..and each of them was logically unpacked/dismantled by one of those three guests..(one of whom was rob salmond..)

     ..i got the feeling it didn’t go at all how plunkett wanted it to..

     ..and the takeaway fact for me came from the labour historian..

     ..who noted the labour pm’s who had faced defeat on their first attempt..

     ..and really..cunnliffe must hang tough..

     ..and not allow himself to be the whipping boy for all that was/is wrong with labour..

     ..in their campaign-strategy/f.p.p-thinking/policy-under-delivering..

     ..’cos the fact still remains..

     ..cunnliffe is labours’ best hope of/for victory in 2017…

     ..robertson is just another running-dog for the right..

     ..one who national/the media want..

     ..the right are scared of cunnliffe/a re-born labour…

     ..so you hang tough there..!..mr cunnliffe..

     ..this too will all pass…

     ..and then you can get on with doing what you do best..

     ..dismembering the bullshit of/from national in parliament..

     ..hanging key up on a hook..

     ..a task robertson has proven himself hopeless at..
     • Hami Shearlie 2.1.1

       27 September 2014 at 9:25 am

       +1000
     • ianmac 2.1.2

       27 September 2014 at 9:35 am

       I don’t like Plunket politics normally but am glad I watched the sanity of the experts. And yes Sean looked a bit miffed that the guests politely rubbished Sean’s negative talking points. It was interesting that he did not bring in Mr Hooten or his ilk in the false name of balance. No shouting down of common sense.
   • karol 2.2

     27 September 2014 at 7:52 am

     Thanks for the outline. I can never bring myself to watch Plunket. I understood Prime TV doesn’t do any ondemand of their shows.
     • David H 2.2.1

       27 September 2014 at 11:22 am

       They are owned by Sky, and hence you have to pay for their drivel if you want it on demand.
3. Pat O'Dea 3

   27 September 2014 at 7:53 am

   David Cunliffe is expected to stand down as Labour leader when he fronts the party’s ruling council today.
   He has been under pressure to resign since a brutal caucus showdown this week…..

   Tracy Watkins

   If true, this is terrible news, and an undermining of the democratic will of the membership by a right wing cabal prepared to risk the destruction of the Labour Party for personal advancement.

   I knew that the ABC dominated caucus would make it impossible for David Cunliffe to lead them. And that they would do there very best to over undermine the democratic decision of the Labour membership.

   And the fact that this scum has leaked the possibility of his resignation today, to the media shows that they want to cement it in, ‘He who can shape the argument, wins the argument’.

   Faced with this total right wing revolt

   What should David Cunliffe do?

   Respect the democratic decision of the membership?

   Give in? Overturning the democratic decision of the membership?

   Or stick it out?

   The caucus have made the situation impossible.

   If David Cunliffe wants to continue, he has to abandon his revolting caucus and seek support somewhere else.

   No one can continue when they are completely isolated, effectively without support, so David Cunliffe needs to seek it outside of his caucus. He has a few options.

   Tracey Watkins lays out what she thinks they should be.

   His options are to resign and seek a fresh mandate by standing again; resign and pull out of the race; or resign and take time to consider his position by leaving the timing of a leadership race in the hands of the council.
   The third option would give the council room to delay a leadership contest till after a formal review into the party’s disastrous electionperformance has been held.
   Cunliffe’s deputy, David Parker, would be the obvious caretaker leader in the interim.

   Tracy Watkins

   David Parker is the black prince behind all the anti Cunliffe feeling in the Labour caucus, in my opinion there is no way that this right wing back stabber should be allowed anywhere near the leadership, even on an interim basis.
   • Pat O'Dea 3.1

     27 September 2014 at 1:11 pm

     UPDATE

     Tracy Watkins is at it again:

     “Robertson-Ardern ticket takes shape for Labour”

     Tracy Watkins

     Is Watkins a Labour caucus member?

     Is she a fly on the wall?

     Who is it, who keeps leaking the ABC narrative to her?
     • Pat O'Dea 3.1.1

       27 September 2014 at 1:31 pm

       Cunliffe needs to take a hard line with his mutinous caucus.
       If I was in Cunliffe’s shoes I would walk into that meeting and say, “I have decided to form a shadow cabinet with the Greens. Are you in, or out?”
     • Ben Adam 3.1.2

       27 September 2014 at 2:10 pm

       If Robertson-Ardern is the ticket, then it may be prudent for political expediency for Robertson to quickly propose to Ardern with a ring, have an urgent drive-by hetero sexual wedding and come out singing Kumbaya for popular votes. Otherwise, it could be an arduous uphill task going simply by my instincts.

       But on the contrary, being gay could actually be an advantage in the modern world. Not sure, though.

       Personally, I have no problem. I am just thinking practically of the ‘real’ world.
       • Westiechick 3.1.2.1

         27 September 2014 at 3:35 pm

         Being progressive makes NZ feel good about ourselves I think. His being gay probably has as many pluses as minuses and is not the reason for him not being the one right now (the reason for me is that I am not over Cunliffe). It would be like saying the Democrats shouldn’t have gone with Obama as he wouldn’t appeal to racists.
4. karol 4

   27 September 2014 at 8:07 am

   Excellent and diplomatic responses from Marama Davidson on the Paul Henry show last night (sans Paul Henry) about Labour leadership – she said it was up to Labour and she hoped they would be a strong opposition like the Greens – or something like that.

   The Paul Henry show journalist (Penfold) was pretty pathetic, making it all about what the LP caucus want, and ignoring the NZLP members’ freferences. She also was superficial in saying election results showed the electorate had rejected Cunliffe.
5. Adrian 5

   27 September 2014 at 8:11 am

   Early morning clarity bought a revelation of sorts to me. I finally realised why people don’t vote,.
   By last night I had come to terms with the fact that if Robertson prevails that I could not vote for him or Labour and that’s after 45 years and thousands of dollars in donations.
   I will not vote at all.
   I could not live with myself for voting Nat, the Greens are one-dimensional and while I admire Winston’s longevity he does attract serious space-cadets.
   I have been proud that Labour has been on the right side of all the big issues in my lifetime, United Nations, workers rights, Vietnam, nuclear testing, apartheid,gay rights etc etc.
   I have bought my children up with the belief that it is a duty to support those less fortunate than ourselves and fortunately they have adopted those principles.
   But if Grant Robertson thinks he is the answer after being comprehensivly beaten 14 months ago then I will walk away.
   He did not get a majority in caucus, that is a myth, he got 16 votes out of 32 on the first ballot, I don’t know what he got on the second but it would not have been resounding.
   I have heard that he is rude and dismissive towards those he does not agree with.
   Winning bloody expensive elections unfortunately requires corporate donations, Robertson and Barnett as openly gay men will not get a cracker.
   Jacinta Ardern as his proposed deputy will be subject to even more disgusting vitriol than Helen Clark had to put up with over her childlessness, ( mid-thirties, no kids, no husband or partner ) the arseholes are waiting in ambush.
   A Labour Party with a gay Leader, gay smeared deputy, gay fundraiser and organiser, the Gay Party
   Electoral fucking suicide.
   Hullo sub 10%, if lucky.
   • BM 5.1

     27 September 2014 at 8:18 am

     I agree.
     Which leaves Shearer or Nash.
     • David H 5.1.1

       27 September 2014 at 3:19 pm

       BM are you dense or can you not read? For the umpteenth time Nash ONLY got in because McVicar split the right vote. And as for Shearer yeah right, been there, and tried him.

       Now I wrote this really slow, so you shouldn’t have trouble understanding it this time around.
   • karol 5.2

     27 September 2014 at 8:18 am

     I can understand your anger.

     Apparently Ardern told the Paul Henry show that she is not interested in being leader – not now nor at any time in the future.

     Sexuality has got nothing to do with who is best leader.

     The Greens are multi-dimensional – they campaign on 3 planks, covering a range of issue: economy, fair society (issues of income, fairness at work); environment. it includes a focus on local issues re governance, transport, etc, plus international issues, GCSB, TPPA, asset sales, etc, etc. If they increase the number of MPs, it will strengthen the range of the areas they work on.
     • BM 5.2.1

       27 September 2014 at 8:39 am

       They can’t get much more than 10%.

       I put that down to their fundamentalist fervor and the lack of ability to compromise or negotiate.

       The greens, my way or the highway approach to politics rather dooms them to political oblivion.
       • karol 5.2.1.1

         27 September 2014 at 8:46 am

         I put that down to their fundamentalist fervor and the lack of ability to compromise or negotiate.

         Myths.

         Exhibits A, B and C – MoUs, and the fact that National rejected any further MoUs last time round.

         It was the Greens that asked to work with Labour.
     • Foreign waka 5.2.2

       27 September 2014 at 1:36 pm

       Hi Karol, sorry but for many sexuality and politics do matter. And if you want the majority concentrating on politics its best to not have any focus on sexuality. Agree?
   • bearded git 5.3

     27 September 2014 at 9:18 am

     Adrian, agreed with reservations about your gay comments.

     I think the final caucus vote after Jones dropped out was something like 18-16* Robertson/Cunliffe but the incredibly biased msm NEVER report this because it doesn’t suit their agenda.

     *somebody out there will remember the actual numbers.
   • Mark 5.4

     27 September 2014 at 9:42 am

     Another recruit. Welcome aboard.
   • Brokenback 5.5

     27 September 2014 at 12:13 pm

     Dear David Cunliffe
     Many of the points above cover the points I wish to raise.

     I differ from Adrian in one major respect, until last week I have not voted labour since 1984.
     I voted in the hope that we would get a progressive Left coalition whose compromise of common Policy would urgently address the failings of 30 years of regressive thinking.
     The massively funded Dirty tricks machine came after you continuously since the leadership contest.
     The lack of support and sharing of load by your caucus has been criminal, but not unexpected as the desire by the membership to be rid of the centrist career caucus is pervading.
     The increased intensity of media attacks post-election by the dirty tricks machine is your greatest compliment and the abiding reason why you should retain the leadership.
     Why?
     Its patently obvious that its you& your supporters the Right fears the most .

     Those of us blessed with an IQ that exceeds room temperature can see clearly the shower of S***t that 19th century economic theory and 20th century “Growth” mindset is doing globally and the client state ,’yes its all for sale’ mentality of Brandkey is accelerating the demise of our society.

     To you and the doubters , reflect on the fact that you & you alone in the Party are capable of managing an electoral triumph in 2017 .
     Reflect also ,if that if every member of the caucus found themselves in that most hypothetical situation – out of a job and seeking new employment , you & you alone would be recruited instantly by any number of Business or NGO organisations , locally or internationally , whilst the rest would languish amongst the formerly employed for considerable time.
     One more thing , Andrew Little , pick up the phone and call the EPMU and use your formidable skills to garner the support that Cunliffe needs.
     Your leadership ambitions need a term or two in Government before the electorate & the media will consider you without a similar derision to the Gays & non-breeders.
   • Draco T Bastard 5.6

     27 September 2014 at 2:22 pm

     the Greens are one-dimensional

     No they’re not but I’m sure that National are happy that you think that they are as it’s the fallacious message that they’ve been spreading about the Greens over the last few years.

     Winning bloody expensive elections unfortunately requires corporate donations,

     No it doesn’t as I’ve shown on here before.
6. swordfish 6

   27 September 2014 at 8:16 am

   Great shot illustrating Open Mike today. Good old Red Dwarf

   Kryton: Mr Seymour, Sir, you’re a Smeeeeee.

   Seymour: I’m a “Smeeeeee” ?

   Kryton: Mr Seymour, you’re a Smeeeeee(g) heeeeee(ad)
   • swordfish 6.1

     27 September 2014 at 8:24 am

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXKlC8ph7mM
     • Rosie 6.1.1

       27 September 2014 at 8:40 am

       Lols. I had a smile when I saw David “rimmer” Seymour on the cover of Open Mike today. David Seymour shall be known as Rimmer from now on.

       Smeg head. Word of the day.
       • boldsirbrian 6.1.1.1

         27 September 2014 at 9:17 am

         ( boldsirbrian ….previously known as brian …. conflicting with other “Brian”s )

         @ Rosie (5.1.1)

         First an acknowledgement. I consistently refer to the Prime Minister as Dirty John. I will continue to do so until an inquiry (with terms of reference accepted by the Opposition) into Dirty Politics is completed, and in the event that he is exonerated. (btw, Where IS Jason Ede?)

         However, I would prefer that Seymour be left alone from name calling. He is sincere, and believes in the policies he promotes. He has done nothing wrong. He has got his position as a gift from Dirty John.

         I cannot recall any policy he has promoted that I agree with. The only positive I can say about the ACt party is that it is a couple of millimetres up from the bottom rung of a long ladder, where the Conservatives reside.

         But Seymour is not the enemy. If he went, there would be others like Jamie Whyte who would fill the vacuum with equal nonsense. The policies that Seymour promotes are what should be targeted.
       • Richard 6.1.1.2

         27 September 2014 at 9:23 am

         same Rosie, like twins, AND have you heard the way he speaks.
       • swordfish 6.1.1.3

         27 September 2014 at 9:39 am

         Dwayne Dibley ……..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6vU_Urxgbg

         And Mr Rimmer as a Green Party activist…..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WgUktfdDy4&list=PL84D1DB7FE317550A
7. Pat O'Dea 7

   27 September 2014 at 8:44 am

   David Cunliffe needs to take his inspiration for his way forward from what he would have needed to have done if Labour had won the election and form a shadow cabinet with the Greens. Caucusing with the Greens would be the best way for David Cunliffe to counter and sideline the ABC creeps and also be very good practice for the future Left wing Labour/Green Government.
8. Richard 8

   27 September 2014 at 8:53 am

   Never fear, The Herald panders to the Key groupies, it’s a third at best, rate newspaper, I certainly read it for sheer entertainment concerning their political posts. What a Joke, they are the main NZ paper? it is remarkable and boy do they talk shit. Really, what a joke of a newspaper, I’d rather read the UK Sun.

   Reading Armstrong is like reading the writings of an insane man going through a bad patch. In touch with reality, one wonders, I watched him skulking around the Hagar book launch, looking like Gollum seeking his precious. Pathetic fellow, and O’Sullivan thinks she’s NZ press royalty, views clearly pro hard right philosophy.

   Honestly all we read in the Herald is attacks on all other parties except Act and Nats. I mean they give Rodney Hyde and Bob jones opinion pieces to spout whatever they want. It’s a joke.

   The rich have to much of a disproportionate representation for policy direction and access to government. they control the media, therefore controlling the population. Democracy? FJK, I think not.
   • bearded git 8.1

     27 September 2014 at 12:14 pm

     But Richard, Armstrong suggested Shearer as leader. What could possibly go wrong? (sarc)
9. Morrissey 9

   27 September 2014 at 9:06 am

   “There are some really, really vile people out there.”—Mary Beard
   Most of them work for the Murdoch empire
   Radio New Zealand National, Saturday 27 September 2014

   In a mostly excellent interview with Cambridge Univ. Professor of Classics Mary Beard, Kim Hill let herself down when she carelessly stated that the online trolls who abused Mary Beard’s physical appearance were “much viler” than the likes of A.A. Gill, who instigated the abuse. Normally, Gill reserves his venom for hapless but anonymous waiters and chefs; his attitude to powerful and intelligent people is normally one of groveling and toadying. Something about Mary Beard led him to go to his (rather limited and uninteresting) grab-bag of misogynistic smears. Ostensibly, it was her long grey hair and imperfect teeth that enraged him, but I suspect the real seat of his hatred was her principled opposition to the war-mongering U.K. government, which she expressed forcefully in the London Review of Books in October 2001. [1]

   I sent Kim the following email, which I am pleased to say she read out on air straight after the interview….

   “There are some really, really vile people out there.”—Mary Beard

   Dear Kim,

   You said that the trolls who swore at Mary Beard online were “much viler” than A.A. Gill, who had used his Sunday Times platform to mock her hair, teeth and general appearance. In fact, it is people like Gill, that buffoonish, ignorant, malicious restaurant critic-cum-political commentator, carefully constructing their insults from positions of power and privilege, protected by the media organizations that employ them, who set the tone of these campaigns of abuse.

   As Mary Beard pointed out in her interview, “There are some really, really vile people out there.” And the fact is: we know who they are.

   Yours sincerely,

   Morrissey Breen
   Northcote Point

   [1] http://www.lrb.co.uk/v23/n19/nine-eleven-writers/11-september
   • ianmac 9.1

     27 September 2014 at 10:35 am

     Yep. Heard that. Agreed.
     For instance we know who Armstrong & O’Sullivan are.
     Vile ones in leading the Slater-like trashing of good people.
   • Colonial Viper 9.2

     27 September 2014 at 2:18 pm

     Good job too Morrissey.
10. Richard 10

    27 September 2014 at 9:18 am

    So three more years, it’s sinking in now, such a long time, he’s already has 6 years of promises, and excuses and lies all the way, what happened to his dream of a brighter future, easy to say, hard as hell to achieve eh Key.

    This years low Fonterra pay out, which NZ seems to run on, small businesses will suffer, a lot of cash flow lost. Man we are in for rough times. Rough I say, batten down the hatches, Car and farm equipment dealerships will become rare as rocking horse shit. it’s all going to get very dire for rural NZ farming towns soon.

    The backlash will start eventually, I have faith Key will get rid of himself as his failed ideology will see NZ slide ever further downhill on most measurements of government performance. Expect more outrageous crimes, 25% off benefits they promised.

    National caring for their wallets business as usual.
    • bearded git 10.1

      27 September 2014 at 9:43 am

      Yep Richard, one of the few consolations of the result is that Key has inherited a self-inflicted poisoned chalice.
11. Adrian 11

    27 September 2014 at 9:27 am

    Karol, of course sexuality has nothing to do with leadership ability but it has everything to do with perception, and politics is all perception.
    The perception that the leader favours their own particular private politics mostly, be they a gay, a woman,an Aucklander, a South Islander, a righty, a lefty, a unionist.
    The problem is when the perception is that they have surrounded themselves with others of similiar persuasion.
    Then you have CAPTURE.
    And voters do not like that, particularly if it does not reflect their own circumstances.
    It makes them uncomfortable and they won’t vote for you.
12. anker 12

    27 September 2014 at 10:12 am

    Hi can anyone supply me with the link to the Keep David Cunliffe page on face book?

    I don’t go on face book as such, but do have a profile, so maybe I should just log on myself. If anyone can help me let me know.

    If people on this site want to keep Cunliffe, best thing is to join Labour its not that expensive and vote (hopefully we will get the chance) and sign the facebook page.
    • Olwyn 12.1

      27 September 2014 at 10:32 am

      https://www.facebook.com/cunliffeforleader
      Here is the link.
13. Ffloyd 13

    27 September 2014 at 10:32 am

    I finally became a financial member of Labour after waiting many months to see if they would become unified enough to be strong in the election. Eventually, I thought they had done this to a reasonable degree and joined. Now I want my money back if Cunliffe is rolled.
    I like Shearer where he is. He is good at what he knows. Grant Robertson would be open to every muck raking, lying innuendos that key and his rabble could find. They would end up making him into the George Michael of NZ. Nothing would be too low for them to stoop to.
    Leave Cunliffe in charge.
14. NickS 14

    27 September 2014 at 11:20 am

    If the Labour Caucus dumps Cunliffe I’ll be switching to the Greens next election, because you can guarantee if Cunliffe is rolled Labour will swing back to the right to chase the “centre”. Instead of building more robust policy and going back to Clark’s strategy of targeting the party vote and start campaigning earlier in the three year cycle.
    • newsense 14.1

      27 September 2014 at 12:28 pm

      I guess the leadership wouldn’t be too unhappy with that if they are able to hoover up some votes from Winston and National. But how a chap who’s whole life has been in parliamentary and political circles and comes third in the party vote in his electorate is going to be able to present as a better option than Winston Peters or Key to the right of the party will be interesting, considering that has been all we’ve heard from Cunliffe opponents.

      He’s never been a minister of anything, though I suppose he can say that if he’s doesn’t become leader he might never be the minister of anything…

      Still it will be a completely fresh party. It will make 4 leaders in four years and begin to put Labour in some dangerous territory. If things start to go wrong? Changing the leader again would just continue the revolving door…I guess if Grant has got it he’s got at least until the next election. However, he should be spending a long time in South and West Auckland if he has, and in the Maori seats. Otherwise it comes across as this (Wellington) city liberal with a leadership team whose constituencies heavily supports the Greens, and who has avoided a vote from the party after being rejected by them the first time. Not having that support in my book, is just as bad or actually much worse than not having the support of Mallard, Shearer, Goff and Cosgrove, say.

      Also, and I hate to say it- it is all about the fundraising. Seemed like they did start earlier, but couldn’t keep up the spend. Business is good for businesses, so there isn’t a lot of cash for Labour. Did think the two advertising campaigns presented a stark contrast as well. I liked Vote Positive and the posters that went up with policy, but the TV presentations seemed a bit weak and not flashy enough.
      • alwyn 14.1.1

        27 September 2014 at 12:46 pm

        You seem to think that Robertson is bad.
        I also see that the newspapers seem to be pushing Arden for deputy. She would seem to be even worse. At least Robertson managed to win in the electorate.
        Can anyone tell me why Arden seems to attract supporters? What has she ever done, inside or outside Parliament?
        • newsense 14.1.1.1

          27 September 2014 at 1:07 pm

          Where did I say he was bad? Fresh start was the word I used.

          However he needs to connect with the base that voted for Labour at this election and make sure they are happy. Is it any better a leader with an unhappy base than one with an unhappy caucus? Obvious statement I would have thought.

          To also restate, this doesn’t seem like a move to the right like all the knowledgable pundits have been saying.
    • Foreign waka 14.2

      27 September 2014 at 1:44 pm

      Then they must get Phil Geoff as a leader? He would fit that bill.
    • halfcrown 14.3

      27 September 2014 at 3:11 pm

      “If the Labour Caucus dumps Cunliffe I’ll be switching to the Greens next election,”

      Same here. May not be the Greens but it certainly won’t be Labour. They can go and get fucked.
15. Clemgeopin 15

    27 September 2014 at 12:48 pm

    I think Cunliffe should stay firm and continue as leader or go for a fresh mandate from the membership. Those MPs who are not happy, are free to resign and be independent or start a new party.

    After that, Labour should review their policies. Discard some, fine tune others and bring out new ones.

    In my opinion, Labour needs to move to the centre in economic matters, but left in social justice matters and pragmatic in environmental policies.

    Capital Gains Tax and Retirement Age Change : Rethinking, debate and public input (through online submissions or indicative referendum) is very necessary for these two policies before the public can feel comfortable to accept the required changes, if any.
16. Foreign waka 16

    27 September 2014 at 1:51 pm

    A lot of comments seem to pander to week knee syndrome. It seems to be rather so that Mr Cunliffe must have hit a raw nerve with the opposition, why else do they have to go after him all guns blazing even if it costs a nat ministers job before the election? The fact that the rank and file labor caucus reacts as they are just shows learned behaviors. Think about it. Something must have scared the pants off the opposition who in turn paid in kind and the ABC’s where just falling for it. Perhaps the logic of sustainability was just too much as it would allow the country to remain in charge of its own destiny?
17. greywarbler 17

    27 September 2014 at 5:39 pm

    An official look at the Fed and Goldmans. One statement – For 100 years there has never been transparency.
    http://www.propublica.org/article/carmen-segarras-secret-recordings-from-inside-new-york-fed

    Where Key got ethicstraining?
    • joe90 17.1

      27 September 2014 at 5:57 pm

      Carmen Segarra was sacked because they had, quote –

      “lost confidence in [her] ability to not substitute [her] own judgment for everyone else’s.”

      Fuckers.

      Also, the transcript of the tapes:

      http://www.thisamericanlife.org/sites/default/files/TAL536_transcript.pdf

      This too:

      I don’t want to spoil the revelations of “This American Life”: It’s far better to hear the actual sounds on the radio, as so much of the meaning of the piece is in the tones of the voices — and, especially, in the breathtaking wussiness of the people at the Fed charged with regulating Goldman Sachs. But once you have listened to it — as when you were faced with the newly unignorable truth of what actually happened to that NFL running back’s fiancee in that elevator — consider the following:

      1. You sort of knew that the regulators were more or less controlled by the banks. Now you know.

      2. The only reason you know is that one woman, Carmen Segarra, has been brave enough to fight the system. She has paid a great price to inform us all of the obvious. She has lost her job, undermined her career, and will no doubt also endure a lifetime of lawsuits and slander.

      So what are you going to do about it? At this moment the Fed is probably telling itself that, like the financial crisis, this, too, will blow over. It shouldn’t.

      http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-26/the-secret-goldman-sachs-tapes
      • greywarbler 17.1.1

        27 September 2014 at 6:18 pm

        Fascinating.
        Advice to Carmen. I want to help you with your career, I want you to be successful.
        It’s really about how you are perceived. You have more sharper elbows, you are breaking eggs. Have a sense of humility. If I was a new person I would say Carmen you are very arrogant. You use ‘definitely’ too often. A lot of it is consensus building, ‘hey what do you think.’
        I’m not questioning your knowledge-base.
        But she needed to be more relational, quickly, in order to be (Carmen) ‘Not fired.’
        Conflicts of interest were common and not handled properly.

        Carmen complains about push-back. Peers – She asked direct questions, that needed to be asked, that weren’t wrong to ask. She is told that notes she took at meetings were wrong. That things written down were not said, or were not meant as definite statements. She is forced to put a small recording device on her wrist to ensure that her notes are correct.

        The other business-line employees are in group-think it seems. They feel uncomfortable to state what they think before they know what their senior management think, not to be too different from their peers.

        Carmen thought – The Fed had the authority to be a good regulator but was afraid to use its own power.
18. greywarbler 18

    27 September 2014 at 6:32 pm

    Many of the Fed regulators who leave go to work for the banks they are overseeing.
    Carmen was fired. She has taken legal recourse and been turned down. One report on her firing says that it was because of her own faults not because of her unpopular findings by the Fed conciliators.
19. joe90 19

    27 September 2014 at 9:07 pm

    There is resistance.

    Given that parliament seems to be on a path to deliver a bigger surveillance state and less means for whistleblowers to expose its abuses or for journalists to scrutinise it, a bit of push back from the community might have been expected. This is, after all, a pretty important principle: public interest disclosure and press freedom.

    Yet nobody, apart from the industry, the Greens and a couple of crossbench parliamentarians stood up for press freedom. The freedom warriors of the Coalition, and the accountability merchants of the ALP, waved the restrictions through without a backward glance. The community as a whole declined to be outraged.

    […]

    But what I am saying is: wake the hell up. I have never been more resolved, in 18 years of practising journalism, of the absolute importance of our function in a democracy. I have never been more sure that the opportunity cost associated with doing this job is, actually, worth it.

    I believe we matter. I know I’m not alone in that belief. Yet we act as though we don’t matter, and facts don’t matter, and truth doesn’t matter. Call this Dispatch this particular weekend a love letter to my profession, and an outpouring of grief at its failings.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/26/the-acid-test-australian-journalists-must-ask-what-agenda-they-serve

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/22/australias-counter-terror-laws-will-restrict-our-free-speech-and-free-press

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS