Shearer Says

55 comments on “Shearer Says ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Rhinoviper 1

   20 December 2012 at 1:00 pm

   And once again, some poor hack has to sort through a rambling monologue recorded on a wax cylinder and transcribe it into corporatese:

   Um. Ah… Is this switched on? Testing? Testing?

   Ah.

   I’d like to wish you a Merry Buddhamas… um… Clausmas… but I don’t know how.

   I’m ah… having a holiday. Someone said they couldn’t tell the difference…. don’t know what they meant, since I’ve been holding my accountant… ah… I’m heading north, like a duck in winter. No, not you Trevor… oh, you’re going north too? That’s nice. Um, where was I… holding the government’s accountant. I have a tape of it somewhere. Gosh, I hope David doesn’t. Oh, I’m David. I mean… C-C-C-nnnnn… HIM.

   Anyway, I’m going to surf north.

   Christmas, that’s it. Got it. Um. It’s a time for reflections and resolutions. New Year resolutions. It’s been a good year. Yes, thanks Trev, I though I said that well too. There were verbs and nouns and all sorts of things like you told me.

   Um. It’s been a good year and I resolve to hold the Labour Party to account. Or audit their accounts. Or listen to their accountant. Yes. And barbecue him.

   Ah, well, anyway, there’s this Zoroastermas message that I’ve recorded:

   It’s been a good year.

   No, I’ve already said that. I mean that here’s a recoding of me holding a Akhenatenmas to account:

   Wasn’t that nice?

   Now I’m going to hold a reflection to account. I don’t trust him. He’s in the mirror and he’s also called David, like C-C-C-C-nnnn… can’t say it. Shifty fellow. Don’t trust reflections, they’re impostors. I’ll hold him to account though! With my hands.

   In 2013 I will be committed. No Trevor, not to one of THOSE places. I mean committed as in showing dedication. Annette got me a dick. Dictionary. I have my hands on it. No Trevor, the book! I am hands on the dictionary.

   I will be holding the government to account and it’s been a good year. Did I say that already?

   Well I have. Matthew told me so, and that other fellow. Short, chubby, spectacles. Also called David. It’s jolly confusing with so many Davids about, I can tell you! Still, they said they liked me, so that’s jolly nice of them. I must be doing well, unlike David… the reflection. Or C-C-C-nnnn… still can’t say it.

   I will be hands-on in holding the government for account for a good year. Well of course if I’m hands-on I’ll be holding it. In a direction. North, probably. What do you mean “redundant?” Look, there are FIVE cardinal directions. North, South, East, West and Hands-on. There, see! What, there are four? Well we’ll call North Hands-on. East, South, West and Hands-on. There.

   Where was I?

   Yes. Labour. I’d like to thank several Labour caucus members for supporting me against the Labour Party and holding them in a hands-on direction to account in what has been a good year. Together we can ensure that our lives eating at Bellamy’s continue. Thank you everyone, all you taxpayers for providing me with food, a nice comfy chair and… stuff. As you know, I believe in a hands-on way that people should pay their way and I’m glad that you’re paying mine.

   I look forward to you continuing to do my work for me.

   By the way, my roof needs painting. Could one of you blu- one of you wonderful warm supporters do it in a hands-on direction?

   My pants are warm.

   To avoid confusion, instead of being called David, I am now Ramesses Niblick the Third, Kerplunk Kerplunk Whoops Where’s My Thribble. Mister Flibble told me that.
2. Tiresias 2

   20 December 2012 at 2:11 pm

   Sorry David. I and thousands of others don’t do Christmas, either as a religious festival or as a crap-fest of over-indulgence and drooling Pavlovian consumerism. So wishing me a happy one is as meaningless as the kiss you’d give someone’s baby on the run-up to an election.

   Oh, and remind me when you tackled the Government on an issue that matters to me? It must have happened when those Jehova’s Witnesses came to the door in October some time and I missed two minutes of the radio news getting rid of them.
   • Enough is Enough 2.1

     21 December 2012 at 1:54 pm

     Take a chill pill
3. ad 3

   20 December 2012 at 3:35 pm

   I suspect next year Shearer will reach for the “nation-building” rhetoric. More abstract nouns like hope and country and identity etc. Sigh.

   Which will strike everyone (here and in analogue space) as being as half-baked as the housing policy. Has there been a detailed housing policy that shows how the policy targets will be achieved that I am unaware of?

   So now we are at less than 2% GDP growth per year. National want to have a traditional rentier + quarry/enclave economy.

   20 years ago you could drive up north from Auckland and the next piece of highly processed and diversified agriculture with good dividends did not appear past your car until you got to Kerkeri. Same in Otago; Milton to Roxburgh, then Ettrick to Alexandra.
   Same in Hawkes Bay apart from a few early vineyards. Same almost right around the country except the South Island West Coast and Far North west coast.

   In 1992 New Zealand still grew masses of raw logs and sheep – two of the very worst value exports that are now in irrecoverable decline (with a few rare high value-add exceptions). The bulk commodity quarry-enclave economy is dying a good slow death, no matter the primitive corporatist thinking Joyce has.

   Despite Joyce’s best efforts, mining just isn’t going to take off here. Unless someone is really gutsy and lucky in the great Southern basin. There are fewer and fewer places for lazy bulk-commodity investments to reside in any safety. Which is excellent long term for New Zealand.

   What I hope Labour wants, is to accelerate a value-added export economy far faster than anyone else. You can only do that with a plan, something like what David Cunliffe was outlining in his speeches this year. Even with a more value-added agricultural economy than we have had in 20 years, we still only get to 2% GDP growth.

   The environment will be damaged that’s a given, the actual question is how much damage is supportable to sustain a tax base that in turn sustains our social welfare net.

   How to get beyond 2% growth to something that sustains our massive retirement welfare burden, and our schools and hospitals and police. But especially retirement welfare.

   This is the one equation I don’t trust the Greens to deal with. Nor do I trust the likes of Shane Jones necessarily. But I desperately want a good government to plot the possible path that gets us there. National have no plan, and will never get back the rentier Old Zealand – too many businesses are locked into wanting higher margins now.

   But what is Labour’s plan? Beyond the broad tax moves. What is Labour’s plan for the economy without Cunliffe? The answer to that is the answer to the mark my pen makes in the election booth in 2014.
4. bad12 4

   20 December 2012 at 5:15 pm

   Dear Dave, nice BBQ spread you have got going there, i am, as usual a little short this week, any chance you can sweep a couple of crumbs off of the table my way,

   A Sickness Bene…
   • Mary 4.1

     20 December 2012 at 6:43 pm

     Sorry bad12, Labour’s a party for workers, not beneficiaries. I wish Labour would just hurry up and die so we can get on with rebuilding the caring society. For as long as Labour hangs around competing with Key’s henchman to see who can hate the poor the most nothing will change. Until Labour fucks off we’re all doomed.
5. Neoleftie 5

   20 December 2012 at 6:12 pm

   Were do you live bad ..near me.
   Alway welcome at me BBQ and Xmas.
   We always have a gaggle of randoms at Xmas time…backpackers to elderly no where else to go folk from the neighbourhood etc, all welcome at our table.
   it’s a small gesture at this time of reflection and thanks giving.
   • bad12 5.1

     21 December 2012 at 9:58 am

     Gee thank’s for the offer but i do not celebrate Christmas in any way and on the 25th will carry on doing the normal stuff that i do every day….
6. Mary 6

   20 December 2012 at 6:56 pm

   “I look forward to continuing to work for you and with you in the New Year.”

   Until you change your stance on social security and your attitude towards the poor and say that you were wrong to abolish the special benefit in 2004 and wrong to ditch the long title to the Social Security Act that has been with us since 1938 and wrong to give beneficiaries with children less tax credits than other people with children and wrong to do a whole bunch of other stuff we’d only expect from the Tory scum and not only apologise for doing all these things but vow to fix them all up (and that we believe what you say, which will be very difficult because your track record is so hopelessly abysmal all trust has gone) we will never work with you again – we will fight you.
7. lurgee 7

   20 December 2012 at 7:16 pm

   Nothing warms the hearts of the right more than the sight of the left turning on itself.
   • Mary 7.1

     20 December 2012 at 7:25 pm

     I agree, but Labour are not part of the left and haven’t been for a long time. When Labour rejoins the left, if they ever do, there’ll be no need to attack them.
   • blue leopard 7.2

     20 December 2012 at 7:26 pm

     Well here’s hoping the Right enjoy Mr Shearer&co’s little Christmas gift to them and that the situation is rectified in the new year then.
   • vivaciousviper 7.3

     20 December 2012 at 11:26 pm

     @lurgee, The left is not turning on itself at all,it’s all about fairness,justice,democracy, for
     too long the labour members,voters, workers have been ignored,Clark took the labour party
     further to the right and Shearer is steering the ship into a stronger shade of blue,that is the
     problem and that’s what alot of labourites and leftists recognize.
     Shearer has spent his dollar,he has shown over and over that he ticks all the boxes that
     represents right wing policies and ideology and flicks off any concerns and expectations that members or voters may have,in fact, he doesn’t care,
     What would warm the heart of the right even more,is if labour blue, joined national blue in
     a mega party, because as it stands there is no real difference,sure as hell would make key’s govt’s
     job easier in parliament, no hassels,no hard questioning,no intense questioning, needless to say,
     it’s already happening, the very time that the nacts should be begging for mercy because of
     their disasters to date, labour are asleep,the last year in parliament would show you that
     there has been no real pressure from labour.
     Shearer say’s he was ‘elected’ that’s spin, which suits him, he was hoisted into the job by
     a faction inside caucus,the members at the meetings voted for a leader, they voted for Cunliffe, who won 9 out of the 10 meetings,caucus went against the vote, can you not see why members
     and voters are just a bit pissed.
     The story here is about the people taking labour back to its roots,it’s founding principles and it
     is long overdue.
8. QoTViper 8

   20 December 2012 at 7:55 pm

   Dear gods, the sizzling sounds, the 4-Square-Guy apron … could you be trying any harder, David? That’s not a compliment.
9. Neoleftie 9

   20 December 2012 at 7:57 pm

   Perhap you should invite hootens and QoT to your Xmas BBQ, after all it’s your turn.
   Poor David cunliffe is all alone at his..
   Seriously how about one or some fiery rhetoric perhaps.
   I’m David shearer and it’s time we put food on everyone table so we all can enjoy Xmas.
   It’s a time of family and community.
   It’s a time to reflect and in this trying economic time it’s time for a new direction.
   A direction where we are all have an fair and equal opportunity to share in the bounty of this fair and great country.
   Time for people to combine and strive together for a better way of life.
   It’s time, it’s labour time, it’s our time.
   • QoTViper 9.1

     20 December 2012 at 8:08 pm

     Ha, can you imagine? I’d hope Matthew and I could do our Kiwi heritage proud by getting off-our-faces drunk and sticking to safe topics like the disgraceful treatment of Ross Taylor by NZ Cricket.
     • Mary 9.1.1

       20 December 2012 at 8:15 pm

       Guess he could’ve posted on Redalert instead. Is that still going? Thought he’d feel more at home on Kiwiblog, anyway.
10. quartz 10

    20 December 2012 at 8:17 pm

    That apron is intensely telling. It’s an in-joke for a boomer elite that has appropriated “Kiwi” national identity while simultaneously denying anyone else access to it. It’s like a taxidermised trophy head in the study of a colonial bureaucrat.
    • QoTViper 10.1

      20 December 2012 at 8:20 pm

      THIS. So true.
11. Chris 11

    20 December 2012 at 8:52 pm

    Not a good look David!
    • Mary 11.1

      20 December 2012 at 8:54 pm

      But true and accurate.
12. fender Viper 12

    20 December 2012 at 9:00 pm

    Thought I had clicked on a Caption Contest there for a minute. With that guy about to instruct how to burn a Cunliffe prime fillet from the Gower 3 month marinade cookbook, the lost looking little Ted guy looking useless and is that Curren scoring an own goal again trying to do a browneye but being to stupid to lower the jeans?
13. mac1 13

    20 December 2012 at 11:16 pm

    A propos the Four Square apron.

    My father was a Four Square Grocer in Christchurch. When he was a grocer, it was a co-operative enterprise in which shares were held by individual small corner grocers.

    It was -strike that- IS a potent symbol for me as a son of a man who kept a small business, ran it ethically and with regard for his customers and community.

    My father was a Labour man through and through. I learned my politics from him and my social values. I was fortunate as the youngest son to give my father’s funeral oration in which I paid tribute to his rejection of profit motive above all else, to his fair pricing and fair dealings. All of these good Labour values.

    I believe that David Shearer as leader of the Labour party shares those values. I, for one, am pleased to see him wearing that symbol.

    That the Four Square guy is playing a guitar just might also have relevance as to why a guitar-playing Shearer should wear such an apron. As a guitar picker myself, I certainly would wear such an apron for that reason as well.

    That the apron happens to be a red one, might also have something to do with why Shearer should choose it.

    The rest, ladies and gentlemen, of what I have read above in your comments is pure unadulterated crap, full of hatred, bile and closed-mindedness. You see what you see because you want to see it.

    If you don’t believe this, then just consider the choice of the still shot from that short video. It’s not the one that got sent to me as a Labour member. It was chosen deliberately. A fair person would ask why. I ask that question of the poster of this post.

    My comments except Lurgee above. He or she has a point. Please take it.
    • blue leopard 13.1

      20 December 2012 at 11:35 pm

      mac1
      Interesting re the Four Square Grocer symbolism.

      How about writing to Mr Shearer and expressing Lurgee’s message to him?

      You are entitled to your opinion re unadulterated crap, full of hatred, bile and close-mindedness, and I am entitled to entirely disagree.

      I think you’ll find that most people critical of recent Labour party behaviour, are basing their opinions on observation, not close-mindedness and I remind you such comments are not the cause of caucus problems, nor left wing implosions, simply a response to them, no matter how msm paint it differently.
    • fender Viper 13.2

      20 December 2012 at 11:48 pm

      Read the excellent comment made by Vivaciousviper for pointers on what has happened to Labour and why people are unhappy. Not the same party your father supported.

      And the duopoly grocery scene aint serving us well either.
    • Mary 13.3

      20 December 2012 at 11:58 pm

      Your position ignores the fact that the current Labour Party is nothing like the Labour Party your father supported. The only thing they’ve got in common is the name. Have a look at all of the nasty policies Labour introduced that’ve done nothing but hurt the poorest of the poor. Do just a little bit of research and you’ll find that almost everyone on this thread is correct. Here’s what Sue Bradford had to say about Labour recently:

      “In the 2000s Labour was responsible, among other things, for getting rid of the much-needed Special Benefit, reintroducing ‘no go zones’ in rural areas, introducing massive structural discrimination against the children of beneficiaries via the In Work Tax Credit, and undermining in legislation the very purpose of social security itself as established by Labour’s own forebears in 1938.

      David Shearer’s recent speech in which he talked about a sickness beneficiary in a way guaranteed to appeal to beneficiary bashers nationwide has not given me confidence that Labour will do any better when they are once more part of Government.”

      http://pundit.co.nz/content/beneficiary-impact-highlights-poverty-of-social-policies
    • IrishBill 13.4

      21 December 2012 at 7:28 am

      Two things, Mac1. That’s a limited edition Dick Frizzell apron (he’s the artist that produced the label for the fundraiser wine) and the video is stopped on a frame chosen by Labour’s comms team – take a look at the original on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlYjZHGxgn4
      • Olwyn 13.4.1

        21 December 2012 at 9:07 am

        Under different circumstances that apron would at least show appreciation for a local artist, but in the present context it simply rubs salt into the wounds of demoralisation.

        I do not expect miracles. I happily supported Labour under Clark, though I did not like to see the scrapping of the SB. I willingly put pamphlets in letterboxes for Goff, though I met his leadership with a sigh and despised the way he dispensed with Chris Carter. Then I was still able to hold on to the belief, now shown to be false, that Labour under Clark had inched away from its dark past and could not go back there. It is utterly demoralising to see the Labour Party trying to sell itself in the manner of an insurance company rather lowering itself to represent or defend anyone. It is demoralising to have Matthew Hooton dropping by to gloat.

        Furthermore, though I cannot get excited about polls under the circumstances, I suspect that the mid thirties is the upper limit to what this strategy can achieve; it’s lose a few more left, gain a few more right, all within a very small margin.
        • Olwyn 13.4.1.1

          21 December 2012 at 9:20 am

          I should add that the deeply unjust treatment of Cunliffe, and less directly, of the members, cannot help but cast a further pall over these cheery meaningless messages – its like watching the ads for a restaurant from which I got food poisoning.
        • JK 13.4.1.2

          21 December 2012 at 2:36 pm

          Likewise. I, too, thought Clark was starting to take Labour to the left, and I could put up with Goff because he was making the “right” noises – seemingly, also to the left. But what has happened since has reinforced my belief that Labour hasn’t really moved very far from the Rogernomics days, and personally I doubt that we’ll manage much more than the percentage we’ve achieved to date. Shearer sounds old and tired on that video, and unsure of himself. He’s had a good 12 months to find his feet and be a vigorous leader – he’s shown just the opposite. Key will wipe him out during election year (and Labour along with him).
          As for Shearer’s reaction to the media-led Cunliffe hounding : he couldn’t explain anything that Cunliffe did that was wrong or disloyal, but he went ahead and dumped him ignominiously anyway. That sort of behaviour on Shearer’s part is/was despicable.
          • Don't worry be happy 13.4.1.2.1

            21 December 2012 at 3:13 pm

            David Shearer’s Labour Party in coalition with the Nats anyone?
      • mac1 13.4.2

        21 December 2012 at 9:30 am

        Thanks, IrishBill. I am happy to know that the discrepancy between the starting images of the two sources for the Shearer “Merry Christmas and thanks for 2012” video lies where it does.

        It might even point out that I too am guilty of seeing what I want to see, once I was disposed to seeing it. I have been the recipient of having my image misused on TV and in the papers so that a particular opinion of the media person/s concerned might be reinforced. I am therefore well aware of what can be done.

        The rest of what I wrote reflects my feelings about the attacks on Shearer. As blue leopard says, he is absolutely entitled to disagree. I am happy to read well-founded and well-argued criticism of our leaders. It’s what I see as the pack-like behaviour and pettiness that grieves me.

        Once the leadership process within Labour is concluded in February, then I hope we can all move on, into constructive work to replace this dreadful National government with what promises to be a collaboration of the centre-left reflecting the values which are our collective history and heritage.
        • blue leopard 13.4.2.1

          21 December 2012 at 6:06 pm

          Yes, after February, I believe there will be a shift regardless of the outcome of the Leadership vote.

          I think that the continued criticism is in order to get a strong message to the Labour party caucus to make some better moves than they have up until now. I think this criticism is a valuable part of democracy and it is too soon to start going easy on them. After February, though, I think people will focus their energies elsewhere, either support of NZLP, or for other parties; depending on the decisions made.
          • Mary 13.4.2.1.1

            22 December 2012 at 8:59 pm

            “I think this criticism is a valuable part of democracy and it is too soon to start going easy on them. After February, though, I think people will focus their energies elsewhere, either support of NZLP, or for other parties; depending on the decisions made.”

            Yes, it’s way too early to start going easy on them, but I just hope that if Labour make the wrong decisions enough people will in fact give their support to other parties. I’m assuming, of course, that there’s consensus on what constitutes a “wrong decision”, but I just hope that the number of people who don’t agree with where Labour ends up going have got the guts to ditch them – that they won’t take the “better of two evils” approach as if we’re locked in an FPP timewarp. I think if enough people on the Left voted honestly Labour may very well be relegated below Opposition (with a capital “O”) status. For me personally when that happens will be a very happy day indeed, but that’s just because I’ve lost all hope that Labour can ever rejoin the Left.
            • blue leopard 13.4.2.1.1.1

              22 December 2012 at 10:23 pm

              @ Mary
              I thoroughly agree with you re if Labour continues to make the wrong decisions, that people will move their support to other parties. This would be MMP working well.

              I hope Labour isn’t that far gone though…there’s still time…I hope (!)
        • Mary 13.4.2.2

          22 December 2012 at 8:47 pm

          “I am happy to read well-founded and well-argued criticism of our leaders. It’s what I see as the pack-like behaviour and pettiness that grieves me.”

          Do you think then that it’s not possible for the “pack” (which in theses circumstances isn’t anything more than a group of individuals agreeing with each other) to offer criticism that is well argued and well founded, i.e simply because it’s criticism coming from a “pack”? Can’t the “pack” be correct? I think that on the question of Shearer and Labour and its track record and what Labour believes and where Labour’s likely to be heading … the “pack” has never been more accurate.
          • mac1 13.4.2.2.1

            22 December 2012 at 10:38 pm

            Funnily enough, Mary, on another thread I was accused of being a sock puppet by the commenter who opened the batting for the anti-Shearer team in this post because I agreed with two other commenters that enough was enough.

            All I would say is to read the comments made from the beginning of this post. If they were fairly made I’d have no problem- apart from the OTT repetition of the slagging of Shearer that seems to dominate the Standard at the moment. My view is that they are not well argued (before my challenge- after that, people seem to have started to debate the issues and not just being denigratory) and not well founded.

            Your comments at 4.1 and 7.1 are examples. Your comment at 6, however, does give some basis for your position, and I respect that expression of an opinion. Since you are arguing from a stance that is outside the Labour Party, given your 4,1 and 7.1 remarks, you are perfectly entitled to attack the leader of the Labour Party. I would just hope that after February, when my Party decides the question, that we move on collectively to attack the real foe in National and its like minded friends as you strongly state in comment 6. “Scum” was your word.

            I note that there is an invitation to other party leaders to put their newsletters onto the Standard. So far, no other party leader has.

            I don’t have to wonder long for why, reading the comments to this post, no other leader has taken up the invitation for a free for all slagging.
            • vto 13.4.2.2.1.1

              22 December 2012 at 10:43 pm

              That’s some well balamced uselessness. You should embrace not repulse.
              • mac1 …

                22 December 2012 at 11:00 pm

                Please clarify, vto. Your comment seems to be critical (“well-balanced uselessness”) but does not explain what the criticism is.

                Does the second sentence refer to me, someone else, or is it a general philosophical principle that you are enunciating?
                • vto …

                  22 December 2012 at 11:11 pm

                  I can’t explain it any better
                • blue leopard …

                  22 December 2012 at 11:16 pm

                  mac1
                  Don’t you feel a little bit critical that the biggest, most directed attack that Labour displayed this year was toward one of its own? In a year when National was doing a particularly good impression of a group of clowns that hadn’t a clue how to run a raffle, let alone a country.

                  Don’t you think that perhaps it has something to do with this type of phenomenon, that people are a tad peeved?

                  Do you think it is useful to point out to a party when it is screwing up? Or do you think that you should be “loyal” to a party, regardless of its behaviour, and regardless of its “loyalty” to you?
                  • mac1 …

                    22 December 2012 at 11:56 pm

                    blue leopard, I have no problem with criticism that is well made, well founded and giving some general obeisance to logic, examples and conclusions. I am not interested particularly in pettiness, etc as I have already stated.

                    If that is made by someone outside the Labour party, no problem. If it’s made by Labour members within the Labour Party, no problem. February should decide the issue that you characterise as the biggest, most directed attack.

                    I don’t respond publicly to criticisms I have of NZLP doings, as a loyal member. The party is bigger than us as individuals. But I do voice criticism within when I feel the need.

                    I understand people’s concerns. I do read this blog and I do attend meetings within the Labour Party. Just had an informal end of year meeting tonight actually.

                    I am saying that a lot of the criticism is unfounded, petty, vindictive, motivated by the desire to pull down a fellow left wing party, motivated by personal grievances with the party, basically bull shit stuff that is tiresomely repetitive. Not all…… a lot. People can decide for themselves which is which.

                    Would I like Labour to be more effective as an opposition? Would I like the media to be fairer in its reporting? Would I like people to be more focussed on issues than upon personalities? Would I like to get one or two people into a quiet room and conduct some restorative justice meetings, refocus energies and ask for a re-examination of their political, social and personal priorities? Would I ask them to consider the question that the party is bigger than us?

                    Those are wish lists for Santa Claus and suggestions for New Year’s resolutions. It’s all been seen before and will be again in my coming up forty years in the party. We’ll be back. We have to. Things are too important otherwise.

                    We all need a bit of a break from all this to refresh, rethink, revitalise, re-prioritise, reprise the struggle.

                    Best wishes to all of us for that.
                    • Napkins …

                      23 December 2012 at 12:42 am

                      “I don’t respond publicly to criticisms I have of NZLP doings, as a loyal member. The party is bigger than us as individuals. But I do voice criticism within when I feel the need.”

                      Perhaps you could also remind the Labour caucus that the party is bigger than they are?
                      Last I looked however they disagreed vehemently with that message. To the extent of silencing their own MPs and members via a major crackdown.
                    • Mary …

                      23 December 2012 at 1:09 am

                      “I am saying that a lot of the criticism is unfounded, petty, vindictive, motivated by the desire to pull down a fellow left wing party, motivated by personal grievances with the party, basically bull shit stuff that is tiresomely repetitive. Not all…… a lot. People can decide for themselves which is which.”

                      Yes, you’re right. We shouldn’t be so petty and vindictive. We should be applauding how a so-called party of the left continued the decimation of our social security system after leading us all to believe it would put a halt to the nasty attacks on the poor carried out by the Richardson/Shipley tag-team of the 1990s.

                      Yes, you’re right. Continuing to speak up for the poor and vulnerable who suffered at the hands of a so-called left party that did nothing for them but put the boot in is just “tiresomely repetitive”.

                      Yes, every criticism of the current Labour Party is unfounded. We should all just shut the fuck up, at least until we know what we’re talking about.

                      I nearly didn’t bother giving your comment a response because as vto’s pointed out what you say is so well balanced it’s useless. Did you ever see the movie Pleasantville?

                      Your problem is that you value party allegiance over how a party’s policies impact on people’s lives: “The Party can do no wrong.” I’ve talked to people from the Labour Party who are of this ilk about what happened to social security between 1999 and 2008. It was like talking to robots. Everything, they said, was out of their control. It’s as if they weren’t human. Your comments seem very similar. What’s interesting, rather than convincing me that your way is the best way, you’re strengthening resolve to keep telling the truth. Apologies, Mac, if all this sounds rather Ghandinian, but Labour will continue to be fought until it proves itself to be a true party of the Left.
                    • blue leopard …

                      23 December 2012 at 1:17 am

                      Hear hear Napkins.

                      Cheers for the response Mac1,

                      I see where you are coming from.

                      Greater than the individuals, the Party is based on political principles that, here on The Standard, I read many pleas that the party realign with, based on fears the Party (more like caucus) is wandering from them. Add that to the wish list and we can all hope Santa Claus (caucus or even perhaps providence? …well anything really) delivers. I think many people commenting here would be very happy if he does. 🙂
            • Mary 13.4.2.2.1.2

              23 December 2012 at 12:12 am

              “My view is that they are not well argued (before my challenge- after that, people seem to have started to debate the issues and not just being denigratory) and not well founded.”

              Guess you’ve socked it to us, then.
              • mac1 …

                23 December 2012 at 12:21 am

                Synchronicity does not imply causality, Mary.

                No debate then? Just more of the same. Have a good break.

                I’ll now put a sock in my own mouth, as this discussion warrants.
                • Mary …

                  23 December 2012 at 1:14 am

                  The clear inference was that your “challenge” caused a change in the way comments on this thread were made. You weren’t saying that it was a coincidence.
14. xtasy 14

    21 December 2012 at 1:13 am

    Shearer faaaarted into the wind, riding on his surf board and feasting on a barbie.

    I always read “Shearer says”, so when does he start to LISTEN, perhaps, our soft dictator dude???
15. Craig Glen viper 15

    21 December 2012 at 8:40 am

    Shearer says “nothing”
16. felixviper 16

    22 December 2012 at 9:32 pm

    Mumblefuck takes twenty-two seconds to say “Merry Christmas” (really getting the hang of those soundbites) while anointed former staffer Kris Faafoi stands around like a half-sucked cock.

    Ladies and Gents, The Labour Party.
    • xtasy 16.1

      22 December 2012 at 9:41 pm

      I am starting to see “Labour” in the same light as the “labour” a pregnant woman painfully goes through, while her baby is born.

      That may mean there could perhaps be a positive outcome at the end, but it must be called something else, as it would have to be “beyond Labour” and full of life, to be “positive”.

      So all on the left, spend some thoughts on this over the holidays, maybe a totally new start, with a new, freshly faced, smartly founded and well organised NEW party may be the only solution to get rid of such idiots that are presently sitting on the front bench for “Labour”.

      Flipping a few chops on a BBQ and saying nothing worth saying for 22 seconds in a useless video message, that is NOT the message I want to get from a “leader”, before Christmas.

      No wonder Key can travel to Hawaii without much to worry about?!
      • Mary 16.1.1

        22 December 2012 at 10:38 pm

        “No wonder Key can travel to Hawaii without much to worry about?!”

        That’s why the right welcomed Shearer with open arms. “Come David, come join the ranks of the chosen, become one of us, join the elite. It doesn’t matter what party you’re from, silly … all that party stuff is for the plebs. You’re in the big time now, Little Flick.”

        I hear what you’re saying, Xtasy, but I don’t share your sense of hope. Labour cannot ever find redemption. Maybe this is in fact what you’re saying, but the party’s tainted beyond ever being able to be trusted again. I agree a fresh start is needed but I’m afraid the only way that can happen is after the complete destruction of the Labour Party as we currently know it.
        • xtasy 16.1.1.1

          22 December 2012 at 10:44 pm

          They are nearly there, to be honest!

          Hence my repeated appeal to others, to rethink, to consider a NEW party altogether, to get over this nonsense!
17. vto 17

    22 December 2012 at 9:53 pm

    Upon first reading and initial reaction it would seem to be written from afar. Lots of things to write to lots of people suppose. What is it that makes a great leader?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS