Rights and privilege

Written By: - Date published: 8:53 pm, May 4th, 2011 - 218 comments
Categories: class war - Tags: ,

Righto. I’ve just watched the debate between Harawira and Brash on Close Up and about five minutes fifty into the second part Brash had the gall to challenge Harawira on whether he believed everyone should have the same rights.

The thing is rights in the real world mean one thing if you’re a millionaire ex governor of the reserve bank backed into a party leadership by other multi-millionaires and another if you’re working class maori or pretty much anyone else outside of the wealthy elite that Brash stands for.

There’s a strand of commentary that thinks Brash’s anti-Maori dogwhistling is just convenient political cover – a sort of vote gathering exercise that will help enable his far-right economic agenda.

Personally I believe the dogwhistling and the neo-liberalism are more intertwined than that. The same social Darwinist impulse that leads Don Brash to believe people who are not rich and powerful like him and his mates have nobody to blame but themselves also leads him to believe that most Maori have nobody to blame but themselves for not being rich and powerful like him and his mates. And he wants to hold onto that privilege.

It’s a funny attitude for a man who has been paid more taxpayers’ money in his life than most Maori workers would see in a lifetime. And for a damn sight less value.

On a more commentariat level I agree with Sammy at the Dim Post – Brash looked old and odd while Harawira came across as a lot more reasonable than most viewers previously familiar only with the “Hone is a monster” line would have expected.

218 comments on “Rights and privilege ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. millsy 1
    4 May 2011 at 10:15 pm

    There’s a strand of commentary that thinks Brash’s anti-Maori dogwhistling is just convenient political cover – a sort of vote gathering exercise that will help enable his far-right economic agenda.

    I have always thought that — There is a reason why Brash chose the ‘need not privilige’ speech in ’04, its to get everyone to sit up and notice him, and then reel them in to neo-liberal social darwinism. I dont think Brash belives in that maori bashing crap, The reality is that iwi ownership of things like national parks, SOE’s, health and education services, state housing and so forth, caters to his privatisation fetish.

  2. ianmac 2
    4 May 2011 at 10:20 pm

    Hone was on Native Affairs on Monday (repeat Sunday 5:30) by Julian with Peta linked back in Parliament. A good interview compared to the shouting match on Close up. Hone has a philosophy whether one agree or not.

    I saw the 2nd part on Closeup and thought of the hammering Phil gets for not being charismatic enough yet Don Brash is a tired old man who shouts a lot and hasn’t changed a drop of his dogma from the 80s-90s. Hone again, in spite of a poorly run interview, delivered his ideas well.

    But heaven help us if Closeup gets the job of running Nov Election sessions!

    • Deadly_NZ 2.1
      4 May 2011 at 10:42 pm

      Yeah but whats the options?? the TV3 radical righties Garner and Plonker?? Sounds like a double act.

  3. Fat Uncle 3
    4 May 2011 at 10:28 pm

    It’s a Maori translation service of the National party.

  4. Jenny 4
    4 May 2011 at 10:35 pm

    Brash aspires to be the representative for the electorate of Epsom, the most wealthy and privileged electorate in the country. What a joke to claim he stands for equality.

    If he really stood for equality he wouldn’t be looking for support from a privileged elite.

    Maybe if Brash was standing in Otara or seeking support for some other working class electorate.

    But Brash’s mission is to promote the interests of the privileged and wealthy and his targeted wealthy constituents know it.

    • Dan 4.1
      5 May 2011 at 4:12 pm

      I know I’m on a month stand-down (Although I don’t remember when it happened, so given I’m not saying anything inflammatory here, I’m hoping I won’t get perma’d) but Brash won’t stand in Epsom. He’ll stand in Tamaki. Mark my words.

      [You’ve respected the ban, It has only 4 days to run, I’m sure Lynn won’t mind if I lift it a bit early. — r0b]

  5. Fat Uncle 5
    4 May 2011 at 10:36 pm

    And another pearler from Brash

    “the Treaty is unambiguously clear”

  6. Rodel 6
    4 May 2011 at 10:41 pm

    Shagger Brash!

    Can’t believe that this unelected silly irrelevant man is now the leader of ACT.Rodney (bless him-not) was at least elected. Brash has been rejected so many times…. frankly and yet he still thinks he has credibility! Incredible!

    Brash’s historical infamy as a hollow man apart, how dare he think he has any authority dare I say mana, in the political spectrum of 2011- and what a bunch of idiots, losers, puny little pawns the ACT MPs are to let him become the leader. Not one of them…not one….. had the nerve to stand up to this epitome of a hollow man, a man devoid of anything but minimalist thought.

    It defies logic…. I didn’t have much respect for ACT MPs before, but what a bunch of yes man/women pushovers. They’ve cravenly swung from Rodney’s coat-tails to Brash’s coat-tails or somewhere anatomically contiguous.

    Even Rodney rolled over like a puppy and said he was “proud to get Don installed as the leader.”
    My God— how would they stand up to Donald Trump…. or my nana!

    ACT and its hanger on Don has shown utter disrespect and contempt for the apparently unimportant voters of Epsom and indeed all New Zealanders. Epsom residents should just boycott the whole election in disgust!!

    There. I feel much better now.

  7. Mac1 7
    4 May 2011 at 10:55 pm

    Rodel, telling people to not vote is often a ploy of the Right. Remember the slogan “Don’t vote. It only encourages them”? Who benefited from that in 2008?
    Better to vote in a way that expresses your feelings towards those who show contempt and disrespect for voters, and vote for those who still respect our democracy and our Kiwi way of life and principles of fairness, equality, and caring for those less well off.

    • Rodel 7.1
      4 May 2011 at 11:08 pm

      Yeah Thanks.You’re right. ACT supporters if there are any left in Epsom, should defile-is that the word? -their voting papers Guess I just got caught up in a wave of helpless disbelief that ANYONE could think that Brash has credibility. But I still feel better for it.

  8. ak 8
    4 May 2011 at 11:03 pm

    Read The Hollow Men (around page 80 onwards) to see how they did it last time, and how they’re doing it again. Note paticularly the “work done on the media” noted by Brownlee on p 88.

    The pure, documented evil of unadulterated, intentional hatemongering.

    Hooton planted the seed (p 81, backed off later, to his slim credit) then Keenan, Bassett, McCully and Brash with indelible blood on their hands forever.

    Do the right thing, Goffy, and reclaim the high ground you inherited. Starter for 10: “What special privilege? Name one law that is not currently for all.”

    Let Key squirm between Tari and Bonageezer. Ignore the games and honour the blood of those who put you there. Last chance to stand up.

    • ianmac 8.1
      5 May 2011 at 9:57 am

      Ak: “Do the right thing, Goffy, and reclaim the high ground you inherited. Starter for 10: “What special privilege? Name one law that is not currently for all.”
      I have asked repeatedly all the experts who abound on blogs, just what are these special Laws? No replies so far and yet it is a central plank for Brash/Act.

      • PeteG 8.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 10:06 am

        I think you might find there are plenty of laws not “for all”, eg:

        – age specific laws for children and for pensioners
        – tax laws that vary depending how much you earn, and how you earn it and declare it
        – property laws that are different for New Zealanders versus foreign companies and citizens
        – gender laws like maternity leave
        – laws that allow for freedom to choose if you belong to a workers union but not for a student union

        • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 10:11 am

          Yeah whoever made up that law that its illegal to screw 14 year olds, unless you are 14 yourself? So you think it’s inconvenient that its not “one law for all”, perhaps these prejudicial laws should be repealed!

        • Carol 8.1.1.2
          5 May 2011 at 10:18 am

          gender laws like maternity leave

          Right, so under a Brash-led government, I look forward to men being pregnant and getting the benefit of maternity leave. There’s no ends to what Brash’s power and magic can achieve!

          Or, could it be that various differnces between people require some differentiations within the laws, whether the differences are based in biology, culture or socio-economic inequalities?

          • PeteG 8.1.1.2.1
            5 May 2011 at 10:36 am

            Yes, I think One Law For All is a nonsense slogan, it seems to usually translate as
            “don’t give the bloody Maori any advantage over me”.

            No one proposing it seems prepared to explain it, they just recite it.

            • todd 8.1.1.2.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 4:14 pm

              It’s a bit like the “War on terror” slogan. Designed to placate those who oppose and give an escuse for atrocities but lacking in any real substance or basis in reality. The “one law for all” theory will simply be utilized to ignore treaty claims. That’s what it’s real meaning is, Don Brash thinks that the theft of lands and subjugation of indigenous people is acceptable because to make restitution will cost people like him money. It always comes down to money for people like him.

              Hone pretty much trounced Brash in that debate. Don was left going but but but, and really didn’t have any good argument. He clearly has a slack understanding of the treaty and works on saying whatever will please the public. Hone showed his true sentiment when he talked about Maori being disadvantaged, particularly his insight and wisdom on many topics that Don had no answer for. Apart from denying that the issues exist that is.

              I thought it was rather conceited and arrogant that Brash complained Hone had interrupted him, when it was completely the opposite. Hone handled it well and treated Don like the fool he is. He dominated the debate with succinct and informed statements, something Brash is clearly incapable of.

              To say Hone looked reasonable besides Brash is a bit funny. Hitler would look reasonable next to Brash, if he was to speak his mind. Acts real policies are all about discrimination and elitism. Just like their new (old) leader, it is outdated and irrelevant. Don Brash is a sad old senile white man that will retain his prejudices until he is put back in the crypt… Permanently. Politically I think that will be at the next election.

        • ianmac 8.1.1.3
          5 May 2011 at 10:44 am

          Agreed about your list Pete G. So are they the ones that Brash means? Wants to get rid of all those pesky ones? Or does he mean the racial ones like um- like ah- frankly there must be one law for all.

    • Sam 8.2
      5 May 2011 at 1:53 pm

      The Kaimoana Customary Fishing Regulations 1998.

      • McFlock 8.2.1
        5 May 2011 at 4:36 pm

        Too true.

        After all, when England makes treaties with European nations it tries to formalise its compliance with said treaty immediately, but in the case of Maori England and its subsidiary governments took 150 years to formalise allowing the “full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess”.

  9. Green Left 9
    4 May 2011 at 11:20 pm

    ‘It’s a Maori translation service of the National party.’

    pure gold

  10. Green Left 10
    4 May 2011 at 11:22 pm

    Maybe Matt McCarten should stand in Epsom…

  11. Colonial Viper 11
    4 May 2011 at 11:24 pm

    I’m guessing Don’s media handlers from National asked him to keep repeating “One Law for All” like it was the slogan for a new pack of cornflakes. Right wing, white cornflakes which come with a free dog whistle.

    Guess we now know what a centre plank of ACTs platform is this year.

    Good on Hone for framing Don’s leadership of ACT as an undemocratic corporate take over, when Don tried to get traction on Hone calling for a by-election.

  12. tc 12
    4 May 2011 at 11:25 pm

    And they’re off and running folks……Sideshow keep to your lines and look moderate….MSM keep slagging off ‘unelectable’ goff….oh it’s all coming along nicely for the Hollowmen’s puppet masters.

    Crosby Textor and associates take a bow that’s damm fine work and you’ve really got this kiwi politico scene down pat now as you come up to your 3rd general election.

    • Colonial Viper 12.1
      5 May 2011 at 12:20 am

      This work would be impossible for Crosby Textor if we had strong independent and public news media channels.

  13. Mac1 13
    4 May 2011 at 11:36 pm

    “Name one law that is not currently for all.”

    A great question, ak. I called a truly nasty and sarcastic SOB on this at an election meeting in 2008. He wanted to know what the candidates were going to do about special laws benefitting Maori. When asked to name these laws, he postured for five minutes and could only come up with the enactment of Maori seats.

    There was another bloke at another meeting who button-holed me about “the bloody Merries.” As he blustered on, I noticed that his fly was open. It took, I tell you, superhuman self control not to tell him that at least Maori know how to keep their trousers zipped in public, and knew a bit more besides.

    The same meeting was full of farmers who nodded in solemn agreement with a questioner who swore that climate change was no concern where they came from because it had been the coldest winter in years.

    The worry is that we have one planet that is currently for all. Especially, the one we share with thinkers like these.

  14. matt 14
    4 May 2011 at 11:38 pm

    I don’t subscribe to either of their views, but in some regards I think a ‘one law for all’ would be appropriate in a racial sense. We should be helping the poor but that doesn’t justify divisive laws on the basis or race.

    • Mac1 14.1
      5 May 2011 at 12:17 am

      What laws, matt?

      • matt 14.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 1:59 am

        Laws that allow for racial-based quotas for a start. There are better ways to help improve Maori and Pacific representation in the academia, and treating them as equals rather than inferiors will more likely improve their own performance.

        • Tangled up in blue 14.1.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 9:10 am

          “Laws that allow for racial-based quotas for a start.”

          Such as?

          I’m not sure that you know what you’re talking about.

          • matt 14.1.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 3:50 pm

            There doesn’t need to be laws for discrimination to be happening, there needs to be laws, which is precisely the point here, preventing such discrimination from happening in practice.

            • fraser 14.1.1.1.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 5:40 pm

              so… no examples then?

              • matt …
                5 May 2011 at 7:10 pm

                Actually there are plenty, if you even need to question that then you probably need to go back to primary school and relearn your NZ history.

                [lprent: You’ve been asked for some supporting information on your assertion of fact. It appears you’re not willing to provide it. I suggest you read the policy for my views on unacceptable behavior. That is a flamewar starter..

                As an aside, I suspect that you will be hard put to find any such laws apart from those related to Maori land acts. It is one of those moronic urban myths. ]

            • Mac1 14.1.1.1.1.2
              5 May 2011 at 5:52 pm

              matt, we need laws to be passed by the majority to prevent the minority from being discriminated in favour of by the majority? Is that what you are saying? That is FUTBAR, my friend.

              • matt …
                5 May 2011 at 7:12 pm

                You have it the other way round, we’re discriminating against a majority for the sake of a misconception of discrimination in the opposite direction. I say no discrimination full stop, it doesn’t matter if it’s considered ‘positive’ or if it’s designed to socially engineer some social outcome, it’s discrimination and their should be stringent laws against such.

            • Tangled up in blue 14.1.1.1.1.3
              5 May 2011 at 8:25 pm

              Laws like the NZBORA or the Human Rights Act?

              It’s an unfortunate reality that sometimes a secondary effect of addressing a problem or applying justice is that some individuals may face a lessened opportunity.

              • rosy …
                5 May 2011 at 8:52 pm

                It’s an unfortunate reality that sometimes a secondary effect of addressing a problem or applying justice is that some individuals may face a lessened opportunity.

                Who is facing the lessened opportunity? and who is paying for the opportunities?

                This is where it gets interesting – and where Labour is having problems, I expect. Competing for better conditions at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder. Take, for example health – the people bearing the brunt of any policies to improve the well-being of one group is felt as a reduction in services for another group at the same level , or they need to be sicker or poorer to get the same level of services.

                Some people barely paying for mortgages etc have cheap health insurance policie but feel aggrieved that they are paying their own way, but getting not much for it as premiums rise and some groups on lower incomes get (what seems more) for free. They certainly don’t feel rich, they just feel squeezed.

                While this is going on those at the top could care less – they have private means to avoid the fray but can go on about Maori privilege – fanning the flames. Whereas if there was a fairer distribution of income the scraps between the have-nots at the bottom would not need to occur.

        • ianmac 14.1.1.2
          5 May 2011 at 10:04 am

          The selection process for admission to Medical School has been used to create this quota myth. In fact the selection process allows for the admission of some who have not achieved the highest academic standards some of whom are Maori. Small country College for example. Excellent personal standards. But if such a person is selected they all have to achieve the highest standards in order to pass.
          Matt. You perpetrate the myth. Shame.

          • onsos 14.1.1.2.1
            5 May 2011 at 11:43 am

            Quotas on entry into law and medical school are not laws. They are university policies. There is a massive difference.

            • Lanthanide 14.1.1.2.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 12:01 pm

              But similarly, there’s no laws preventing this practice from happening.

              • onsos …
                6 May 2011 at 11:16 am

                Are you suggesting their should be more government interference in universities?

                In any event, quotas at law and medical schools are about ensuring Maori and Pacific communities (which are often communities of deprivation) have lawyers and doctors. The importance of this is huge; I can explain if you like.

                These policies are unfair for individuals. The equity goal is not for individual students; deprivation could much more accurately be gauged through a process of interviews and suchlike. This is not even about Te Tiriti (although that, no doubt, informs the policy); this can be seen in that they are extended to Pasifika peoples, also.

            • ianmac 14.1.1.2.1.2
              5 May 2011 at 12:33 pm

              onsos: Yes of course you are right but it is one of the myths perpetrated by the right.

          • NickC 14.1.1.2.2
            5 May 2011 at 5:53 pm

            Here is an example of race based funding which Brash would oppose

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closing_the_gaps

            • Colonial Viper 14.1.1.2.2.1
              5 May 2011 at 6:04 pm

              A programme designed to help highly disadvantaged Maori using approaches and understandings unique to them…yes I can see why Brash the Racist would oppose it.

              They should just fit in like ordinary NZ sounding whities, dammit.

  15. M 15
    4 May 2011 at 11:57 pm

    Well done Hone, especially staying in control and on message.

    I liked Hone’s method of visible exaggerated patience and then intoning, “Yeah, yeah, trying to….”

    Hone examining his manicure served to underline how boring Brash is.

    LOL when Brash said that the 300 million borrowed per week was the result of grossly irresponsible government spending, hmmm …. would that be on tax cuts for his mates in NACT?

    • Colonial Viper 15.1
      5 May 2011 at 12:24 am

      yeah had me laughing when I spotted Hone alternatively staring at the ceiling and at his nails. Also when Hone apologised for interrupting Brash, it was just done in a completely dead pan style.

      I haven’t watched much of the man before, but it was a pleasure. Didn’t even flinch when whatshisname started the whole interview with the Nazi meme. I mean, WTF, have you never heard of Godwins law.

      And yeah, I can see how Hone really fraks off a lot of people too.

    • Colonial Viper 15.2
      5 May 2011 at 12:25 am

      Got a comment in mod, but yeah, Hone did fine 🙂

      • Lanthanide 15.2.1
        5 May 2011 at 9:32 am

        Lynn, I notice that we don’t have captchas any more. I’m unsure if this is a blanket-wide removal of captchas, or just for ‘known’ commentators who don’t like to sign up (which seems to be most of us).

        If the latter is the case, could you also add us to a rule that relaxes the auto-moderation of ‘restricted’ phrases?

        • onsos 15.2.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 11:45 am

          I just made my first comment here, and was somewhat surprised that there was no captcha.

          [lprent: The captcha is now hooked to the anti-spam engine. It will give you a capture if it thinks that your comment may be spam. Got stuck in last week and so far appears to work perfectly. ]

  16. Penny Bright 16
    5 May 2011 at 1:32 am

    Comment I just posted on Kiwiblog…………

    # publicwatchdog (478) Says:
    May 5th, 2011 at 1:00 am
    …………………………..
    ‘Don the Dictator’ came across as a yappy, slightly desperate, geriatric fox terrier to me – with all his constant interrupting.

    Articulate ‘elder statesman’ Don Bra$h definitely is not.

    (errrr…. he’s not even an MP – he’s a corporate carpetbagger who has effectively bought the leadership of a political party he wasn’t even a member of, until two hours before assuming this role?)

    However, with all that access to corporate bankrolling – you’d think that Bra$h – ‘I’ve got the ca$h – could afford better media training?

    Or maybe it’s just not possible to turn political goat sh*t into marketable electoral honey?

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com

    • todd 16.1
      5 May 2011 at 4:24 pm

      I thought he acted more like an insane little poodle myself. Yap yap yap! There’s no convincing the public what Brash is dishing up is good when it looks, smells and tastes like dog shit!

    • HitchensFan 16.2
      5 May 2011 at 4:29 pm

      LOL@Penny’s description. Penny, I don’t always agree with your analysis but that description of the Hollow Man was spot on! That’s just what he looked like.

      Hone was Oarsome with a capital O – ka pai, Hone. Keep it up.

  17. Tanz 17
    5 May 2011 at 5:09 am

    Actually, Don was the perfect gentleman, while Hone talked over both him and Sainsbury. Brash could hardly get a word in, and unlike Hone, did not cut in at every opportunity. He was fair, reasonable, and on the money. Too polite for his own good, but at least he held his cool….and Sainsbury was not much help.

    We need more like him.

    • felix 17.1
      5 May 2011 at 7:58 am

      Err Tanz, Brash is the skinny white guy.

    • Lanthanide 17.2
      5 May 2011 at 9:33 am

      Yeah, reminds me of his leader’s debate with Helen Clark, when he didn’t want to speak over her because “she’s a woman”.

    • ianmac 17.3
      5 May 2011 at 10:06 am

      You must be joking Tanz! Funny by inversion. 🙂

    • HitchensFan 17.4
      5 May 2011 at 4:31 pm

      Which channel were you watching, Tanz? You do realise Brash was the skinny, white, arrogant doddery old dude espousing bullsh*t don’t you?!

      Or maybe you were watching Shortland Street.

  18. appleboy 18
    5 May 2011 at 6:49 am

    Maori privilege – hmm…Maori live a shorter life than Europeans in the same country , and fare worse all all social indicators. What’s fair about that. Oh let me guess Brash and all the right whingers think well it’s their fault? or it’s genetic or something.

    If you had 2 children , would you treat them the same? Of course we all shout.

    Hang on, what if one had Dyslexia. Then would you not give that one the additional help needed.

    It’s grossly unfair to treat unequal people’equally’.

    Don, saying Maori are privileged in this country won’t make that true. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    • Robert Atack 18.1
      5 May 2011 at 8:07 am

      Yeah AB
      If Maori could get a fair* market rental on the property they are only getting peppercorn sums for in Wellington, and around the country, it would be a different story, the system gets more out of Maori than it pays back.
      Thanks Bro’s

      *–adjective
      1.
      free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge.

    • Shaz47 18.2
      5 May 2011 at 5:48 pm

      I like that analysas. So hard to explain to many Europeans in a way they can ‘get it’. My son who is Maori would walk to school and it was not uncommon for him to be spat at and called a Nigger (I so hate that word) he would have been 10 then. We lived in a white middle to upper class part of town.

      • rosy 18.2.1
        5 May 2011 at 6:00 pm

        I’ve had similar with my Maori grandaughter at a wealthy beach town – on the play ground the little rich kids saying ‘don’t play with her, she’s dirty’

  19. PeteG 19
    5 May 2011 at 6:59 am

    Brash reminded me why I voted against him in 2005.

    Harawira will not attract the party votes he wants with his repeated Brash is like Hitler” claims, nor with comments like:

    Bin Laden a freedom fighter, says Harawira

    Hone Harawira has described Osama bin Laden as “a man who fought for the rights, the land and the freedom of his people”.

    In tributes on Maori-language television, the leader of the new Mana Party said the al-Qaeda founder should be “honoured” rather than “damned” in death according to Maori culture.

    When asked if he was concerned about how such comment could be construed, he said he was Maori and “tributes to the dead are always appropriate” in Maori custom.

    Trying to play the Bro in Arms card. But it’s not a universal Maori view.

    Labour MP Shane Jones said he did not have the same level of affection for bin Laden as Mr Harawira.

    He also scotched Mr Harawira’s claim that it was Maori custom to always pay tribute to the dead.

    “In the old days, a great enemy – if he wasn’t eaten – his bones were used to make musical instruments. So this romantic notion that in the old time, Maori spent hours of their time saluting the enemy was not the case.

    “Enemies were turned to dust and people rejoiced, because of the suffering they had caused.”

    One of Harawira’s biggest failings, trying to portray his views as that of all Maori.

    • IrishBill 19.1
      5 May 2011 at 7:08 am

      I noticed that Pita Sharples made similar comments. I wonder why the headline didn’t quote him? I also wonder why there was no byline on the story.

      • PeteG 19.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 7:27 am

        In the same article Sharples sounded much more reasoned.

        Speaking on Te Karere, Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples was also uncomfortable about people openly celebrating bin Laden’s death.

        He said utu (revenge) was a Maori custom. “But we don’t agree with the extent of the celebrations or with anyone celebrating the assassination of anyone and then the person’s body being discarded into the sea.”

        I agree with that, I don’t mind seeing the end of bin Laden (Sharples suggests it’s utu) but the celebrating turns me off.

        • Pascal's bookie 19.1.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 7:33 am

          He also called it an “assissination” which is a crime as it so happens, and said the body was ‘discarded’ into the sea which implies a coverup.

          Fairly inflammatory stuff that the ‘staff reporter’ decided not to editiorialise on or seek to clarify.

          • IrishBill 19.1.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 7:42 am

            I’d just like to make it clear that I’m not defending Hone on this but it’s suspect enough that I’m reserving judgment until there’s some clarification and context.

          • NickC 19.1.1.1.2
            5 May 2011 at 6:20 pm

            That is absurd. Saying that the body was discarded doesn’t imply cover up – it just implies that it should have been treated with more respect.

            • Pascal's bookie 19.1.1.1.2.1
              5 May 2011 at 8:16 pm

              Fair enough, not a coverup, but it does reinforce the assassination statement. The body was gotten rid of, like you would with evidence.

              But hey, a Minister of the crown alleging that this was an ‘assassination’ isn’t worth any column inches compared to a misleading quote from Hone.

              And I’m not saying that what Pita said is in fact a big deal, but it’s at least as big a deal as what Hone said. They both phrased something badly. But only one gets crucified, and strangley, it’s not the Minister saying our allies committed a crime.

    • Tigger 19.2
      5 May 2011 at 7:51 am

      Totally agree with PeteG, much as typing tht suprises me. I assume Harawira’s remark will gain him traction with the self-hating Pakeha element he appeals to, however, so clearly he was playing to that crowd.

      • felix 19.2.1
        5 May 2011 at 8:01 am

        Which remark was that?

      • Tigger 19.2.2
        5 May 2011 at 11:45 am

        Ha ha, yes clarification always important when quoting Mr Pete – his view that Harawira is off-base with his Osama tribute. Bin Laden hasn’t just killed Americans or even Westeners. He’s killed indiscrimatedly. There is no honour in what he did.

        • Colonial Viper 19.2.2.1
          5 May 2011 at 11:55 am

          US air strikes in Afghanistan have also killed indiscriminately. Multiple confirmed US strikes on civilian targets, families etc. over the last couple of years. Not much “honour” in that either I suppose.

          • felix 19.2.2.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 1:48 pm

            Agree with both of you there – they’re all a bunch of cnuts.

            As far as I can tell the idiots talking about Osama’s “honour” are no better or worse than the idiots who think the invading forces – including ours – are somehow “honourable.”

            Those defending their homes and nations are the only ones in this whole sorry mess with even a shred of honour to their names.

    • MrSmith 19.3
      5 May 2011 at 8:29 am

      Up early spinning your usual dribble for the Nact’s peteG

      peteG the fact you where even thinking about voting for those right wing bigots at ACT says a lot about you.

      Also PeteG, Osama bin Laden was a freedom fighter, just because you don’t agree with his politics or ideas on freedom doesn’t change the fact he was fighting for what he believed in.

      NO ASSET SALES

      • PeteG 19.3.1
        5 May 2011 at 8:54 am

        If he was a freedom fighter he wasn’t very successful, Saudi Arabia is still an absolute monarchy, which his family has close ties to. Women still don’t have the vote there.

        What freedom is he fighting for? Certainly not the freedom for innocent people to live in safety. And not for democracy.

        I wasn’t aware he had any concerns about asset sales.

        • MrSmith 19.3.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 9:18 am

          “If he was a freedom fighter he wasn’t very successful” In your opinion.

          “Saudi Arabia is still an absolute monarchy” More like a US puppet.

          What freedom is he fighting for? He was fighting for what he believed in, freedom from foreign interference in his country as I understand it.

          NO ASSET SALES

          • PeteG 19.3.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 9:30 am

            You say that Saudi Arabia is a US puppet and that OBL was fighting for freedom from foreign interference in his country, so by your own claim he mustn’t have been successful.

            Are you sure the US isn’t a puppet of Saudi Arabia? Who wants oil? Where did most people organising and participating in 9/11 come from? Maybe you’re right and OBL prevented foreign interference in his own country and diverted the inteference to Iraq and Afghanistan.

            • Colonial Viper 19.3.1.1.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 9:32 am

              Perhaps PeteG you don’t understand that fighting for freedom against oppression is frequently a multigenerational effort.

              Declaring one generation a “failure” because they were not the generation which made it to the finish line, is sorely mistaken.

          • William Joyce 19.3.1.1.2
            5 May 2011 at 11:01 am

            @MrSmith – “He was fighting for what he believed in, freedom from foreign interference in his country as I understand it.”

            That maybe as you understand it but his mission was religious and it was only ever political in as much as it touched on his religious objectives.
            The only freedoms he was fighting for was the freedom to institute his form of Islam, the freedom to clear Muslim lands of all infidels, and the freedom to spread his brand of Islam by overcoming the infidel through either conversion or the sword.
            Perhaps, in these objectives he does, in a sense, have kinship with Hone.

            • MrSmith 19.3.1.1.2.1
              5 May 2011 at 5:52 pm

              “That maybe as you understand it but his mission was religious and it was only ever political in as much as it touched on his religious objectives.”

              Well William I would like to ask him, but the very people that are saying they are here to bring us democracy have assassinated him!

          • rosy 19.3.1.1.3
            5 May 2011 at 5:08 pm

            “freedom from foreign interference in his country as I understand it.”

            But at the same time had no problem interfering in the governments of other countries – failed or failing states got the ‘benefit’ of his presence – Afganistan, Sudan, Pakistan for a start.

        • Colonial Viper 19.3.1.2
          5 May 2011 at 9:29 am

          If he was a freedom fighter he wasn’t very successful

          Oh contraire, Osama Bin Laden helped US corporates transfer up to a billion dollars worth of US tax payer funds into their own pockets via the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

          You don’t get much more successful than that.

          Still have to wonder how/why members of Bin Laden’s family who were in the US at the time of the 9/11 attacks got US military escorts out of the country.

          • ianmac 19.3.1.2.1
            5 May 2011 at 10:17 am

            bin Laden was a freedom fighter in his early days. He was used by the USA who supplied money, arms and intelligence in his war to free Afghanistan from the Russians. (In the same way that USA supplied Iraq with the same to fight their Iran war through the 80s.) Just what part bin Laden played in the 9/11 will never be known for sure because he is dead but the 3,000 dead is a tragedy just as the 100s of thousands of dead civilians in Iraq is a tragedy.

            Perhaps Hone meant that the years bin Laden did act as a freedom fighter should also be remembered?

            • William Joyce 19.3.1.2.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 11:05 am

              @ ianmac “Perhaps Hone meant that the years bin Laden did act as a freedom fighter should also be remembered?”

              I think you give Hone too mush credit for thinking issues through and for thinking before speaking.

            • wtl 19.3.1.2.1.2
              5 May 2011 at 4:06 pm

              Hone has apologised and said:
              “As Maori we do not speak ill of someone who has died even if such a person has done bad things.”

              If you watch the video, it is painfully obvious that he is just trying to show some respect for the dead. I have no great respect for the man, but I think he has been badly misrepresented on this issue.

    • HitchensFan 19.4
      5 May 2011 at 4:32 pm

      Actually, Pete it’s a media beat-up. Hone was in fact saying it’s not Maori tikanga to celebrate the death of a human being.

      Hear hear to that.

  20. higherstandard 20
    5 May 2011 at 7:10 am

    Like you IB I agree with Sammy at Darryls blog.

    “Hone “won”, simply because he’s the Monster, and if you give the Monster twenty minutes rather than ten seconds, he can only improve. He wasn’t good, but was better than Brash.

    Don just looked – and sounded – old. He’s got a much easier pitch, to a ‘talkback’ audience ready for the Orewa message. But he’s not the right messenger.

    In a Panglossy sort of way, I’m glad our “extremists” make me laugh or sigh, not froth. Nick Griffin they ain’t.”

    For me they did the impossible in making Phil and John looking like statesmen in comparison.

    The sooner Mickeysavage gets his cat to set up a political party of moggies up and down the country the better – their yowling would be preferable to the fucktards we have to suffer listening to at present.

  21. Carol 21
    5 May 2011 at 7:45 am

    So Don suggests he’s for democracy and equality with his “one law for all” message – and that after his corporate takeover of a political party that he was not a member of – (is he yet?).

    And Hone in response focused on issues of pwoer and socio-economic inequality:

    He claims that Maori MPs are do what the white MPs of their party tell them – well certainly there NAct team are dominated by white males.

    Don’s response was to repeat numbers (of Maori and non-Maori MPs) and ignores the fact of the financial and political power behind him that enabled his take-over of Act, not to mention the tacit support from key & national.

    Home talked about cultural & socio-economic inequalities that disadvantage a large proportion of Maori: Don keeps talking about numbers of MPs, seeming to have little interest in acknowledging or addressing the very real struggles of people disadvantaged inthe current system, as raised by Hone.

    Not only a Hollowman, but a shallowman, talking slogans based on little substance, and supported by financial & political power & privilege.

    “One law for all” – “one person, one vote”: Yeah Right.

    • KJT 21.1
      5 May 2011 at 9:01 am

      I see why people tell me I will never be a politician.

      If I had been Hone I could not have resisted punching Brash in that, self satisfied, ignorant mouth.

      Never had much time for the Hariwera’s. They are racist, (as we know through family experience)  but Brash is racist, sexist and has had a closed mind since 1980.

      Hone is growing on me though.

      There should be one law for all.
      A white kid who is boy racing should have to pay half their income in fines just like a brown kid.
      White ex politicians who steal should get jail time just like everyone else.
      If Maori foreshore and seabed is to be made part of the commons it should happen to all foreshore and seabed. With realistic time lines and fair compensation to ALL present owners.

      • Jenny 21.1.1
        6 May 2011 at 4:10 am

        KJT Just a note to tautoko your statement. I and others who have had personal experience of the Harawira family will know you are speaking from the heart.

        As you say, Hone is growing on me too.

        In fact I have a lot of affection for him, having much knowledge of his good works up North. Hone has many admirable qualities. Not least his honesty, (which many times gets him into hot water).

        His courageous recent stand on principle, over the Sea Bed and Foreshore, when all were against him was also very admirable.

  22. Robert Atack 22
    5 May 2011 at 7:54 am

    I just worked it out, Don joined Act so he could use Rodney’s old ties.

    They will have to shoot Hone, he is to good for them/us. And that is saying a lot for a politician.
    Hone is the closest we have to a Hugo Chavez, but alas the red necked, media lead, closed minded, ignorant as pig shit masses, will never appreciate what we have in Hone, we will be governed by Nazis before any ‘people orientated’ government gets hold of the treasury benches, and that will take blood in the streets.
    ‘They’ are not going to relinquish power without a lot of dead people, and the death of loved ones is about what it will take to get the masses to wake the fuck up.
    We are sleep walking to our doom, this nightmare is only beginning. http://guymcpherson.com/2011/05/this-must-be-a-nightmare/
    But fear not we have Kiwisaver. lol

  23. felix 23
    5 May 2011 at 8:14 am

    My impression? Don’s a fuckwit.

    If he talked over me like that as if his ignorance of history was some kind of special wisdom that I was just too stupid to understand in spite of the topic being essentially my specialty subject, I’d swat him.

    Brash has clearly been given the hard word by his handlers. His politeness cost him a debate with Helen once and he’s not allowed to let it happen again, especially with some uppity darkie.

    Hone came over ok just for not decking Brash really.

    • vto 23.1
      5 May 2011 at 8:42 am

      Yeah, I was almost expecting a backhander from Hone across Don’s mush.

      Brash was truly hopeless though in having not even a good grasp of things Treaty (e.g. maori v english version priority). Just like not being able to answer which were the two important pieces of legislation ACt was working on. ha ha ha ha ha ha, how useless..

      But imo Hone should have spoken up a little more. A bit too calm and collected perhaps.

      I just get the feeling that Brash is going to fall flat smack on his nose again and get nuffink from this election. What a dick.

      • Colonial Viper 23.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 9:23 am

        Hone didn’t want to fall into the indignant angry brown man stereotype so he let Brash fall into the indignant angry white man stereotype. Thought that it worked ok.

  24. mikesh 24
    5 May 2011 at 9:09 am

    “Laws that allow for racial-based quotas for a start. There are better ways to help improve Maori and Pacific representation in the academia, and treating them as equals rather than inferiors will more likely improve their own performance.”

    Affirmative action is really a matter of institutional policy rather than law.

  25. TightyRighty 25
    5 May 2011 at 9:18 am

    Did maori have a national set of laws before the arrival of whitey?

    And how did hone get the history of the formation of maori seats so wrong? i can hear echoes of his ghastly mother every time he opens his mouth.

    • Colonial Viper 25.1
      5 May 2011 at 9:21 am

      Yes because silver spoon in the mouth Don Brash clearly knows more about Maori political history than the Harawiras 🙄

    • Pascal's bookie 25.2
      5 May 2011 at 9:27 am

      What do you think he got wrong? He told the other half of the story is all.

      Fact is, if the number of Maori seats was based on the number of voters, Maori would have dominated parliament. Instead, it was decided that four seats ought to be enough, for some reason.

      And I’m not sure the relevance of your first question. All the national laws we have today derive their legitimacy via the treaty though, if that’s what you are getting at.

      • grumpy 25.2.1
        5 May 2011 at 9:33 am

        only in as much as the treaty obligated the state to treat all citizens equally under British law.

        • Pascal's bookie 25.2.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 9:45 am

          No.

          The Crown gained the right to make and enforce laws in NZ from the treaty.

          In return for that, it promises to treat everyone equally.

          • TightyRighty 25.2.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 9:55 am

            gained the right? technically correct, but seeing as there was no other governing body before the crown, it can only be viewed as an improvement. also an inclusive one as there was no need to really ask anyone, the crown could have just done it anyway without any treaty.

            Hone really needs to check his history, but appealing to the segment of the electorate he is pitching at, he can say whatever he likes as the idiots will judge him on his image and not his values, if he even has any that aren’t race based.

            • Pascal's bookie 25.2.1.1.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 10:06 am

              Technically correct; also historically correct, in that it is what happened.

              That the British might have been able to defeat a numerically stronger resident population given enough time, if they even wanted to; is supposed to tell us what?

              Why speculate about things that didn’t actually happen, and assume that they somehow trump what did happen and leave reality in a discard pile marked “technically correct”.

              The fact is they didn’t go with your alternative history plan. The fact is they signed a treaty. The treaty exists.

              So what history is Hone supposed to check? What actually happened, or what you reckon could of happened had things been very different from the way they actually were?

              • Colonial Viper …
                5 May 2011 at 10:33 am

                TightyRighty’s Whitey Counterfactual of NZ History 😀

                • Pascal's bookie …
                  5 May 2011 at 10:37 am

                  Yeah, all this Treaty stuff is just TC Gone mad.

                  • HitchensFan …
                    5 May 2011 at 4:39 pm

                    It would help if the Hollow Man actually got a half-decent public lawyer to explain the Treaty to him, and in particular the differences between the English and Maori versions.

                    Article 1: Maori give up their governorship rights (not a concept Maori understood) in return for (Article 2) the protection of their sovereignty over lands, forests and fisheries (te tino rangatiratanga – a concept Maori did understand, if they thought they were signing over that (which they did in the English version but not the Maori), they never would have signed the Treaty.

                    Article 3 which Brash bleats ON and ON about merely makes clear Maori are NOT to be treated as second-class citizens, they are to be given all the rights and privileges of Her Majesty’s subjects by their new British GOVERNORS.

                    Article 3 does not have the meaning Brash thinks it does and must be read in the context of Articles 1 and 2. But if he had a halfway decent lawyer advising him, he might STFU on this issue because every time he opens his mouth about it he makes everyone cringe with embarrassment at his total lack of understanding.

                    • Morrissey …
                      5 May 2011 at 4:44 pm

                      Interesting nickname you’ve got there, HitchensFan. Although your comments here are generous and thoughtful, your nickname implies you’re a fan of that vicious toady, thug and right-wing hatchet man, Christopher Hitchens.

                      Please tell us it ain’t so.

                    • HitchensFan …
                      5 May 2011 at 4:49 pm

                      @Morrissey, I couldn’t reply to your message directly for some reason. But you shouldn’t make assumptions 🙂

                    • Morrissey …
                      5 May 2011 at 4:55 pm

                      Fair enough, my friend, fair enough.

                    • Puddleglum …
                      6 May 2011 at 12:54 pm

                      I was thinking INXS for’ HitchensFan’ and that ‘Meat is murder’-UK-sometime pop icon for ‘Morrissey’.

                      Shows how much I know (and my spelling might be wrong in both cases). About then was the last era when I still had a vague idea about popular music – long gone now.

      • TightyRighty 25.2.2
        5 May 2011 at 9:43 am

        i am asking the question because i don’t see how hone can criticize whitey’s law, when there was nothing nationally before that.

        • grumpy 25.2.2.1
          5 May 2011 at 9:47 am

          Hone can criticise anything he likes because he’s not very bright and people (especially lefties and the media) make allowances and are not too critical. But a party whose leader idolises Bin Laden as a “freedom fighter” and whose No 2 (Sykes) “jumped up and down and clapped” when the twin towers collapsed are clearly nutters.

          • ianmac 25.2.2.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 10:26 am

            Did Annette Sykes do all that jumping up and down grumpy or is that a Garner myth which you are compounding? (There are many who thought and think that USA aggression in other countries caused such a retaliation.)

        • Pascal's bookie 25.2.2.2
          5 May 2011 at 9:50 am

          But it doesn’t matter what there was before that. What we have now comes, like it or not, from the Treaty.

          Lew has a great piece on this here:

          http://www.kiwipolitico.com/2011/05/violating-ourselves/

          • TightyRighty 25.2.2.2.1
            5 May 2011 at 10:01 am

            Duh, I know our law comes from the treaty, which i have no issue with.

            but to say it doesn’t matter what there was before the treaty? when clearly it does in the context of the treaty and it’s national and historical significance. i’d say what existed before the treaty is extremely relevant to any issue related to whitey’s law and how people feel it applies to them and their particular culture.

            • Colonial Viper 25.2.2.2.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 10:09 am

              OK I get it, you are saying that indigenous peoples around the world who got fucked over should at least be grateful that the whities came along, gave them civilisation and culture, a British judicial system, running hot water, a real language, iPods and the like.

              • TightyRighty …
                5 May 2011 at 10:18 am

                the right to criticise the british judicial system, social welfare, education, improved living standards, health care etc etc etc.

                so yeah pretty much CV

                • Colonial Viper …
                  5 May 2011 at 10:36 am

                  And like Gandhi and the other Indians decided, the Brits can now “Go Home” and leave them to get on with self governing as an independent country quite happily without the whiteys?

                  Is that the natural conclusion mate?

                • south paw …
                  5 May 2011 at 11:18 am

                  Maori have been treated like dirt by the TightyRighty bigots of NZ from the beginning.

                  In 1911 the Auckland health officer was only concerned about Maori health because he was worried about Europeans getting infected – ‘As matters stand the Native race is a menace to the wellbeing of the European’. Great example of superior British colonial culture.

                  Maori were unable to obtain housing finance or access loans for land development until the 1930s. Great example of British colonial law and justice – and like WhitieRighty says Maoris were ‘free’ to criticise it.

                  The Minister of Native Affairs in 1940 – “I regret to say that many of our Maori brethren do not fully appreciate all that has been done for them in a brotherly, loving way”.

                  Looks like WhitieRighty is keenly repeating the bigoted parts of NZ history.

            • Pascal's bookie 25.2.2.2.1.2
              5 May 2011 at 10:17 am

              Why?

              Does it change what the treaty says, or whether it should have been honoured, or whether we should continue to honour it?

              If not, then how is it relevant at all?

        • Lanthanide 25.2.2.3
          5 May 2011 at 10:09 am

          Why does it matter that there wasn’t anything “nationally” before the treaty?
           
          You realise that when the crown came in and started making laws nationally, they actually affected everyone “locally”? So if there was previously some “local” laws/customs or structures in the Marlborough region, which differed from those in the Canterbury region, you can’t just say “oh, they don’t matter because they weren’t national”.

    • grumpy 25.3
      5 May 2011 at 9:30 am

      It’s the Harawira familys version of history – quite different to anything else, and used to justify their racist and violent tendencies.

      Harawira’s support and eulogising of Bin Laden is a good example. Ok to do on Maori language media but not on English language media.

      “a freedom fighter” “fought for his country”???? What country (Saudi Arabia)?? and what freedoms????

      hone can no longer be regarded as a harmless idiot – he is now a dangerous idiot and puts the Urewera terror raids into perspective.

      • Colonial Viper 25.3.1
        5 May 2011 at 10:07 am

        Actually its Brash who is the dangerous idiot.

        A case for “dangerous idiot” could also be made for whoever is supporting our ongoing military adventures in Afghanistan, now that the reason for being in Afghanistan in the first place is dead and buried at sea.

        Oh that would be John Key and his Government, wouldn’t it?

        • grumpy 25.3.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 10:42 am

          Silly me, and here I was thinking the Helen sent us in there in the first place. Don’t tell me that (it was a UN “authorised” war) that she only did it for future employment prospects??
          Hone is starting to look principled by comparison.

          • Colonial Viper 25.3.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 11:27 am

            Yes silly you mate, our guys have done a great job over there, I was talking about ONGOING operations and that is Key’s decision.

            As was his authorisation to keep troops there even longer and escalate our commitment of manpower and equipment.

            • grumpy 25.3.1.1.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 11:31 am

              Ahhhhh…”ongoing…” I would have thought “Initial” would be more relevant.

              After all, Helen got us involved in there in the first place.

              • Colonial Viper …
                5 May 2011 at 11:32 am

                Not taking into account little changes in circumstances (like Bin Laden now dead)?

                Letting Key off for escalating and lengthening our military presence?

                Do stop living in the past as if its the most relevant place for you to be, times have changed and the threat to our personnel exists today not 3 years ago.

              • felix …
                5 May 2011 at 2:02 pm

                grumpy,

                “Initial” was more important at the time (obviously, if you subscribe to the concept of linear time.)

                “Ongoing” is more important right now (obviously, if you actually want to do anything about it.)

                Slice that any way you like.

      • ianmac 25.3.2
        5 May 2011 at 10:28 am

        Afghanistan Grumpy. Remember Russia, USA war, invasion?

  26. Daveo 26
    5 May 2011 at 9:30 am

    I just watched the clip http://tvnz.co.nz/te-karere/video [it’s about two thirds in] – it turns out the full quote was “they [bin laden’s family] mourn for a man who fought for the rights, the land and the freedom of his people”.

    It seemed to me he was talking about the way Bin Laden’s family would have thought of Bin Laden.

    • grumpy 26.1
      5 May 2011 at 9:31 am

      What rights, land and freedoms would that be Daveo????

      • Daveo 26.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 9:34 am

        What ever ones bin ladan’s family thought they were, I guess.

        • grumpy 26.1.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 9:49 am

          …can’t you be a bit more specific??? go on, give it a go…..

          • Daveo 26.1.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 10:44 am

            I’m not here to waste my time educating fools – watch the video yourself.

      • Colonial Viper 26.1.2
        5 May 2011 at 9:34 am

        Don’t forget that Bin Laden helped to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan as part of the CIA trained Mujahideen. No doubt some think highly of that achievement.

        • Daveo 26.1.2.1
          5 May 2011 at 9:44 am

          That’s right. Ronald Reagan called them “freedom fighters” back then.

        • grumpy 26.1.2.2
          5 May 2011 at 9:44 am

          So he was Afghani then……????

          • Colonial Viper 26.1.2.2.1
            5 May 2011 at 10:05 am

            Bin Laden was a Saudi who felt solidarity with his muslim brethren in Afghanistan.

            Interesting that it was the CIA who provided those muslim “freedom fighters” with the training and support needed to defeat a global superpower.

            • ianmac 26.1.2.2.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 10:31 am

              By that time bin Laden was living in Afghanistan and was a roading engineer building roads for the country as a means of development. Then came the Russians then the USA and he stayed to defend.

    • ianmac 26.2
      5 May 2011 at 12:43 pm

      Daveo . If you have this right it blows the negatives of Hone’s remarks out of the water. The whole debate is a mislead, originating from the Hollow Men lot but sadly repeated over on Red Alert!
      10 out of 10 Daveo! 🙂

  27. Andrew Kensington 27
    5 May 2011 at 10:30 am

    Osama Bin Laden the freedom fighter was a creation of the CIA and Hollywood (I’m sure he had a bit part in the Rambo movie “Sylvester Stalone Goes to Afghanistan to Kick Ivan’s Arse”). Then, just as the “Soviet menace.” disappears into an Orwellian memory hole and Islam is erected as the next great threat to the West’s freedom and prosperity, up pops the same CIA/Hollywood ‘freedom fighters’ wearing boogey men masks.

    Hone did well on the Close Up debate. Watching Brash, on the other hand, claim ACT party policy would help the workers and the poorest people in New Zealand made my skin crawl.

  28. grumpy 28
    5 May 2011 at 10:44 am

    One thing about Hone though – he makes Kelvin Davis and Shane Jones look bloody good.

    I don’t think he can win his electorate.

  29. PeteG 29
    5 May 2011 at 10:58 am

    I wonder if McCarten is regretting what he has become involved with. And this is before Sykes has said anything.

    It will be interesting to see if they can come up with “Satisfactory evidence of at least 500 eligible members”.

    • Daveo 29.1
      5 May 2011 at 10:59 am

      So you’ve watched the video?

      • PeteG 29.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 11:15 am

        I watched Close Up live last night if that’s what you mean.

        I’ve also seen a mixed reaction from supporters of both (men or parties) – and it’s been very mixed. I doubt it has enhanced either reputation, more commonly it confirmed why both could be a liability to their parties.

      • grumpy 29.1.2
        5 May 2011 at 11:15 am

        Which video is that ? “Dumb and Dumber”?

    • North 29.2
      5 May 2011 at 6:57 pm

      Already there with the 500 Pete G. How foolish you are to use that nonsense. So easily verifiable. Which (poetically) makes you look a real dickhead. Oh I guess you can refine the definition of “satisfactory” to suit your own pathological senses. Some nutters still believe the earth is flat after all.

      Don’t tell me you’re into the rubbish of the other “The Don”. Trump I mean. “Obama wasn’t born……”
      Guess his next blooper will be “Osama didn’t die……”. Kia Ora Pete G !

      • rosy 29.2.1
        5 May 2011 at 7:03 pm

        How Obama to the Trump(eting) out of the Donald…..

        President Obama Roasts Donald Trump At White House Correspondents’ Dinner

  30. vto 30
    5 May 2011 at 11:13 am

    I say Go Hone!!

    Provided the Mana Party is careful about not recreating birthright privileges (which is already underway in NZ unfortunately) then all power to them. They seem to be the only ones prepared to stand up to the crushing weight of the existing powerful. Good on them.

    Just gotta watch them crazy statements at times tho…

  31. Jonno 31
    5 May 2011 at 11:13 am

    bin Laden was part of a wealthy Saudi family, where they practice an extreme form of Islam called wahhabism
    The only “freedom” these guys want is to impose their fucked-up world view on the rest of us.

    How Hone can come out with this tosh is beyond me. How anyone could possibly want to vote for this gobshite, even more so.

    • joe90 31.1
      5 May 2011 at 12:25 pm

      Yeah Jonno, just like the US wanted to impose it’s fucked up world view on the rest of the world.

      This is how they did it in Chile.

      In April 1962, the “5412 Panel Special Group”—a sub-cabinet body charged with reviewing proposed covert actions—approved a proposal to carry out a program of covert financial assistance to the Christian Democratic Party (PDC) to support the 1964 Presidential candidacy of Eduardo Frei.

      Also in 1962, the CIA began supporting a civic action group that undertook various propaganda activities, including distributing posters and leaflets.

      In December 1963, the 5412 Group agreed to provide a one-time payment to the Democratic Front, a coalition of three moderate to conservative parties, in support of the Front’s Presidential campaign.

      In April 1964, the 5412 Group approved a propaganda and political action program for the upcoming September 1964 Presidential election.

      In May 1964, following the dissolution of the Democratic Front, the “303 Committee,” successor to the 5412 Group, agreed to give the Radical Party additional covert assistance.

      In February 1965, the 303 Committee approved a proposal to give covert assistance to selected candidates in upcoming Congressional elections.

      In 1967, the CIA set up a propaganda mechanism for making placements in radio and news media.
      In July 1968, the 303 Committee approved a political action program to support individual moderate candidates running in the 1969 Congressional elections.

      As a result of 1968 propaganda activities, in 1969 the “40 Committee” (successor to the 303 Committee) approved the establishment of a propaganda workshop.

      In the runup to the 1970 Presidential elections, the 40 Committee directed CIA to carry out “spoiling operations” to prevent an Allende victory. more

  32. Brian Boon 32
    5 May 2011 at 11:56 am

    Rather vote for Brash than a guy who compares people to a certain German leader or thinks Bin laden is a freedom fighter, still his base will eat this up, and I’m guessing they are clapping like trained circus seals at the moment.

  33. John D 33
    5 May 2011 at 12:36 pm

    Interesting little rant from Joe90

    I see that NoRightTurn is also bashing Hone over this issue.

    http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2011/05/hone-hone-hone.html

    Hone has really jumped the shark this time.

  34. Andrew Kensington 34
    5 May 2011 at 12:49 pm

    I think the comparison to Hitler was a mistake, the policies of the Facist Augusto Pinochet are closer to what Brash wants. Although, the big money backers in the US were big fans of both Hitler and Pinochet so it would not be surprising to see the same sort of people bankrolling Don Brash.

  35. Samuel Hill 35
    5 May 2011 at 12:57 pm

    I can’t be bothered getting involved. Brash is an Economic Disaster waiting to happen, and is using Redneck Populism to screen his real agenda. Hone Harawira is a proud Maori, but he doesn’t have the intelligence to bring change to Maori people. Sorry Hone, but whatever your intentions are, you simply don’t have the nous to lead a massive revolution in Maori’s education, income and health.

    Brash is Dangerous

    Hone is an Amateur.

    Who agrees?

    • joe90 35.1
      5 May 2011 at 3:21 pm

      Brash is dangerous but dismissing Hone as an amateur, nah, Hone has you doing exactly what he wants you to do.

      And this wee gem Samuel,

      but Hone probably doesn’t

      I’ll take that as a continuation of the pigs ear you made of yesterdays effort.

      • Samuel Hill 35.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 5:11 pm

        You’re so sensitive Joe. Get over it. If you want to back a guy that says we should honour Osama Bin Laden, then go ahead. Hone is an amateur.

        • felix 35.1.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 5:23 pm

          Where did he say that, Samuel?

          ‘Cos if you’re referring to the Te Karere video he said nothing of the sort.

          Of course you may well have a report of him saying this elsewhere, in which case I think everyone would love to see it for themselves.

          Do you?

            • felix 35.1.1.1.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 8:50 pm

              But Samuel those quote marks are around single words. You can’t even see where they’re from.

              Please tell me you watched the video to check the context before forming such strong opinions.

              It was posted just above, but here it is again: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4964292/Harawira-honours-bin-Laden-as-freedom-fighter

              I’m not saying you have to agree with him, but he didn’t say what you think he said.

              • Samuel Hill …
                5 May 2011 at 9:07 pm

                I don’t think we should show Osama Bin Laden any honour, even in death. I know what he said. It was a cope out by Hone, trying to score some anti-US votes. Thats why he apologised today.

                • felix …
                  5 May 2011 at 10:48 pm

                  Samuel,

                  You’ve been given the video links which prove he didn’t say that, yet you keep repeating it over and over.

                  Why won’t you watch the videos, Samuel?

                  Why are you pretending that you haven’t been proven wrong?

                  • Samuel Hill …
                    6 May 2011 at 12:18 am

                    I haven’t claimed anything that was wrong. I have pointed out what I believe was a stupid opinion to have, and Hone apologised for that opinion today because he realises what the connotations of what he was saying were. I didn’t quote him out of context. This is my opinion. Is it wrong to say that I think somebody is not smart enough to be the leader of an effective movement for the left? I don’t think so. If the first thing you have to say about Osama Bin Laden is that we should think about his family and that – yeah nah.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      6 May 2011 at 12:27 am

                      it’s quite correct not to celebrate the killing of an unarmed man, especially a killing which prevents justice being done and prevents justice being seen to be done.

                      (Unless you are into summary executions of defenceless people my military squaddies as being just).

                      In this case Hone is more principled than you.

                    • Samuel Hill …
                      6 May 2011 at 12:46 am

                      More principled? Thats your opinion. I’m sure the people killed on September 11 would have loved a trial for their lives too. If Bin Laden had killed one of my friends or family I would have been keen to execute him without trial myself.

                    • felix …
                      6 May 2011 at 8:34 am

                      Samuel.

                      “If you want to back a guy that says we should honour Osama Bin Laden, then go ahead.”

                      You’ve repeatedly misquoted Hone as saying things he never said, particularly about honouring Bin Laden.

                      I notice that in your comment at 9.07 you’re still underhandedly accusing Hone of doing so, but you’ve stopped quoting altogether.

                      Very dishonest, Samuel.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      6 May 2011 at 8:52 am

                      Samuel Hill = ACT Troll

                      He’s not here to boost Brash on this site because he knows he will not win us over

                      So he give Brash the odd Bash for credibility with us (no harm done – he knows Brash had no votes here at The Std anyway)

                      But his true assignment is to take Hone down.

    • Campbell Larsen 35.2
      5 May 2011 at 3:26 pm

      Brash wasn’t looking dangerous on Close up – he was looking desperate and doddery.

      Hone surprised me with his composure and I think he spoke well too. He does not need to be an intellectual Maori to achieve things in Parliament for the people he represents. Also he is quite principled in his own outspoken way and in that regard is bringing to the table a quality that the Maori party clearly lacks.

      Hone was in my opinion the clear winner on the day – however most people will of course not likely abandon their preconceptions of either man on this basis.

      • Samuel Hill 35.2.1
        5 May 2011 at 5:08 pm

        I’m not sure redneck NZ agree with you. ACT getting 7 or 8 seats is very dangerous as far as I’m concerned.

        • Samuel Hill 35.2.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 7:37 pm

          81% of people who texted into Close Up tonight, said that Maori DO NOT have a special place in this country.

          Now that is what I call dangerous.

          If any of you still can’t see why allowing this debate to be fronted by Hone Harawira on one side of the debate is a bad thing, please speak up. Don Brash has an agenda, and a media capability of pushing it through to the public through his spin, that Hone Harawira has no chance of winnning this debate. Phil Goff is not going to stand by him either.

          • Carol 35.2.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 8:10 pm

            And yet, a large proportion of kiwis like to use Maori culture as a signifer of national identity – hakas etc. Curious double think? or is it just that Close Up phone polls are far from representative?

            • Samuel Hill 35.2.1.1.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 8:17 pm

              Very worrying is all I can say.

              • Pascal's bookie …
                5 May 2011 at 8:27 pm

                Then someone else needs to get up on their hind legs and front the debate then.
                Till Hone did it was bloody vacuum right?

                Not Hone’s fault Sam.

              • vto …
                5 May 2011 at 8:35 pm

                Very worrying question is all I can say.

                What about this for a question… Do early European settlers have a special place in New Zealand?

                answers would be appreciated.

                • higherstandard …
                  5 May 2011 at 8:41 pm

                  Lucky you didn’t mention sheep, otherwise I suspect a ban would’ve been forthcoming.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  6 May 2011 at 12:31 am

                  What about this for a question… Do early European settlers have a special place in New Zealand?

                  Do you mean the ones who did the most killing of Maori and the most rampant stealing of their lands? Or do you mean the other ones, the ones who were not directly involved but who benefitted indirectly the most from that activity through to the late 1800’s and beyond?

                  • vto …
                    6 May 2011 at 8:18 am

                    CV, that is wroing on so many counts. But is probably exposes many people’s views on early settlers, which is as bullshit as many people’s views on early maori.

                    What I trying to get at is, yes sure Maori have a special place thanks to those entirely selfish first-in-first-served principles springing out of total luck (and dubious anyway). And so do europeans for other reasons have a special place. And so do the chinese who have received a harder time than any group around. And it goes on.

                    But it seems CV that if that is the view espoused by many then race relations in this country have a lot further to go than I had ever anticipated.

                    btw, perhaps you could recount a true account by way of example of settlers killing maori. Just for credibility purposes you know. Cause I got shitloads of stories from the opposite end of the spectrum.

                    Very disappointed.

                    In the same way that Willie Jackson and whatsisname were disappointed in the 81% on close-up who did not think maori had a special place, I am disappointed too, for the same reason.

          • higherstandard 35.2.1.1.2
            5 May 2011 at 8:26 pm

            I disagree with that 81% of x number of people but am interested in knowing why they say that………… it’s one of those polls where you look at the question and go well that’s potentially going to mean a lot of different things to different people.

            • Samuel Hill 35.2.1.1.2.1
              5 May 2011 at 8:53 pm

              No its not, its because people like Hone Harawira and Willie Jackson are getting confused about things like ‘Rights’, and Close Up is then spinning the debate to get anti-maori opinion. Hone came on Close Up with Don Brash to talk about his new party, and instead of having a debate on economics, we end up having a debate on race. Why? Because Hone Harawira is known as an activist for Maori, he has never represented anybody else, he sits in a Maori electorate seat.

              So Don Brash who we all know will want us to vote for a change of voting system, gets in Hone’s face saying that Maori don’t deserve special rights. I think he is right. All humans deserve the same rights I may have said differently on here a couple of days ago, but I tell you what, in the last couple of days I have changed my mind about a few things – mostly due to what I have discussed with people on this site. Don Brash, is right because we should all have the same rights. But the way ACT and everyone else on the Right will spin this is so that we end up eliminating the maori seats, and voting in a National/ACT government. Phill Goff has said he doesn’t want anything to do with Hone, but he should be able to take the high ground on this debate, point out the stupidity of the question asked, and give a well rounded view on the issue which will satisfy both Maori and Pakeha.

              But I am really angry about this Close Up poll and the result.

              They asked “Do you think Maori have a special place in New Zealand”?

              Ofcourse they do. They are the Tangata Whenua.

              81% disagree.

              The debate allowed to degenerate into another scrap over seperate issues. This is the kind of shit that will get ACT into power.

              This is why I don’t believe Hone is the right man. Nobody wants to be associated with him. Brash is getting great publicity and Labour can’t even come out and attack him because it will only make more people hate Labour.

              I would encourage Goff to make a statement tomorrow in favour of the Treaty process and that Maori DO have a special place in New Zealand as the Tangata Whenua, but when it comes to rights, we all have equal rights.

  36. chris 36
    5 May 2011 at 1:00 pm

    Brash isn’t a ‘racist’ per se. He clearly states that he wants equal treatment for all.

    However – the real question however is whether true equal treatment according to the textbooks is actually fair or equal in reality. For this to be the case, all ethnic groups would have to start in the same place economically and financially.

    Current government ideology, (for the last 30 odd years) is that Maori were mistreated for over a century leaving them far behind other New Zealanders on most measurements of wealth, health, incarceration and happiness… which needs addressing before true equality can be enacted.

    I think Brash’s stance on race relations is actually admirable given how controversial he probably knew it would be… but I also think it’s rather idealistic and unrealistic given the system of redress that is in place. New Zealand isn’t yet ready to start talking about stripping race from policy in an intelligent way. There are still too many people who are disadvantaged because of the way the system was over the previous century, and still too many people who think Maori are all bludgers.

    • Anthony 36.1
      5 May 2011 at 1:23 pm

      Brash may not be racist, but he’s willing to use racism to score political points.

      In my opinion it’s actually worse than being racist.

      • higherstandard 36.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 1:25 pm

        So on the racism front at worst he’s the equivalent of Winston and Hone then ?

        • Anthony 36.1.1.1
          5 May 2011 at 1:33 pm

          At worst?

          There is no equivalence, he exceeds both of them.

          And Hone is not racist anyway.

          • higherstandard 36.1.1.1.1
            5 May 2011 at 1:36 pm

            Please explain how Brash uses racism to score political points and Hone and Winston don’t/haven’t ?

            • Samuel Hill 36.1.1.1.1.1
              5 May 2011 at 1:38 pm

              Brash isn’t going to do anything to help Maori. Atleast Winston and Hone appealed to Maori voters.

              • higherstandard …
                5 May 2011 at 1:52 pm

                Sam I haven’t seen any real policy from Brash, Hone or Winston let alone anything that’s specifically going to help Maori.

                All I got from that debacle last night was a feeling of deja vu as two retards pandered to sectors of the voting public with soundbites and fatuousities and while those two fuckwits rabbit on we have the same old …same old headlines.

                http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/4964083/Serenity-died-a-violent-death-police
                http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10713966

                • Samuel Hill …
                  5 May 2011 at 2:32 pm

                  Well Winston atleast favours aconomic policy that will help boost Maori living standards via education and investment in jobs. Brash will destroy the morale of not only Maori but every working class New Zealander. Hone atleast has his heart in the right place, but I don’t believe he has the nous to achieve great improvement for Maori, unless he gets some serious help from fellow Maori with much greater MANA than himself.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    6 May 2011 at 12:36 am

                    I reckon you support National/ACT, and are here playing a game to smear Mana.

                    And using your so called support for NZ First as a fiction and a distraction.

                    Which is why nothing you say rings true.

                    • Samuel Hill …
                      6 May 2011 at 12:56 am

                      I support New Zealand First mate. I Hate National and ACT with a passion. I would rather hang out with Hone than Don anyday. But I don’t think he is the right man politically. I hope he does change my mind actually, but I doubt it. A few of you guys attack me for my view, but thats fine, if you care to look for some of my other posts, you might actually find we agree on certain things and disagree on others. As far as I’m concerned the best thing we can do for NZ is invest in apprenticeships, education, scientific/tertiary research and build an efficient public transport system. I want this election to be about ideas that will make our future positive, because that is the best way we can have a campaign that makes people think about what really matters.

    • felix 36.2
      5 May 2011 at 2:14 pm

      “I think Brash’s stance on race relations is actually admirable given how controversial he probably knew it would be”

      chris , he’s only doing it to because he knew it would create controversy. Horrible, hate-fuelled, bigot-baiting, divisive, nasty controversy, just what we need.

      Nothing admirable about that.

      “New Zealand isn’t yet ready to start talking about stripping race from policy in an intelligent way.”

      That’s OK, Brash has no intention of doing anything of the sort.

    • Colonial Viper 36.3
      5 May 2011 at 2:27 pm

      Brash isn’t a ‘racist’ per se. He clearly states that he wants equal treatment for all.

      So I wonder when it comes to prison time for criminal offences is Brash going to make sure that Pakeha get more prison or is Brash going to make sure that Maori get less?

      You know, in order to achieve this “equal treatment” that he is talking about?

  37. randal 37
    5 May 2011 at 1:08 pm

    wait till donnie’s di-lithium drive runs out of gas 2,000 light years from home!

  38. Steve Withers 38
    5 May 2011 at 2:40 pm

    I suspect the National Party has bought the ACT Party so they can – together – play out a pantomime that will see voters turn against MMP.

    I’m trying to account for Rodney Hide’s behaviour. It’s not too late for him to stand for the National Party in Epsom. All he said was he won’t be running as an independent. He didn’t say he wouldn’t be running for another party. That would be Hide’s post-MMP reward for his part in the pantomime.

    Update: There is even an iPredict contract about Hide running for the Nats in Epsom. I found it after drafting most of this comment.

    • Lanthanide 38.1
      5 May 2011 at 4:05 pm

      Yes, but that Hide/Nat contract was made months and months ago. When questioned, they said it was in direct response to rumours of Hide leaving Act or Act imploding. This was all long before Don’s chequebook takeover.

    • Carol 38.2
      5 May 2011 at 4:15 pm

      I thought Hide said yesterday that he’d like to win Brash’s approval and maybe go on Act’s List.

      The Nat guy on BackBenchers this week said he’ll be voting for the Supplementary Voting system.

  39. Carol 39
    5 May 2011 at 4:22 pm

    I think the positioning of Harawira and Brash in this video is interesting – as indicated in the still that fronts this blog thread. Hone is positioned directly in front of the camera so he can look relaxed talking to the audience. He’s a bit behind Brash, so he can talk to Brash without moving his head much and seems in control.

    Brash has to keep turning his whole body to Harawira and does so in an awkward way, looking unsettled, slightly startled, but also manages to look a little stiff condescending and smug. The last bit probably has nothing to do with the positioning, just Brash exposing his attitude.

    • Colonial Viper 39.1
      5 May 2011 at 4:26 pm

      If we are consistent with our narrative of a National Party leaning TV, the NATs (or a faction of them) asked that Don Brash be made to look bad.

      Looks like a few people out there might like the Don even less than they like Hone.

      • Carol 39.1.1
        5 May 2011 at 4:37 pm

        Or maybe the positioning wasn’t the result of any conscious effort on anyone’s part – it could have been done intuitively or by accident? Or maybe Hone shifted his chair a bit backwards as he sat down – either being aware of how this would impact, or just because it made him feel more comfortable?

      • North 39.1.2
        5 May 2011 at 6:14 pm

        That’s the cool part CV – since the righties can’t miss the wailing dementia in Brash their default position can be nothing other than virulent, racist attacks on Hone. Which shows them up for what they are – screeching Maori-haters. A pox on them !

        Don’t be too sure we’re not seeing some history here. And ain’t it wonderful ? Pittance Sharples and Toryana Torya hardly a word. Hone (for all the claims he’s a dumbo) has them in a corner. If they get too hoha about him they prove his point and have Maori (being truly disenfranchised and still raped), flocking to him.

        Hone’s point ? Pittance and Toryana don’t represent Maori. Both National Party snivellers at heart…..cashed-in their “brown” for the hot-leather seats of the ministerial BMW and buddy buddy stuff with The Smiler.

        Watch the Maori Party hui in Te Tai Tokerau Waitangi this weekend. That’s gonna show that this is all really significant…….

    • rosy 39.2
      5 May 2011 at 7:38 pm

      “just Brash exposing his attitude.”

      Yes, it looks an awful lot like body language – the chairs are close and Brash doesn’t want to be near Hone so he is pulling the top part of his body away.

  40. Jenny 40
    5 May 2011 at 7:34 pm

    One law for all?

    What’s that old saying mocking the ancient claim right wing claim, that there is one law for all?

    I am sure that Don Brash supports the laws that make it illegal for both millionaires and the homeless to sleep under bridges.

    This would be ‘fair’ in Brash cloud cuckoo land.

    • burt 40.1
      5 May 2011 at 8:24 pm

      Maybe, perhaps Don wants to have special rights based on race while claiming he’s not a racist.

  41. Jenny 41
    5 May 2011 at 7:40 pm

    Just googled it.

    It was Anatole France who in 1894 mocked the concept of one law for all;

    “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.” (from The Red Lily, 1894)

    • PeteG 41.1
      5 May 2011 at 8:24 pm

      That’s a good quote.

      If we had one tax law for all would it mean everyone pays the same percentage of tax or the same amount of tax?

      • Jenny 41.1.1
        6 May 2011 at 4:15 am

        What do you think, Pete?

        • PeteG 41.1.1.1
          6 May 2011 at 6:54 am

          Taken to an extreme it’s ridiculous, I don’t think my grandkids should pay the same tax I pay (but I presume the poll tax that Redbaiter prefers might exclude kids).

          I’m very dubious about Act’s tax policy working in practice, they are proposing that by 2017/2018 the tax rates should be:
          0-20,000 12½%
          20,000+ 15%

          But confusingly they also say:

          Create a tax free threshold of $25,000, saving $3,050 in tax for those people who want to opt out of government provision of accident, sickness and healthcare cover to provide for themselves. Provide an additional grant to those people for any dependants they might have, covering not only accident, sickness, and healthcare cover but also an educational scholarship for dependent children.

          …but they don’t say how that will fit in with their 10 year reduction table.

          We don’t have to worry about this sort of tax structure though, I think we are destined to carrying on with the existing complex tax and benefit system with a few yo-yo tweaks.

          I don’t really know what the optimum tax and benefit levels would be. We seem to be stuck with an over-generous WFF. I think the current tax rates should be maintained for another term to see how they work out, it’s impossible to judge their effectiveness having been applied during a major and prolonged recession. Increasing tax now could tighten the economy even more.

  42. Float 42
    8 May 2011 at 2:51 am

    When Hone was asked, what could be done to bring Maori’s inline the New Zealand europeans no answer was given. Im not sure if any politican has a plausable solution. I would think that would be at the forefont of Hone’s agender.
    Surely he could have highlighted test schemes that could be implimented at a national level…

    Both politicians have their good points, and they certainly have their bad points. I think merit should be given to each individual concept, instead of pledging allegiance with one politician

    • Adele 42.1
      8 May 2011 at 8:47 am

      Teenaa koe, Float

      Either I have suffered a TIA, or you have, but nevertheless, could you please clarify your post. Maori inline with European what exactly?

Links to post