Where does he find the time

65 comments on “Where does he find the time ”

• Comments are now closed

1. ianmac 1

   9 November 2011 at 9:18 am

   Yes. It did occur to me that the huge range and quantity (quality?) of “appearances is all on the taxpayer and not his salary. Sooner or later he runs the risk as most celebrities do, of believing in his own persona.
2. Tombstone 2

   9 November 2011 at 9:21 am

   So Key is all about work work work – what about his wife and children or Moonbeam for that matter? Do they not count? One would almost have to ask wether he’s married to his wife or wether he is in fact married to the job. Given the amount of hours he claims to work each week I can only but summize that it’s the later. Poor Moonbeam growing up in that mansion without daddy being there to play chase the string of $100 notes.
   • Craig Glen Eden 2.1

     9 November 2011 at 9:36 am

     Gee 19 hours a day when you have decided to bring 2 kids into the world who raises them? I would have thought the family first lobby would be out raged calling for this anti family behavior to stop at once.
     Hang on hang on lets give him the benefit of doubt, so lets say 1/2 hour each kid a day that leaves 4 hours for sleep? Hell where does the wife fit in, oh no does this means the marriage is a scam, its not a real marriage just a marriage of convenience?
     Heck so who will the right wing pro family group give their vote this election.
     • rosy 2.1.1

       9 November 2011 at 9:41 am

       This was missed off the work list

       “You’ve got a wife!” one of the men at the races reminded National leader John Key as he disappeared under yet another flutter of fascinators.

       “I know,” Mr Key called back. “And I can’t afford a divorce.” … He smiled and primped and pecked cheeks and bathed in their adulation. He gave them all his tip for the day: his “wild card” Choise Achiever or Smiling Shard.
3. queenstfarmer 3

   9 November 2011 at 9:30 am

   Whoa, bitter much already?

   Or, maybe, he should get out of the way and let someone with proper policies and an actual work ethic do the job

   Or maybe, we should hold democratic elections.
   • Tigger 3.1

     9 November 2011 at 9:32 am

     Great qf, when we do that be sure to let me know. Certainly these aren’t democratic elections. The media has made sure of that.
     • queenstfarmer 3.1.1

       9 November 2011 at 10:25 am

       So your view is that “the media” has destroyed our democracy (for which we are consistently rated at or near #1 in the world by international organisations).

       As you no longer consider NZ to be a democracy due to “the media”, will you still be voting in the undemocratic elections to be held on 26 November? Or would you regard that as endorsing a corrupt process?

       I also look forward to seeing your complaint to the Press Council regarding the media’s undermining of democratic elections in NZ. Assuming, of course, you actually beleive in what you say.
       • Daveo 3.1.1.1

         9 November 2011 at 10:40 am

         That’s perception of corruption chump and we’re slipping down the chart since this bunch of crony capitalists got in.
         • queenstfarmer 3.1.1.1.1

           9 November 2011 at 11:03 am

           We are? Citations please.

           I note that the Labour Party has recently become the only party in NZ to actually have an MP (and a senior one) convicted of corruption. This has been recently affirmed by the Supreme Court (who I presume you do not consider corrupt too, but please tell me if otherwise). So a senior Labour Party MP being found guilty and jailed for corrruption could possibly cause a slight slip in our corruption index, although I don’t think that is likely.

           I am not aware of any other “slipping down the chart”, as you put it.
           • ghostwhowalksnz 3.1.1.1.1.1

             9 November 2011 at 12:53 pm

             TV3 late news lead story. 8/11/10

             Coming up …The FOUR letter word that Phil Goff used to describe John Key.

             It was ‘actually’ the word smug. And he didnt use to describe Key as an adjective or noun, as in John Key is smug , or that smug John key.

             Goff used it in this way . the top 10 Fail list ” Its nothing to be smug about”

             Looks like TV3/ Media works got a contra for their $30 million loan from the taxpayer
             • queenstfarmer …

               9 November 2011 at 1:08 pm

               You haven’t actually set out what TV3’s alleged transgression was.

               However, if you genuinely think they misattributed something etc, I presume you will be making a complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority. I’ll keep an eye out for it.
             • Vicky32 …

               9 November 2011 at 10:01 pm

               Looks like TV3/ Media works got a contra for their $30 million loan from the taxpayer

               They’re simply disgusting! (I haven’t seen TV news for about 5 weeks now, and I don’t feel the lack..)
           • bbfloyd 3.1.1.1.1.2

             9 November 2011 at 1:04 pm

             that’s only because you aren’t very aware of anything outside your nose queeny….displaying a self serving lack of understanding of the grasp the nats(or their bosses to be more accurate) have over the judicial process doesn’t excuse your silly word game playing….
             • queenstfarmer …

               9 November 2011 at 1:12 pm

               So can you name anything beside a Labour MP’s conviction for corruption that is causing “slipping down the charts” of the anti-corruption indexes?

               And can you please explain what “grasp” the Nats (or “their bosses”) have over the judicial process – does it include the Supreme Court? The Chief Justice?! I would love to know, and I really think you should go public with your amazing revelations.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 9 November 2011 at 2:06 pm

                 was pointed out yesterday that Stats NZ was trying to spin a decrease in the number of building consents as an increase in building consents.

                 Just before an election.

                 DODGE
                 • queenstfarmer …

                   9 November 2011 at 2:26 pm

                   Hmmm, a Labour candidate throwing yet another statutorily independent civil servant (he was appointed by Labour, you know) under the bus for electoral gain.

                   Just before an election.

                   DODGE
                   • ghostwhowalksnz …

                     9 November 2011 at 2:35 pm

                     There is two words that usually describe what happened on TV3

                     BEAT UP

                     Some minor thing is twisted to make it bigger than it is.

                     In this case they had to widen the usual definition of ‘four letter word’ PLUS take it out of context to make it into some sort of personal attack.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     10 November 2011 at 7:36 am

                     It’s not a word game, Stats NZ clearly issued a press release whose title could not be justified by the facts in the body of statement.

                     Now you may think that is unimportant or irrelevant, but it is the job of our MPs to exercise oversight over issues such as this.

                     Or maybe you think that part of their role is just a joke.
               • rosy …

                 9 November 2011 at 6:16 pm

                 “So can you name anything beside a Labour MP’s conviction for corruption that is causing “slipping down the charts” of the anti-corruption indexes?
                 ECAN
           • Campbell Larsen 3.1.1.1.1.3

             9 November 2011 at 1:22 pm

             If NZ has such pure and principled governance then surely there is no harm in signing up to international anti corruption treaties? Why is NZ not following best practice in terms of disclosure of MPs financial interests, ownership of the media, control of lobbyists etc etc.

             One of the least corrupt countries my arse – NZ can and must do better.
             • queenstfarmer …

               9 November 2011 at 1:33 pm

               surely there is no harm in signing up to international anti corruption treaties

               Which treaty are you complaining that NZ has not signed up to?

               One of the least corrupt countries my arse

               I prefer the crediblity of organisations such as Transparency International, to that of your arse, showing that New Zealand is again 1st equal in the world:
               http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results

               I have to ask are you throwing NZ’s reputation under the bus for political purposes, or because you genuinely think TI and the like have just made hundreds of mistakes?
               • Campbell Larsen …

                 9 November 2011 at 1:52 pm

                 http://thestandard.org.nz/what-is-important-to-voters/#comment-322955
                 H/t Penny Bright
                 If there is no corruption then there is no reason not to take the simple steps that Penny has outlined.
                 Are you up to the challenge of actually debating the points? or are you just going to point to more corrupt countries and say well we’re a 100% pure in comparison to them…
                 As for throwing NZs reputation under a bus, if it is so lightweight and insubstantional as to allow a humble commentator on a blogsite to destroy it then it is logical to concluded that it is in fact simply smoke and mirrors.
                 • Batman …

                   9 November 2011 at 2:03 pm

                   Isn’t Penny Bright an insane old bat ?
                   • Campbell Larsen …

                     9 November 2011 at 2:04 pm

                     Isn’t Batman supposed to fight for justice instead of running cover for Tory trolls?
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     9 November 2011 at 2:04 pm

                     That’s the ACT leadership you’re thinking about.
                   • Batman …

                     9 November 2011 at 2:09 pm

                     I’m not saying it’s a bad thing Campbell, if I had a choice between Key, Goff and an insane old bat, that insane old bat would be looking pretty good.
                 • queenstfarmer …

                   9 November 2011 at 2:22 pm

                   If there is no corruption ..

                   Who said there was no corruption? I specifically gave a very grevious example of actual, proven corruption in this country by a member of the previous Govt.

                   … then there is no reason not to take the simple steps that Penny has outlined.

                   What credentials do you ascribe to Penny Bright such that NZ should adopt her prescriptions without question?
                   • Campbell Larsen …

                     9 November 2011 at 9:11 pm

                     It’s a UN Convention Against Corruption – why hasn’t NZ signed it?
                     I think Penny Bright raises some very valid issues – issues that I note that you have not addressed in any way in your reply.
                   • queenstfarmer …

                     10 November 2011 at 12:06 am

                     It’s a UN Convention Against Corruption – why hasn’t NZ signed it?

                     Wrong. NZ has signed it. I thought my question would have been a tip to you, but obviously not.

                     What NZ hasn’t done is ratify it. You would have to ask Labour why they did not ratify it shortly after signing it, as is usual for such treaties these days. I would suggest the reason is that it is hardly a priority for NZ given our long-standing top-ranking corruption-free reputation (a reputation that a few here seem rather eager to besmirch despite being entirely ignorant of the subject, sadly).
                   • the sprout …

                     10 November 2011 at 12:17 am

                     oh i see, it’s Labour’s fault again.

                     and i guess it is pretty unreasonable to expect National to get round to ratifying it, it’s an anti-corruption treaty after all.
                   • queenstfarmer …

                     10 November 2011 at 12:52 am

                     What? I didn’t say it was Labour’s fault at all. Read what I said. I suggested a good reason why they didn’t need to rush to ratify the treaty.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     10 November 2011 at 1:29 am

                     a reputation that a few here seem rather eager to besmirch

                     Maybe that’s because the reputation is starting to show itself to be similar to our 100% Pure Brand.
           • Ianupnorth 3.1.1.1.1.4

             9 November 2011 at 3:31 pm

             Wasn’t there a minister who was using tax payer funding to pick up work for his aviation firm, another who was taking her hubby to China to buy trains for Kiwirail, how about Bill English’s brother getting a slash and burn job at the Ministry of health – didn’t see any advert for that role?
             • queenstfarmer …

               9 November 2011 at 3:43 pm

               You’re askng do MPs rort the system? Ummm, let me think about that one… yes they do. Plenty of examples of that everywhere, sadly.

               If however you are alleging corruption or some other crime (seems to be the day for it? Must be an election coming up), and genuinely believe it (as opposed to say playing partisan polemics) then as a responsible citizen I trust you will be popping down to your local police station to lay a complaint. It’s free you know.

               I’ll keep an eye out for any police complaints just in case (a few things on my watch list!)
4. In Vino Veritas 4

   9 November 2011 at 9:56 am

   I’m sure, without much research, a similar montage could be put together of Phil Goff. It’s not Key’s fault he is popular and Goff is not. Labour should remember the old saying,” one cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear”.
   • Blighty 4.1

     9 November 2011 at 10:22 am

     It is Key’s fault that the economy has gone backwards under his watch.

     He wanted the job. he’s responsible for the outcomes.
     • fmacskasy 4.1.1

       9 November 2011 at 11:34 am

       Blighty…

       I’ve noticed that the Right is very BIG on personal responsibility.

       Except when it come to mismanageing a country. Then it’s someone elses’ fault;

       (Tick one or more)

       [.] Solo mums (but never solo-dads)
       [.] Bloody maoris
       [.] Unemployed dole bludgers
       [.] Previous guvmint
       [.] Events Beyond Our Control
       [.] Bloody tree-hugging Greens
       [.] aliens
       [.] All of above (If in doubt, tick this box)
       • In Vino Veritas 4.1.1.1

         9 November 2011 at 1:00 pm

         Frank, as you well know, there is a large part of the population that believes that Key and National have managed the economy well, given the circumstances. This is why National and Key are polling ahead of Labour and Goff.

         I also note that Labour, before they were ejected in 08, where still blaming the previous National led government for the ills of the country, 9 years after they were voted out. When National got in in 08, the economy was already falling into recession because of global issues, beginning with Bear Stearns and followed by Lehmann. Labour had, at the time, predicted a decade of deficits. And now National is being savaged? Don’t you find this laughable?
         • fmacskasy 4.1.1.1.1

           9 November 2011 at 1:30 pm

           Vino…

           Interesting concept about pointing to previous governments. This National Governments points back at Labour (unfairly, I might add, given that Cullen actually left the economy in a fairly good state).

           The 2000-08 Labour government pointed back to the Bolger/Shipley government of the 1990s – and with good reason, as social services were cut back quite savagely. But Bolger/Shipley pointed to the depressed state of the economy left by the 1984-89 Rogernomics Labour government – and again, with good reason.

           The 84/89 Labour government then point to Muldoon’s “Fortress NZ” policies; failed “Think Big” projects; and the electorate choosing to dump compulsory super savings in 1975.

           At what point do we accept governments pointing the finger at each other – and at what point do New Zealanders accept responsibility (as a nation) for making bad decisions in electing these governments?

           For example, in 2008, as the global recession hit, we KNEW we couldn’t afford the tax cuts that National promised. Yet, we (as a nation) voted for National. Result; Key & Co proceed with two out of three promised tax cuts.

           Question: where does responsibility lie in electing a government, knowing full well that their promises can only be met with borrowing from offshore?

           Just as, where does responsibility lie in electing a government, knowing full well that their promise to dump a compulsory super scheme will leave us unable to sustain retirement benefits for superannuitants?

           Our collective irresponsibility in electing the wrong party into government, at the wrong time, has consequences that cannot be avoided. And we have no one to blame for those consequences. No one else did it to us – we did it to ourselves.

           And blinkered tribalism in politics certainly doesn’t help.
           • In Vino Veritas 4.1.1.1.1.1

             9 November 2011 at 4:14 pm

             “And blinkered tribalism in politics certainly doesn’t help”. Never a truer word said Frank. I’m not sure whether your questions are rhetorical or not.

             I do take issue with your assertion that Cullen left the economy in a good state – he could have left it in a better state than he did. I direct you to:

             http://www.treasury.govt.nz/budget/forecasts/eff2008/00.htm

             Which amongst other things gives information on forecast unemployment 2009 – 2013 and forecast Government debt. Interesting in that they forecast 6.2% unemployment (worst case 7.2%) and yet Labour, who (1) would have been privy to these documents and (2) based on these forecasts, must have expected unemployment to grow, are blaming John Key.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               9 November 2011 at 5:34 pm

               Ah, the old decade of deficits BS.

               The state of the economy at the time of the election was good, Labour had promised to enact another budget taking into account new information that had emerged since the previous budget that would have corrected for the projected deficits. National, on the other had, continued to promise “north of $50/week” tax cuts even with the forecast deficits and did nothing to account for the changing global circumstances until a budget or two later when they finally cancelled some tax cuts – just not the really expensive ones for the rich that we couldn’t afford that they had already passed.
               • Herodotus …

                 9 November 2011 at 6:18 pm

                 Where was the detail as to the mini budget. Here we had in 08 Labour campaigning against National still continuing the promise of Labs tax cuts and other promises. Yet the voter was unaware as to what was priomises were to be broken, even thought Lab was aware of what was to be contained in the mini budget. MS was kind enough to imply in a comment here recently that these tax cuts were to be recinded (Same as the other promised tax cuts that were not delivered on)
                 And unless there are some who can read financials and understand the macro and micro position NZ is in and was in we will continue to get this superficial comentary of how good times were in 99-08 period. There were short term NZ was borrowing to fulfil our bouyant times and the basis of our GDP growthwas unsubstainable.
                 • Draco T Bastard …

                   9 November 2011 at 9:45 pm

                   MS was kind enough to imply in a comment here recently that these tax cuts were to be recinded (Same as the other promised tax cuts that were not delivered on)

                   IIRC, Labour said that the tax cuts would be looked at and possibly reversed.

                   There were short term NZ was borrowing to fulfil our bouyant times and the basis of our GDP growth was unsustainable.

                   Yep, the lovely free-market where everyone gets to do what they like with no thought about it’s consequences which eventually led to a collapsing housing bubble. This is one of the reasons why we need strong regulation of financial capital and the movement of money.
         • Dan hansen 4.1.1.1.2

           9 November 2011 at 3:57 pm

           The best comparsion on the true performance of the Key government would be each of those 10 items peer compared to other OECD countries over the same time frame – if we out performed the average then given the external circumstances key done well and vice versa

           In other words, on a relative basis has NZ’s growth in unemployment been above or below average. Same for GDP / inflation / debt levels etc etc

           This methodology would remove the defence that “it all due to the global economy”
5. felix 5

   9 November 2011 at 9:57 am

   I suppose I’ve created an atmosphere where I’m a friend first and a boss second. Probably an entertainer third.
   • The Voice of Reason 5.1

     9 November 2011 at 10:38 am

     Second Ricky G related comment of the day, felix. I went with the shaved monkey on mine.
     • felix 5.1.1

       9 November 2011 at 2:18 pm

       Lolz
6. Terry 6

   9 November 2011 at 11:07 am

   Key is “popular” largely because too few people lack discerment, i.e. are not good at “reading” human nature. Cast minds back to popular leaders of the past, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, Gaddhafi, Castro, and I cannot exclude Obama! The only incredible thing is that their “popularity” lasted as long as it did!
   • King Kong 6.1

     9 November 2011 at 11:22 am

     Too right Terry. Isn’t it great to be part of the small percentage of the population who have discernment. I quite often go on walks up and down Lambton Quay just to lord my superiority over the simpletons that are the general populace.

     Quite a compelling argument for giving MMP the boot as well.
     • Colonial Viper 6.1.1

       10 November 2011 at 12:15 am

       I quite often go on walks up and down Lambton Quay just to lord my superiority over the simpletons that are the general populace.

       Ironic since they are all doing exactly the same to you when they go for walks downtown…so do the math.
   • In Vino Veritas 6.2

     9 November 2011 at 11:26 am

     Terry, perhaps Mr Goff could become popular like those you mention, by having a purge and sending a chunk of the population to say, camps in the Central Plateau.

     I’m not sure where in your analysis, John Key has become a dictator like those you mention. He certainly hasnt (1) started a world war, nor (2) exectuted millions of his countrymen.

     Your comparison is flawed, and with respect, I’d suggest the only lack of “discernment” is on your part.
     • felix 6.2.1

       9 November 2011 at 2:40 pm

       It would be obvious to anyone with a couple of rocks to bang together that Terry was drawing a comparison between Key’s popularity and that of the leaders he mentioned, not between their respective deeds. In fact the comparison hinges on popularity in spite of deeds.
       • In Vino Veritas 6.2.1.1

         9 November 2011 at 4:22 pm

         Felix, there have been many popular politicians and statesmen that have not been dictators, and not been dictators that wipe out large parts of their population. Therefore the only conclusion to be drawn, is that Terry wanted to compare Key to those dictators in popularity and by default, deed.

         And I would point out, that when it comes to wiping out chunks of the population, the left are light years ahead in body count.
         • felix 6.2.1.1.1

           9 November 2011 at 11:12 pm

           So you’re saying that Obama, Mussolini and Castro are/were “dictators that wipe out large parts of their population”? You need a history lesson buddy.

           Try reading Terry’s comment again. It’s about personality cults.
           • the sprout 6.2.1.1.1.1

             9 November 2011 at 11:54 pm

             exactly. who’d have thought that being a pisshead might damage your comprehension skills eh?

             in Key’s case, however, it’s more a cult of personality deficit 😉
           • In Vino Veritas 6.2.1.1.1.2

             10 November 2011 at 9:14 am

             Felix, firstly, I am not your “buddy”. Secondly, I would respectfully suggest, even without knowing you, that my knowledge of history is significantly greater than yours. Read my post before you mouth off.
             • felix …

               10 November 2011 at 9:31 am

               I did read it pal.

               According to what you wrote, you think Obama, Mussolini and Castro are/were “dictators that wipe out large parts of their population”.

               So you either need a history lesson or a lesson in basic set theory. And going by your use of the phrase “the only conclusion to be drawn” when you haven’t demonstrated any such thing you need a basic logic lesson too.

               What are they teaching the kids at trollschool these days, eh?
   • fmacskasy 6.3

     9 November 2011 at 11:37 am

     Terry, you have a point. We attended two public meetings in the Hutt Valley, where Key was the Guest Speaker.

     I honestly couldn’t understand what people see in him. He came across as shifty and manipulative. His bending of facts (and one outright lie) was fairly obvious. I wouldn’t buy a used car of him.

     I just don’t get it.
     • Craig Glen Eden 6.3.1

       9 November 2011 at 12:04 pm

       They have bought the inference that Key is just like them, when clearly for many the “he’s just like us” would only be in relation to his poor ability to speak properly or read a speech instead of delivering one.
       Popularity is all about image and when you have no history its very easy to create a good image it only becomes a problem when people realize that the guy who is flying the plane is not actually a pilot, and the plane they are on is heading towards earth at a great rate of knots.

       Sadly our media have except for a very few exceptions ( Rail Shares Standard and Poors) asked him the hard questions.
       • mik e 6.3.1.1

         9 November 2011 at 6:01 pm

         What bout the 79 trillion us dollars in toxic derivatives that Merril Lynch are foisting on the US govt KEY austro speak i know nothing yet he was in charge of currency trading who were deeply implicated in this giant ponzi scheme to end all ponzi schemes
         • Colonial Viper 6.3.1.1.1

           10 November 2011 at 12:12 am

           More info on the Bank of America / Merrill Lynch attempt to socialise their massive losses on the US tax payer.

           http://problembanklist.com/fdic-to-cover-losses-on-trillion-bank-of-america-derivative-bets-0419/
7. Craig Glen Eden 7

   9 November 2011 at 12:16 pm

   that should read have not asked him the hard questions.Sorry people
   • Roy 7.1

     10 November 2011 at 9:58 am

     It’s a darned shame they don’t ask him hard questions more often because his track record is to get huffy when asked hard questions. The nice guy veneer is very thin and cracks easily under stress.
8. Roy 8

   9 November 2011 at 7:36 pm

   19 hours a day smirking, waving, posing and getting mobbed by starf***ers seems like a good gig to me, but I don’t think I could do the lying.
9. seeker 9

   10 November 2011 at 1:00 am

   Loved this Wurzil Gummidge or John -and- his -mates -without- a -primeminister- in -sight-photo-ops post Zetetic. Sadly hilarious. Thanks

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS