Saturday General Debate

via Imgur

via Imgur

Go on then.

Another fresh Saturday General Debate.  Let’s see what’s on your mind today.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Pete George

    Colin Craig:

    I actually think we’re at an interesting time in New
    Zealand politics. We are seeing some change. Now, obviously the
    Conservative Party is a part of that, but not only that.

    I think what we’re going to see over the next while is a renewal,
    politicians that have probably been there far too long are going to
    start falling away, we’re talking about a number of them now looking at
    local body positions, mayoralties, whatever. It’s about time.

    I think we need a different kind of politics in New Zealand, pragmatic.

    As a centre right mainstream party we like pragmatic, but I think
    you can find pragmatic on both sides of the house, and I think we’ve
    got people who are willing to be more about consensus politics.

    That’ll be great for this country.

    A centre-right pragmatic consensus seeking conservative. Certainly not a CONSERVATIVE as some supporters would prefer. Colin Craig’s final word.

    • Colin Craig is a fool, a rich fool I’ll grant you but his grasp on politics is worse than a 5 year old’s

      • Pete George

        You’re into old school politics. Perhaps Craig will lead the Enlightenment of politics.

        • justin

          If enlighted politics means that pollies will be listening to the people then bring it on.

          • rockape

            Generally those who wish the Government would listen to the people mean they wish the Government would listen to them! Sadly there is a 50/50 split in NZ so always 50% are going to be disappointed. I am a National voter but there are a lot of things I wish the Nats would do that they dont, does that mean I will vote elsewere,No because the Nats are the closest to what I would like.

          • justin

            Why is it that the crazies always imagine that there’s 50% of them? I know Whale says all pollies are aholes (“not for nice guys”) – and we get screwed via representative government. Lets have referenda, make them binding. The model to follow is Switzerland (and that seems like a pretty good state to emulate).

          • rockape

            So how would a referendum on GST increase have gone? How would one on Welfare go? The difference is Switzerland has been doing it for a very long time, the Swiss are conservative with a small c. The Swiss are smart and rich neither of the last to apply in NZ.

          • justin

            Rockape, bring it on – NZ needs to grow up. The sooner we do this the sooner we’re on track to a more cilivised society.
            GST – really that’s your example of not having direct democracy.
            Are you a pollie? Are you a party insider who chooses the list? Because that would explain wanting to keep the people out of their own governance.

          • rockape

            No not a party member but from a family of professional politicians who worked for an electable Conservative party! The electorate gets its chance once every 3 years to exercise its democratic right, between those years we have a government that governs. Seems to work in must countries . Dont think in Switzerland its all rosey outside referendums there are so many layers of beurocracy nothing much changes.

          • justin

            So every three years we get to choose between ‘left’ or ‘left of left’. Most of this thread is lamenting that pollies cant be trusted.
            NZ not so rosey – but worse as pollie are just ignoring the wishes of the people.

          • rockape

            Hey why don’t you start a referendum about governing by referendum If its the wish of the people you can add it to your list of political successes!

          • justin

            Rockape – you should support Conservatives they’ll hold true to the wishes of the people. That would be a great political success for the people.
            Are you sure you aren’t a political insider, pulling the strings?

          • rockape

            which people?

          • justin

            The 67% of people voting in referenda. That’s the point of binding referenda.
            You debate from the weaker ground.

          • rockape

            No I dont, if we needed 76% to change from the last Labour Governments plan then we would still be waiting. So what countries, other than the welfare stateless rich, non immigrant no state pension country Switzerland do have binding referendum. Why do you want to follow a scheme no-one else does.

          • justin

            That’s why we need a right lead government to bring it in!!!
            If the left set the spend/tax and then bring in binding referendum then NZ in for a rough time.
            National has blown their mandate of the last two terms, they are the biggest spending (% of economy or in real $) than any other government ever.

          • rockape

            a now I see your cunning plan, get a right wing Government, bring in binding referenda( lets make it 90% support for change) We will then have Right wing policies forever! Cunning plan just not very democratic!

          • justin

            I think that most of the referenda have come back with 90% results, so fair enough.
            Two thirds sounds fair.
            Basically I talk with a lot of people from a lot of back grounds and I find the vast majority to be highly rational and wanting the same general things. I’m happy for NZers to govern.

          • rockape

            Yes Justin ,has it just dawned on you that thats what centerist politics that you so hate is about. Labour a littlke bit left of center, national a bit right of center. No major jumps from radical right to radical left as in the UK in the 70s pre Thatcher. After that comon sense, New Labour and a leftish conservative democrats alliance. NZ will catch up soon. Sorry Justin your politics just wont wash in the electorate no matter how you try and pin yourselves to JKs coat tails,he just doesnt love you.

          • justin

            National bit right of centre is very rich. They’re left of where Helen positioned herself. This should have opened up the political landscape for true right ‘ACT’ type party. Colin has appeal to central voters (this is why Whale and Farrer hate him so much).

          • rockape

            i am having real difficulty following you. you support the will of the majority,the majority want one or other of fairly centerist parties. You want something much further to the right and you think referenda will support those policies. Do you not see the flaw in your argument?

          • justin

            I don’t consider it to be far right to be fiscally prudent. I think that Act is severly compromised and that all the other parties are sitting well left. The people are happy because the direct pain of the dire situation we actually in (because we are borrowing like mad to keep up the illusion of prosperity).

          • rockape

            But what is prudence,cutting benefits, stopping government spending on Hospitals ,schools etc. It seems strange to me that the Conservatives dont want assets Electrical sold but want to privatize everything else. Government should stick to its core business ,Security of the realm,security of its people,health ,education and welfare for its neediest citizens. They want to keep out of business.

          • Only cowards insist on referenda, can you imagine the nightmare…gutless politicians who are afraid of putting their own beliefs forwards are the ones who suggest BCIR

          • justin

            Gutless – you like WFF? You like interest free loans? Labour brought these in (plus heaps of other bribes). National has been twiddling fingers long time now.

          • rockape

            Gutless Swiss pacefists!

          • Mediaan

            They even gave Swiss women the vote, not so long ago. Advanced western society.

          • They won’t they never have. It is a pipe dream

        • There is no old school or even new school, just politics. It is blouses like you Pete who think there is another way, and it is people like me who run over the top of you.

          • Pete George

            There are always other ways. I’ve annoyed old school activists elsewhere because I won’t play their bully boy games. They invariably switch to personal attack, which means they have abandoned any debate.

            Politics always evolves, and the old school political mallardy is terminally sick.

          • Pete, you just don’t get it…politics is not for nice guys. It is a pipe dream for people like you, who get marginalised simply because you aren’t prepared to do what is necessary because you are too busy being nice.

            Society isn’t nice either, life isn;t nice, it is rough and tumble and unless you are prepared to get into the wet work then you are destined to be disappointed with your political failures.

          • Pete George

            But I don’t think I’ve failed. I’ve been involved in politics for a much shorter time than you. I’m gradually working towards what I want to achieve, and am more than pleased with progress.

            There’s always going to be failures along the way but I’ve learnt a lot. One thing I’ve learnt is that many people embedded in politics are so engrossed (and arrogant) in their own circles and their own way of doing things that they can become blinkered.

            If I haven’t achieved anything that I have aimed for in politics in perhaps five years I will concede failure. In the meantime I’m having fun and I’m happy with where I’m going.

          • Mr_Blobby

            You not suggesting that the Whale in blinkered are you.

          • rockape

            The trouble you will find being a cuddly little bunny is that next year is hunting season so time to find a safe hole and get your head down.

          • Going where? Nowhere?

          • cows4me

            Pete you must at some time call them out, fucking arseholes would be a good start.

          • rockape

            I thought you supported referenda, the Swiss have had that for 175 years so hardly New Vogue!

          • justin

            If labour was in power then binding referendum would be championed in this site.

          • rockape

            The hell they would if it took 67% to make a change and thats what your leader wants although he seems to be weakening on that.

          • justin

            No Colin is on the record saying he will happily go with the majority if they vote it (said happy with gay marriage if that was the wish of the people).
            I’d say that’s a good sign of leadership.

          • Hazards001

            Define the criteria for a binding referenda..let me help you…not the percentage of turnout but the percentage of eligible voters, regardless of whether they vote or not. Referendums are a cock suckers way of rule…it allows those that want change to trample on those that do not. If you like the status quo then it is unlikely you will shift ass to go vote to keep it…human nature says this…therefore if someone wants to change the status quo then they should be required to prove that the majority actually want the change.

            The reason we got stuck with MMP in the first place!

          • Mr_Blobby

            Run over the top yes and I have the photos to prove it. But that does not make it right. Careful Whale boy you may become a dinosaur.

        • Mediaan

          Get him to lead the Enlightenment of Radio NZ National. That would be a start.

          Brief switch on today brought me this astounding quote mid afternoon today Saturday, spoken apologetically:
          “… I know it’s a bit “old school”, but I do think musicians should be able to keep in time …”

      • Mr_Blobby

        Maybe that is what we need a fresh look at the problem. Because the current system is not working to well and all we get is more of the same old same old.

        • NZ had a chance to do that and like a bunch of moronic sheep let politicians like Simon Power gerrymander a referendum to ensure MMP, which ironically was supposed to give people more power, and instead handed power to the political parties.

          The answer isn;t to change the system, it is to use the system more effectively

          • Mr_Blobby

            How can you use something broken more effectively, without first fixing it.

            Our Justice system seems like another good example.

          • Kimbo

            “How can you use something broken more effectively, without first fixing it.”

            By electing the right people, or appointing the right judges.

            Like Crusher Collins did with Susan Devoy as Race Relations Commissioner. The position is bullshit, and has been subject to capture by the loony and malcontent reverse-racist left for decades. Just look at the calibre of people now criticising Devoy and why – “lack of education (i.e., in lefty dialectic malcontent politics), lack of a career background (i.e., not a professional trougher, like that self-important bombastic arse that TV3 dredged up a few days ago, Barry Lovegrove), nothing but a competitive sportsperson (i.e., someone who knows that merit is based on achievement irrespective of race and making excuses and blaming others, and overlooking her work with folks with disabilities)”.

            Collins made an excellent appointment and there is now someone in the position who can transform it from within so that the role is no longer required – rather than tackling the abolition of the position head-on, which would have been politically impossible in the current environment.

          • justin

            Yeah MMP not working – binding referenda is the way to go. Hmm seems there is a party that has this as a cornerstone.

          • rockape

            A party without an MP is just a social gathering, you need to get real. The only support the Conservatives got was because of ACTs leadership and the wrangles that they brought on themselves over the previous 2years. They will probably come back post Banks and there are no prizes for guessing at whose expense!

          • justin

            So you are suggesting the right block (all right leaning voters) should just wait for another coup in ACT.
            Get real the viable alternative is here, it has a support base, growing party membership, well funded and sound political manifesto.
            The right needs Conservatives to keep the left out of the government benches.

          • rockape

            Well at the last election they were polling 4%, it now seems down a fair bit. How long will it take for Colin to get bored and start sending cheques to National again?

          • justin

            That’s your plan – wait for boredom?

          • rockape

            No Boredom is only for boring people. I intend to work as hard I can to ensure John Key gets the election he would wish for.

          • justin

            Sorry I was taking your response as your idea/intent.
            Good on working hard for JK – the right needs a strong national, but that doesn’t mitigate the necessity for a viable coalition partner.

          • rockape

            I dont work hard for John Key. I work hard for me and to get a government that suits the needs of NZ not some political ideology. PS when I say work, I am just a retired old fart who sits on 5 acres, sails yachts and misses these sort of arguments down the pub( UK Pub )thatis.

          • justin

            I hope that we have a safe prosperous NZ for future generations. We share the same aspirations, but I’m genuinely worried about our future rockap, we need the right behaving like the right.
            p.s. what are you using your 5 acres to grow?

          • rockape

            3 dexters,15 wiltshire 21 chickens and all my own fruit and veg. I have a pump action shotgun and 22 years as a military and weapons tactics instructor. So come the socialist revolution i am OK.

          • justin

            I’ll be your field commander in the right revolution as long as I’m made Lord of the Mighty BOP.

          • rockape

            Binding referenda, now according to your leader that will need a 67% pro vote to make it binding, with a left vote of about 45% thats going to put paid to many of your plans How does the will of the people work when it can be blocked by 34% of the people?

          • justin

            Sounds like great policy to me!.
            So that the pollies will only be binded to legitimate messages from the people.
            People that don’t think this is a great idea have strong personal agenda for power.

          • rockape

            No I dont Justin. I think binding referenda will stop progress. I also think it has an inbuilt error, that of the Knee jerk reaction. a moments popularity of a policy and you could live with it for years.

          • justin

            As opposed to the tangible damage that will be done by the Labour/Green/Mana/NZF monster?
            Why afraid of direct governance? Democracy is a great idea, what we have now is far far from democracy.

          • rockape

            If they do that much damage they will be out in 3 years. Bad descissions that take time to change and 67% to change them can last a lifetime. In your arguments you seem to forget we have elections every 3 years and even Labour have to reign in their extreme elements to get elected again as National would have to do with you. So thanks for your offer of support, but no thanks.

          • justin

            So your happy to give the left multicoalition monster three years because you won’t endorse the Conservatives as a legitimate political ally to National?
            We are in an MMP race – we (the right) cannot cannibalise ourselves.

          • rockape

            See your trying to put words in my mouth, but I learnt my politics from smarter people than you. NO I want a National Government and I think a Conservative party weakens the chance of that. Note I didnt say Conservative MPs, iI just dont think you will get any, So a vote for you is a vote less towards a National Government. Now if you were an extreme Left wing party taking 4% away from Labour and the Greens you would have my blessing. Thats how the cooky crumbles. In fact my dream is 15 left wing parties all polling as wellas the conservatives.

      • Mediaan

        And very little is known of his wider policies. They could be anything.

    • justin

      Simple fact is that come 2014 NZ is going to need the conservatives getting over the threshold.

      • rockape

        Why is giving votes to a party, votes that can only come from National or ACT help the cause of National? I dont believe the conservatives will get an MP or get over the 5% threshold. So unless i am wrong what good is taking votes away from the right. 2% to craig is 2% ACT may not get,ACT gets 2% and they get 2 MPs the conservatives get 4% and they get nothing!

        • it is worse than that as shown by the results last election. Colin Craig stole 3% of National’s votes and by not crossing the threshold went and gifted half of those to Labour. If he hadn’t stood then National would have won outright without the need for coalition.

          • justin

            Or maybe JK cup of tea fueled NZF over 5%.
            Whale you’re not seriously suggesting no conversatives is good for the right??

          • rockape

            He probably isnt suggesting that. But its sure good for National.

          • justin

            Again just silly to say good for national. No conservatives = no national government.

          • rockape

            So what exactly in terms of seats did the conservatives do for National last election, answers on the point of a pin please!

          • justin

            History. But six weeks of campaigning and 3% of votes. The next election will be a longer campaign and many many more have signed up as party members. Conservatives won’t be a ‘interesting’ alternative – but a genuine home to conservative voters concerned with National having little discernable difference to Labour.

          • rockape

            History,The more we here from the conservatives, the lower they go. History, no PM under MMP has had more continued support from the people of NZ. Tell you what if Colin Craig gets 1 MP I will buy you dinner, if National get re-elected despite the Conservatives,you buy me dinner.

          • justin

            No minor party polls well mid electoral cycle. But believe me the Conservatives will be there campaigning hard come election time. They are legitimate force in politics – there is a wide body support network formed (and growing) and more and more disenfrachised voters.

          • unsol

            Justin I think you make a fairly good case re striving for the swiss model & pushing for binding referendums.

            The problem with this though is that most people in NZ are not prepared to make the tough calls. They cannot see the forest for the trees & merely only vote according to what they see in it for them.

            So before going down that path society needs to start recognising that decades of current/regurgitated old polices are no good, that long term they do more harm than good.

            This is why I vote & will continue to vote National. They – as in this current version – recognise that it will take years, decades/generations even to change people’s mindset on what makes for good economic & social policy.

            In terms of you flying the flag for Colin Craig, can you please explain why it is that you like him & his party so much?

            To date he has offered nothing in terms of substantive policy so what is it you think you would gain from him in government? How do you know that he won’t just do whatever it takes to get into government – e.g. if he holds the balance of power, go with Labour. How would such a scenario make you happy?

            The thing is that he is a fundamentalist christian so he polarises a lot of NZ right there. Many people will not go for him based on that. Further he has said nothing about what it is he claims to stand for other than being anti gay & tougher sentencing. Hardly stuff to actually resolve some of our most major issues. Good to also keep in mind that the last christian led party ended up with its leader in jail for child molestation. Not inferring CC is a pedophile, but more that such things do not pose as a good precedent for NZ political history.

            Act on the other hand make their policies very clear & further are neutral when it comes to religion.

            Personally I think a vote to CC is a wasted vote & further if he gets in you may find you regret it (as in what he claims to stand for may be very different to the reality once in parliament).

          • justin

            Your last sentence sums up National for me “what they claim to stand for may be very different to the reality once in parliament”.

            That’s why I feel true betrayal from National. That’s why I consider binding referendum as a great idea.

            The Conservatives have zero silly policy (and their website has lots of detail).

            THe reality is that If Colin goes rogue then he will suffer the same fate.

          • unsol

            “That’s why I consider binding referendum as a great idea”

            Assuming of course most people will vote for what you want.

            Remember CC has barely 2% of the vote at last count. He is no way representative of the majority of NZ.

            And re him going rogue – I would be willing to wager it is when not if.

          • justin

            If the National Front (horrible bastards) said they’d agree to binding referendum results. I’d think great lets take them up on this. You think the Conservatives are in the same boat (with opinions no-one would back) you should be thinking the same.

            I’ll take you up on that wager. I’ve met him, read what he has had to say. I weigh him in my best judgement as a sound, sensible, honest man.

          • Colin Craig is a dishonest politician. He lied about his polls, lied to the NZ electorate and continues to lie especially about his views on gay marriage. If the conservatives have any support it is from happy clappy bigots opposed to gay marriage and they have been suckered in by Colin Craig who won;t lift a finger to repeal the law despite what his supporters say

          • rockape

            hey but out us kids are having our own fun here, go kill a duck or something:)

          • Hazards001

            Define the criteria for a binding referendum?
            Turnout or eligible voters?…and consider that people that are happy with the status quo are unlikely to hit the polling booth….hence why we are stuck with MMP?…errr…you happy with the fact that a wanker like Peters or pull throughs like Dunne and Hide have held the balance of power for so long? All due to referenda…feel free to correct me…as I know you will…posted at 1139pm…troll check lolollolol

          • unsol

            Late answer but will answer anyway since I know you’re likely to check in. :-)

            Funny re troll – they must really love you! Weird as I clicked on your profile & you don’t have any followers (I apparently have one!) so love to know how they know you have made a comment.

            For me if order for me to be keen on the kind of thing Justin wants I would have to see over 90% voter participation in binding referendums elections with over 2/3 voting one way or another.

            The last election- lowest turnout in years whereby MMP was given another life line, shows why referendum doesn’t work. Not enough people vote & not enough people have the guts to make big changes.

            So if Justin’s little theory came to fruition you can bet that the referendums would result in changes he (and most of us on the right leaning to hard core right) would not be that keen on.

            Most people seem to be centre & swing depending on what the see will benefit them the most.

            I hate MMP, WFF, scholarships based on race, long-term welfare assistance, DHBs, regional & local councils & their overpaid CEOs, unions, the public service (the entitlement & gluttony), etc etc yet I cant see any of this changing if it were left up to us & referendums.

            I personally think that the Nats are doing the prep work in order to bring in more substantive changes next term. Or at least that is what I am hoping!

          • Hazards001

            I worry if my troll doesn’t down vote me..I rush of and check the hatch match and dispatch columns just in case…hehehe

            Yep where you’re coming from is in line with my thoughts re binding referenda.

            As to the Nats I believe they have pissed away the opportunity to wind back some of the excesses of Helen’s vote buying.

          • unsol

            Me too. I wish they had been tougher – I agree with the tinkering as it will take generations to change the handout mentality that has been building since the 1920s, but they didn’t have to tinker so lightly! The problem is slash & burn (Shipley) did a lot of harm too hence why the Nats are too afraid to do anything major. After all, it is all about securing their next term so the way of the masses always rules.

          • 3% based on a lie that Colin Craig was going to win Rodney, that he was leading in the polls…Mark Mitchell is still pissing himself laughing over that one…New Zealand not so much after the conservatives gifted 1.5% to Labour

          • rockape

            Seems right now we have no conservatives and a National Government. Doesnt quite fit with your wet dream does it!

          • Kimbo

            he he he. Well done.

            The only thing more amusing that pointing out to an ideologue that their argument is circular is…the way continue to run around like a mouse in a Skinner box refusing to see that the circle is complete :)

          • justin

            But the problem is that National has failed to implement the real policies that would make NZ a better place. Instead they’ve keep Labours big spend vote bribes, socially engineered and fallen for the baubbles of power.

          • Kimbo

            “There is a widespread and understandable belief that National is a party without philosophy. In fact it has a quite explicit philosophy expressed as fifteen constitutional objectives. Four of them give the movement its identity, the rest being the usual hogwash about loyalty to the monarch, belief in democracy, a just society and so on.

            The critical four are briefly, a belief in private enterprise, in individual effort and initiative, in a property-owing democracy and in personal freedom.

            But in the last three decades there has been a steady erosion of all these desirable tenets, coinciding with National’s long reign. In short the party in office has never practised what it preaches. In that regards it differs from Labour only in that its objectives are different. In office the two parties are largely indistinguishable.

            Nevertheless the philosophical differences between the parties are the principal reason for National’s continuing success and Labour’s continuing failure and that is reflected in their membership support.

            For every genuine socialist among the New Zealand masses there are twenty strong adherents to the private enterprise, market-economy system. They provide an undying if often frustrated and complaining allegiance-base for the party. Their complaints when aired to National politicians are invariably met with the retort, ‘Naturally we agree with you but you don’t want us to lose the election do you?’

            …In fact National could well replace its present list of constitutional objectives with a single expression of its purpose- ‘To seek and retain by whatever means necessary, within the existing democratic system, the political control of New Zealand.’ Possibly a second and shorter objective could be added which would state, ‘To keep the bloody Labour Party out of office.’ Bob Jones, New Zealand the way I want it (1978).

            Nothing has changed in 35 years, justin. New Zealand doesn’t want or need an ideological right-wing political party, and the time has never been ‘right’ for one.

          • justin

            Kimbo – you reveal yourself as a left wing supporter “New Zealand doesn’t want or need an ideological right-wing political party”.
            The left don’t want the Conservatives because they know that it will mean no left wing executive.

          • Kimbo

            “The left don’t want the Conservatives because they know that it will mean no left wing executive”.

            And over 95% of the country doesn’t want Conservatives. Sounds like governance by the majority.

          • justin

            False argument Kimbo. You measure Conservatives as failures because 95% aren’t voting for them.

            You know well enought that 30% always vote Labour/National. Leaving 40%’ish that could possibly swing (Conservatives hold well in this domain). Remember they are consistently polling as the 5th most popular party in this country.

            The threshold is key. They will get more attention when election comes around (but remember the threshold will be 4%).

          • Kimbo

            “The threshold is key. They will get more attention when election comes around (but remember the threshold will be 4%)”.

            On that matter you may be right.

            However, you still overlook that

            …National may not need a coalition partner with over 5% of the vote (they haven’t the last 2 elections).

            …even if they do, NZ First could fit the bill.

            So much for your talk of a factual and rational discussion.

            Ultimately the Conservatives will have to stand on their own feet, and should expect no favours from National getting over the 4%. If National is seen or perceived to support them then it is potentially damaging to their brand and ultimate election chances.

            Which runs counter to the message you are running…

          • justin

            I totally agree – the Conservatives need to stand on their own feet. A cup of tea is a major cop out.

            The goal is the threshold (I’m not sure if any electorate in the last 25 years has been won by a non national/labour (or sitting MP) ever. [did Jeanette do it in the Coromandel??].

            But I will defend the Conservatives due to unfair/justified attack. The policies are sound and with fair journalism will attract the support they need.

          • Kimbo

            “The policies are sound and with fair journalism will attract the support they need”.

            But no conservative politician should EVER have to rely on fair journalism. Always expect the worst from the rferees, and lift your game so you tak ethem out of the play. Remember, the public aren’t that stupid, and they love to hate the media even more than politicians. Again, I’m not making the rules, I’m just reporting them!

            You said earlier, “be careful how high you set your own bar”. I’m not – it is already set.

            If you come talking about conservative values and fiscal responsibility then there ate three hats the media will invariably try and place on you: –

            1. Homourless kill-joy and stuffed shirt. Strike one against Craig.

            2. Bully prepared to use their power/money to intimidate others – case in point Aaron Gilmore. By threatening satirists that is strike two against Craig

            3. Hypocrisy, be it financial or moral. Witness Graeme Capill. Even poor old Rodney Hide, who broke no rules, was hung out to dry on his ministerial expenses. Technically right doesn’t make you politically astute, especially in a profession where perception is everything.

            Colin Craig and his supporters had better get a thicker skin, and especially expect no favours or even fair treatment from the media. They will be hunting for the hypocrisy story, and if there is one there, you can be certain they will find it, and feast on it.

            Again, I don’t make the rules – I just report them.

          • rockape

            So justin lets test your resolve on that one. You all for consensus politics. Natioal poll 46 % labour about 31%, a total of 77% So wouldnt the best think for a consensus be a National/Labour alliance, a true alliance that reflects the wishes of the majority?How does that grab you? or are you not as interested inwhat the majority want as of your dream of a lurch to the right that just isnt going to happen.

          • justin

            Rockape, I will go with majority in true democracy. I’ll give you a couple of specifics with MMP not being democratic. The list MP’s are core drivers of social policy (look that the gay marriage and drinking age – both failed to pass if only electorate MP had votes counted – why is that??)

            I will happily go with the majority vote in referenda. I’ll stake that as a promise, I would expect you to do the same (acceptance to go with democracy is something I hope all WO readers can agree on).

          • BJ

            Maybe the Conservatives and NZ First could form a ‘right coalition’ pre election and call themselves the NZConsensus Party.

          • Simplistic like most conservative supporters.

          • justin

            Hi Whale,

            Welcome aboard – good stream of debate here.

            Where you been?

          • Yes I am

        • Kimbo

          Quite right!

          Coalition parties will only come into the play for National with over-hang. Over-hang is the result of the anomaly of parties like ACT, United Future, the Maori Party, and Mana, who achieve electorate seats and therefore parliamentary representation greater than their share of the party vote.

          It is like the argument in One Day Cricket that you HAVE to bat out all your overs to win a game. WRONG! You have to score as many votes/runs as are needed, and overs batted/coalition partners is simply desireable, but not necessary means to that end.

          Seeking/assisting a coalition partner where one does not naturally exist who cannot get into Parliament on its own steam is inherently risky. Other than tactical voting in particular lectorates like Epsom and Ohariu-Belmont, you have to send the coded message to your supporters to party vote for option B, but if, say, only 3% get the message, that ultimately detracts from your ability to make the 50.1% of the ‘live’ vote.

          The left in NZ – Labour, Watermelons, Mana, Winston First (i.e., Rob’s Mob) is fragmented, and when it suits they will betray one another. Even if they can/will cobble together a 4-headed alliance (and maybe add the Maori Party), it will be an unstable government that will result in the quick re-election of National, probably before the end of three years.

          National is in the perfect position of having a stable and coherent brand, and have essentially united the right-wing vote that fragmented when every ambitious political whore went their own way after MMP was adopted after the 1993 referendum.

          • Mr_Blobby

            You started of well. Over-hang is the result of the anomaly of race based parties. There should be no room for race or religious based parties in a functioning democracy.

          • Kimbo

            Hmmm. Can we have Labour outlawed as the party of Irish-Catholic malcontents on that basis?

            Or the Greens as pagans? It is a religion. Your idea has great promise, Mr Blobby. But then isn’t banning and outlawing who and how people can vote a control-freak leftie trait?

            Also, just out of interest, how are Act and United-Future race or religion based?

          • Mr_Blobby

            No. But being a gaggle Gays and self serving unionists, Yes.

          • justin

            not so Conservatives picking up 5% would not create an overhang. Anderton wins wigram but neglible party vote creates overhang. Replace Anderton with Maori Seat or Dunne.

          • Kimbo

            Correct. Overhang only results from parties winning electorate seats while gaining a lesser percentage of the party vote than their total number of parliamentary seats justifies. Just don’t ask me to explain it while I’m drunk (or sober for that matter)!

            However, the only way in the present context (and that is the key point!) for the Conservatives to get 5% is for people who would usually party-vote National to vote Conservative instead. But for what purpose?! 46.5% for National + 5% Conservative is not as good as 50% for National, and a wasted 1.5% for the Conservatives, especially if not enough people vote according to the (stupid) ‘plan’, and it ends up National 47%, Conservatives 4.5%.

            Right-wing voters may have their differences, such as ACT and the Conservatives are more ideological, whereas National are pragmatically on the right. However, one thing they are united in is their abhorrence of left-wing government. Why, if you want to keep Labour/Greens/Mana/NZ First out would you try and manufacture a 5% coalition partner you haven’t needed in the last two elections, and in doing so possibly risk splitting and potentially wasting your votes, thus opening the door to a self-inflicted defeat?!

          • justin

            But you are still sounding like a zealot preaching the mantra of National over 50%. I think that more pragmatic right wingers need to look for that viable alternative which there is only Conservatives.

          • Kimbo

            Hmm. Interesting to be accused of being a zealot by an obvious Conservative Party supporter.

            In 2008 National achieved 44.93% of the vote, and once those who had wasted their vote (on parties such as the Conservatives), they had 58 seats – that is nearly 50% of the effective vote.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_general_election,_2011

            In 2011 National achieved 47.31% of the total vote, which was effectively 49% of the ‘live’ vote – and formed a government easily.

            Bear in mind that if you win approximately 48% of the non-wasted vote in your own right, you have won both ‘morally’, and almost certainly in reality.

            Why? It is effectively impossible for the other side to cobble together a coalition from their disparate and contradictory parts, especially when there is no obvious dominant partner (like National) with bit players happy to accept what crumbs come their way (like, Act, United-Future, and the Maori Party).

            Don’t believe me? Try Labour 28%, , Greens 14%, NZ First 5%, and chuck in Mana, the Maori Party and United-Future with 1 seat each. The numbers might (just) add up on paper. Good luck forming a workable government with such a group of self-seekers and zealots of various shades!

            Conservative spruikers, like ACT before them, are trying to sell the message that you MUST have a genuine coalition partner, whom you must assist to get 5%. The first premise is debatable, the second is nonsense. Helen Clark in three elections (1999, 2002, 2005), and John Key in two (2008, 2011) have showed that major parties don’t win elections by manufacturing partners on the ideological fringes. Instead, elections are won in the centre-ground.

            In 2005 the total Labour vote declined slightly, and Labour’s partner, the Alliance. imploded. Meanwhile stupid Don Brash took National towards the ideological right, and cannibalised the ACT vote.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_general_election,_2005

            When all the votes were in, despite talk about the great campaign Brash ran, the dividing line between the left and right vote was in EXACTLY the same place it had been in 2002. All the partners Clark needed to form a government fell into line. She didn’t even need the Greens in cabinet, because they had no choice other than to vote her confidence and supply!

            The first rule of politics in a pragmatically (not ideologically!) conservative country such as New Zealand: To win elections you head to the centre – and ignore the zealots on the fringes.

            Which is why Labour, who have always been a natural home for zealots and extremists and Utopian dreamers, have always been the natural party of near perpetual opposition. In contrast National, the party of moderate right-wing pragmatists (Holyoake, Muldoon in his day, and Key) are the natural party of government. Buy sticking to the centre, sometimes setting the policy debate, but often following it.

          • justin

            Why was Labour turfed to the curve?
            Because of their radical social agenda and borrow + big spend mantra.
            I was so pleased to see the back of Labour, I am a right wing voter National voter, but no more. Yes I’m a supporter of the Conservatives – and rightly so, National has continued exactly where Helen’s Labour left off.

          • Kimbo

            “Why was Labour turfed to the curve?
            Because of their radical social agenda and borrow + big spend mantra”.

            Hah! You are listening to your own echo-chamber, projecting your policy preferences onto the wider electorate.

            If that was really the case, then they why, if Key (as you allege) has been simply repeating the same policies, has National in both 2008 an d2011?!

            And if that really was the case, Labour would never have been elected in 1999, or re-elected in 2002, or 2005 (when they stood on the policies of interest free student loans and the recently-introduced working for families).

            Why did they (just) lose in 2008? The rise of John Key, previous NZ First voters who were betrayed by Winston Peters (again!) taking the baubles of office (if Peters had won just 2% more of the vote and crossed the 5% threshold Clark may have been able to govern again), the lunacy of the Electoral Finance Act, and death-by-a-thousand cuts scandals like David Benson-Pope, Taito Phillip Field, the Owen Glenn saga which contributed to the perception that Clark lacked…competence.

          • justin

            I’m so disappointed with National – I’m well right of most posters here. You know that Labour bribes their way into power, usually through higher tax. National has bribed their way into power using borrowed money (which by default must mean a higher tax for future generations).
            I want government that acts in the best interests of NZer’s even if that means making hard decisions

          • Kimbo

            “I want government that acts in the best interests of NZer’s even if that means making hard decisions”

            Yeah, but EVERYONE says that!

            But ok, even if that were so – and I accept that in the case of zealots and ideologues on both the left and right they REALLY are prepared to “make what they perceive as the) the hard decisions” – the majority of the electorate won’t truly buy it unless there truly is no other alternative. Ideologues end up on the margins, invariably disappointed, while the pragmatists who are prepared to swallow the dead rats, govern with a consensus that placates but doesn’t thrill most.

            Welcome to the “democracy” thing you were lauding earlier. Again, don’t blame me. I’m not making the rules – just reporting them.

            “I’m so disappointed with National”. Meh. The only place you find sympathy is in the dictionary between ‘shit’ and ‘syphillis’.

            John Key is the best “conservative’ government you are going to get. Pushing for anything more, as rockape and I have explained previously, seriously risks opening the door to Labour and the Watermelons. Again, I don’t make the rules – I just report them…

          • justin

            Kimbo the Labour and watermelons (and Hone + Winnie) will be in power if there is not Conservative MP’s next year.

            It’s as simple as that.

            When you say – “welcome to democracy” you died a little inside didn’t you? Labour ‘democratically’ ruled for 9 years – and those guys will look moderate compared to whats sitting on the opposition benches at the moment.

          • Kimbo

            “When you say – “welcome to democracy” you died a little inside didn’t you?”

            Now you are being a presumptuos, not to mention sanctimonious (no surprise!) c_nt.

            Actually, as much as I despise the Greens, I figured people have as much right as you to vote for who they want and have their vote count. So as musch as I personally dislike MMP, I voted rto retain in at the 2011 referendum.

            Which is as much as a favour as I’m going to extend to them – or you. Democracy means people collectively vote for what they want, and we all live with the consequences.

            Now kindly stop with the mind-f_ck talk, stop thinking you know what I believe and why, and stop acting like you are engaging in rational and adult discussion instaed of peddling snale oil.

            Did I mention you are a presumptuos, not to mention sanctimonious (no surprise!) c_nt?

          • justin

            This reply is disappointing you had some keen debate going before. Sorry if this sounds sanctimonious.

          • Kimbo

            You presumed to know what I thought, so the disappointment is your own merited work.

            Try a decent apology genuinely retracting your arrogant presumption and you won’t sound sanctimonious (and yes, you still do).

          • justin

            Yeah sorry about that last comment. I genuine apology too. I like debate and hate trolls (I felt like one when I posted that last comment).

          • Kimbo

            Thank you. Apology genuinely accepted. And sorry for reverting to 4 letter words

          • justin

            Sweet. I’m feeling a bit up against it as I’m threading a few conversations now.

          • rockape

            AND ACT you know the party with an MP!

          • justin

            Ha ha. Banks is completely compromised. I don’t remember that 8 foot german and his helicopter ride. haha

          • rockape

            I think someone said that about Winston a couple of elections ago.

          • justin

            Can’t stomach that guy. did he ever actually pay back that $200k? saying he had a transcript of the cup of tea and something was said about pensioners – just straight up liar and political opportunist (he would go with Labour in a second).

          • rockape

            justin my dear chap, you are starting to sound like a Labour supporter. If you say something often enough maybe it will be believed. Well thats old school politics, and hows it working out fot Labour.

          • rockape

            and in which area is colin craig going to run against National and win?

          • justin

            On social engineering. Selling strategic assets. Foreign farm purchases. Astronomical public borrowing. Hypocritical leadership. Housing bubbles.
            Rockape – if you’re a true National support you need to rely on Labour shooting themselves in the foot, not on asking the electorate what National has done.

          • Kimbo

            “On social engineering. Selling strategic assets. Foreign farm
            purchases. Astronomical public borrowing. Hypocritical leadership.
            Housing bubbles.”

            OK, so if that is going to be how Colin Craig is gouing to carve out a niche at National’s expense…then why would National go into coalition government with him when…New Zealand First has almost exactly the same political agenda?!

            Tell me again why National has to have the Conservatives as coalition partner option, when NZ First will fit the bill – and have a proven track-record of getting over the 5% threshold, and a history of playing the whore for the baubles of office!

          • rockape

            Sorry I should have said in which electorate!

          • justin

            “Sorry” because you can see I’m right above on every point.
            If you really are a right winger you will acknowledge the missed opportunity of this “right wing” government.
            5% (could be 4%) means no electorate.

          • rockape

            What national has done. Well I voted for better education, better health service, lower crime rates . I have had the bonus that the National Government has seen us through the recession in a better state than most OECD countries and has seen us through a couple of narural disasters to boot. Output is rising, the confidence of businesses is rising and the belief that National is on the right track is stable at about 60%.
            So what happens next! well we are coming out of recession and soon will reap the rewards that can only be good for the Government in Power. So based on 47 years of studying politics , will we need the Conservatives, Nah!

          • justin

            Rockape,

            I don’t really want to school you here. But “seen us through the recession in a better state than most OECD” is a massive fallacy. You must (all voters must) take a real look at the accounts of this country, we are royally stuffed.

            Bill is fire selling strategic assets, raising GST, taxing car parks etc because we are in big big trouble.

            We are spending like mad (more than Helen/Cullen ever did) – we are spending on daily bribes (WFF etc).
            The GFC was caused by too much borrowing in the western world – look at the housing bubble.
            We are in trouble.

          • rockape

            If you want to school me go ahead. But try using facts not suppositions. Fact NZ has one of the highest growth rates in the OECD. What is more strategic about electricity than food. Raising GST offset a drop in income tax. a transfer of taxation from earning to spending a good idea in a recession dont you think. Yes we are spending more, we still have to support the citizens(voters) of NZ and there Has been a recession! So yes we have more out of work,we also have more employed! What housing bubble, a much smaller one under National than under Labour. Join the real World!

          • justin

            Yes yes, the merry go round will keep going. Don’t look over there at that giant public debt, endless balance of payment deficits, increasing credit fueled record house prices.

            The world will continue if we keep borrowing on future generations… the path to wealth is through debt.

            Highest growth rates in the OECD – you know that of every two dollars spent in nz one is spent by government?

          • Kimbo

            “You must (all voters must) take a real look at the accounts of this country, we are royally stuffed.”

            But they wont unless they really have to – which they don’t at the moment We don’t want boring messages of impending eco-doom from the Greenies, and we don’t want economic and social doom whether it is from the Conservatives on one side, or the ‘99%’ on the other.

            You are free to peddle whatever political snake oil you want but one thing I will call bullshit on, and that is that stable and dependable government depends on sharing real power with those on the fringes, like the Conservatives.

            Not in New Zealand it doesn’t. because the people who determins the outcome in politics, i.e., the electorate, invariably give ideologues short shrift.

            Again, I don’t make the rules, I just report them.

          • justin

            Kimbo,
            Our public debt under national has risen 20billion to around 70billion. Our private debt levels are very high (somewhere around 120% of GDP). Exporters struggle with massive high dollar, which is encouraging a consumer spend up fueling the deficit in our balance of payments. Housing prices have reached record highs (all borrowed money from overseas).
            Kimbo you cannot serious defend our terrible financial position.

          • Kimbo

            Nope, I didn’t say I was defending it.

            I said that the people who ultimately decide what should be done about it, i.e., the electorate, have their phone off the hook to your incoming call.

            Again, I’m not making the rules – just reporting them.

          • justin

            Kimbo your damned if we do damned if we don’t mantra will enable the left.

            The electorate is always docile during the mid term. Come election they will find a viable, enthusiastic and motivated Conservative party.

          • Kimbo

            “Kimbo your damned if we do damned if we don’t mantra will enable the left.”

            And the Greens say the same thing at their end of the spectrum about the right!

            I’m sure come leection day there will be a enthusiastic and motivated cosnervative Party (the jury is out on ‘viable’). Just like there is for every other party.

            Enjoy that Kool Aid.

          • rockape

            I agree. Politics is fickle, the last election would have been a walkover had it not been for that damned cup of tea and the tape. If that hadnt happened both Nats and ACT would have done a couple of points better. It amazes me the arrogance of those who say an alliance with the far right is democratic and good but with ACT or the Maories is bad.

          • Mediaan

            Strategic assets! They are not by any measure strategic. Who have you been listening to?

        • justin

          Because Nats won’t get over 50% of the seats and there is no sensible coalition partner. It’s as simple as that.

          • rockape

            So ACT taking away votes from the conservatives would be good for the conservatives. If ACT didnt have such a loose cannon for a leader, the conservatives would be pushed to poll 1%.

          • justin

            So you have to weigh it up rockape. The ACT party is critically compromised with Banksie as leader there is zero credibility. And Banks will be very very very lucky to pick up Epsom again.
            The Conservatives however has the structure, party base, and importantly the finance to campaign as legitimate alternative. Don’t under estimate how many Nat voters hated Helen’s liberal agenda – which has just been completely emulated by John Key.
            If the euthanasia private members bill (Labour authored) is drawn it will be even more so. p.s. John Key stated he considered that it was regular practice now anyway.

          • Kimbo

            “The Conservatives however has the structure, party base, and importantly the finance to campaign as legitimate alternative”.

            Just as ACT did from 1996 to 2008, and that went REALLY well for National in that period, didn’t it!

          • rockape

            I way things up on my terms you say ACT is dead so the alternative must be the Conservatives.Well no, more votes for National is my preferred alternative, next getting Mr Dunn a couple of extra percent that would certainly help. Choice 2% to dunn strengthen National alliance, 4 % for Conservatives and achieve nothing. Do the sums!

          • rockape

            I have been weighing up politicians for a long time. I live my life and weigh my politics by my old Regimental prayer. Give me the wisdom to change what i can change,the tollerance to accept what I cannot change, and the strenght to kick the shit out of those that piss me off.

          • justin

            Amen

      • Nope…the Conservatives, aren;t…conservative, they are a cult of personality lead by a person with no personality, and worse no political smarts.

        • justin

          Scare mongering. You have learnt from the left – don’t debate the issues just smear as much as possible and hope it sticks.

          • Dave

            Justin, Colin Craig doesn’t stand a chance, the majority of NZ thinks he is a weirdo. There are a few things in life don’t mix, for me the biggest is Politics and Religion. nuff said!

    • Rodger T

      Politicians, meh!

      • Rodger T

    • rockape

      If ACT wont see a leadership change then the answer is for everyone who believes socialism is a crock to Vote National. If National got over 50% then all this bullshit about a lack of a mandate vanishes. Not only that, but why is it partners in Government let the side down. Peters ACT, the alliance all disappointing for the party in Government. I want all dog,no tail!

      • Kimbo

        “If National got over 50% then all this bullshit about a lack of a mandate vanishes”.

        No, the bullshit about the lack of a mandate won’t disappear. Don’t you know that every election the left don’t win was stolen from them by the corporates/business exploiters/conservative forces of darkness?!

        • rockape

          Cant I hope?

          • Kimbo

            Fair enough.

            In the interim, I prefer to view the moaning as a chance to savour the taste of their tears.

            As an alleged poltical philosopher and thinker once said, “We won, you lost, eat that”.

      • Pete George

        The last proved that there is resistance to National getting over 50%, they had been consistently polling over but inevitably dropped under in the election. People preferred to vote for Winston rather than see National rule on their own.

        Labour are trying hard to give National single party rule, but I don’t think it’s going to happen.

        • rockape

          Wrong, the National party is a fairly broad church. The right of the party went to ACT and the Conservatives, a loss of about 4% Add that 4% to National and they would have been home and dry with no need for the Maori party or ACT both of whom I suspect damaged Nationals support base.

        • justin

          You are spot on Pete – real head in the sand attitude to think 50%+ is a viable election result. Those preaching this are the religious zealots!

          • rockape

            Typical of you dont like an argument and the opposition become religious zealots. Well I am an athiest and support the center left and voted for FPTP just how does that make me a religious Zealot? Playing the man ,not the ball, not a good argument!

          • justin

            Not personal – just that in this stream there are many many comments hinting that National wont need a coalition partner which is just pure misplaced faith (hence zealot comment).
            Can you see polling which has National regulary over 50% – answer no so silly to think not need for a coalition partner. Conservatives are just the logical partner.

          • Kimbo

            They are “logical” if

            1. they can get over 5% of the vote without any favours (and as a conservative party they will understand why subsidies and special favours don’t work, and are usually held in scorn by the voters, who are the ultimate boss).

            2. they have sufficient nous to enhance, rather than detract from a credible government. The antics of misfits, amateurs and sundry zealots among NZ First in 1996 to 1999, the Alliance in 1999 to 2002, and United-Future in 2002 to 2005 were potentially damaging to the Governments in which they took part – certainly so in the case of Shipley’s re-election chances in 1999.

            On that matter, Colin Craig may be an attractive leader to those who have drunk the Kool Aid. Amongst the majority of the electorate I’d suggest he is damaged goods, and anyone who brings him in as a partner risks being shackled to a corpse.

          • justin

            Damaged goods. Hmm seems to me he’s a successful businessman, family man and isn’t tainted with prior political experience.
            Just as John Key was seen by voters as being a breath of fresh air – Colin will have the same effect.
            I agree with your conclusions with various political minor parties, but the conversatives appeal to a much much wider voting base.
            Smears like “Kool Aid” are very reflective of the genuine political mandate many voters want to give to a legitimately conservative party.

          • Kimbo

            I don’t make the rules, I just report them.

            “the conversatives appeal to a much much wider voting base”.

            Hah! Not based on ‘history’ which you lectured rockape on. The Christian Coalition, Destiny, Gordon Copeland, even Taito Phillip Field (snort!) when he struck out on his own…glug, glug, glug.

            You are confusing your own enthusiasm and that of the narrow circle you run around in with the wider electorate. It is a simple mistake that most ideological and religious zealots stepping into the public and political arena make. In the end, the feedback you are hearing is your own echo chamber.

            Don’t believe me? Trust me, no one who determines elections cares about the descriptor, “family man”.

            Like Martin Luther said – “it is better to be ruled by a competent Turk, than an incompetent Christian prince. Key was a breathe of fresh air as you rightly say, but the thing that earned him the support was not ultimately his business acumen, his family status, nor being untainted by previous office. Instead it was because he was recognised as…competent.

            Colin Craig threatens to sue a satirist. Legally possible, personally justifiable, politically speaking…incompetent!

          • rockape

            Helen did OK for 9 years hardly your typical family man! And, her policies were crap too!

          • justin

            Rockape,

            Helen bribed everyone with taxed money.
            You a serious scrapping the bottom of the barrell when you say “Helen is my defense”.

          • rockape

            es I agree, and dont a lot of voters just love to be bribed. Thats why referena are a crock most wont vote for the good of the country, they vote for what they think is good for them.

          • justin

            That’s what you’ve got… “Colin Craig threatens to sue a satirist”.
            Wow write him off now!
            Come on we need a sensible adult debate on real issues. We need a strong right government. The Conservatives are the key to this come election time.

          • Kimbo

            “Come on we need a sensible adult debate on real issues.”

            Indeed we do, but from Colin Craig and his suuporters that is a pompous self-serving distraction.

            It also overlooks that as politicians are content to package themselves in neat sound bites, with glossy pictures and ad campaigns costing lots of money (hello Colin Craig) and the New Zealand public are forced/choose to judge on the basis of that sort of trivia, then politicians have no alternative other than to ensure they manage the trivia well.

            If they can’t do that, then the public is entitled to judge that they can’t manage the big things, like, say…the country, well.

            Again, I don’t make the rules, I just report them. And your guy managed to make a laughing stock of himself in a way that every political opponent and liberal media commentator (i.e., most of them!) will hang around his neck at every opportunity.

            The lesson Colin Craig didn’t learn, and which now probably makes him unelectable – don’t give them a stick to beat you with.

          • justin

            Unfair judgement. You write off Colin because of a defamation case which was retracted an hour after the apology?

            You quoted me on real issues above. Lets debate real issues.

          • Kimbo

            “Unfair judgement. You write off Colin because of a defamation case which was retracted an hour after the apology?

            You quoted me on real issues above. Lets debate real issues”.

            OK, let’s discuss the real issue of political management. No matter how important a candidate thinks his policies are, he has to have the ability to “sell” them.

            Craig is obviously a political idiot-savant. Of course the defamation case was retracted on the basis of the apology. The person concerned couldn’t be bothered with the hassle. And the apology was suitable derisory and hollow, while satisfying legalistic requirements.

            The real issue, though, is Colin Craig’s stupidity in highlighting the issue of obvious satire at his expense. Yes, his lawyer may have been legally right – although we will never know because it wasn’t tested in court. However, lawyer are experts in law, not politics. In fact, often the advice of lawyers to their clients (e.g., as in the case of Donna Awatere and Taito Philip Field – admit nothing, explain and say as little as possible) runs directly counter to the need politicians have for public credibility.

            Any expereinced politician would have realised that getting the apology was a Pyrrhic victory, that simply publicised well beyond the original scope the satire at Craig’s expense, and portrayed him as defensive and pompous.

            And what was Craig’s supposed reason? “Politicians should be respected”?! Hah! I think the NZ public has it right in holding them in contempt until such time as they prove themselves – and if they don’t do so very quickly they very rarely deserve a second chance.

            Which I doubt Craig will get, because he is obviously a numbskull who hasn’t learnt Politics 101 yet. So we can safely carry on looking into other political options, and consign him to the dumpster. Which is how it will probably end up as a result of his inept political management.

            There – real issue considered and debated, and conclusions reached.

          • justin

            I’ll conceed happily that the defamtion was poor judgement – before I write him off I’d like more evidence against his character.

            Here Kimbo the door is wide open, but remember there are gaff’s made by all. I’m right wing so I avoid attacking Nat pollies (be careful how high you set your own bar)

          • Kimbo

            I notice that you did the bait and switch with this post.

            Let me remind you of what I wrote before, which you were allegedly responding to” –

            “they (The Conservatives) are “logical” (coalition partners) if

            1. they can get over 5% of the vote without any favours (and as a conservative party they will understand why subsidies and special favours don’t work, and are usually held in scorn by the voters, who are the ultimate boss).

            2. they have sufficient nous to enhance, rather than detract from a credible government. The antics of misfits, amateurs and sundry zealots among NZ First in 1996 to 1999, the Alliance in 1999 to 2002, and
            United-Future in 2002 to 2005 were potentially damaging to the Governments in which they took part – certainly so in the case of Shipley’s re-election chances in 1999″.

            Care to respond to that, and the point I have made 2x already, that

            1. National didn’t need a partner who managed to get over the threshold in the last two elections and

            2. even if they do in future, NZ First would fit the bill?

          • justin

            1. 2008 there were 122 seats and National had 58. in 2011 there were 221 seats and National had 60.

            2. NZF are a highly volitile groups (Horan is rogue, Prosser caught out and Winnie’s a shocker).

            Sufficient?

          • Kimbo

            At least you make an argument.

            You overlook Winston’s love for the baubles of office, and the others in his feifdom (because that is what it is – just check out where Horan will be aftre the next election) will likely fall into line behind him for the sake of their parliamentary salaries (it is the Winston First party).

            Also, as I’ve argued elsewhere, getting to just short of the required number of seats on your own is effectively a win for National – they could govern as a minority government even if the sprats like Banks, Dunne, and the Maori Party didn’t fall into line/disappeared. NZ First would be unlikely to force a vote on confidence and supply because they would be blamed (and likely punished) for forcing an early unecessary election.

            Even if National was just under 50% with no obvious partners, there are just too many unworkable deals to be done on the other side. Labour and NZ First – yep. Labour and the Green, yep. Labour and NZ First, and the Greens? Almost impoosible. Add in Hone – nope!

            Proven option 1 for Key – ACT

            Proven option 2 for Key – United Future

            Proven option 3 for Key – Maori Party

            Proven (electorally, and on the basis of willingness to enter into coalition in 1996 annd 2005) option 4 for Key – NZ First

            Unproven go-to option if he really needed to – Conservatives.

            I admire your enthusiasm for your cause, justin. Maybe it will come to fruition in 2014. I’m just not buying your message National will “need” them.

          • justin

            The state of these parties (bar one man band Dunne – who has gone with Labour) is just awful.

            A minority government… hmm… this will simply mean more of what we have now (borrow and hope). Being right I like stability and I’m pragmatic enough to see National not getting over 50% – remember 2011 was a record bad for Labour – they likely do better.

            I’m chuffed that the left is in the disarray they are if they remotely had any clues the right would be in big trouble (why I hate these missed opportune years now “sorry cuts in spending GFC really can’t be avoided”).

            I am enthusiastic for the Conservative cause. I think that Nov 2014 we’ll all be happy that they get over 4%

          • rockape

            I ask you a genuine question. If the conservatives poll just under the threshold and National lost by a small margine would you feel thats good or ban for NZ. If that3% had got National in again would that not have been you preferred option?
            IF THAT HAPPENED WHO WOULD HAVE CUT OFF THEIR NOSE DESPITE THEIR FACE.

          • rockape

            Todays trivia question. Has any country ever elected an MP called Colin?

          • Kimbo

            Rob Muldoon’s mate, Colin McLachlan was MP for Selwyn

          • Mediaan

            Numbers quoted wrongly I think.

          • rockape

            Can you see polling that gives the conservatives 1 seat. Not your dodgey internal polling we saw the result of that last time!

          • justin

            Rockape, your cutting your nose off inspite of your face.
            NZ needs a right wing government next election, we really need this more than ever before. We are a critically broke country, drowning in debt, spending like mad and we’ve been able to do this for the short term because we were in a fiscally strong position – but not now.
            We are compromised – we need strong leadership. If the left get in and spend and borrow on all of their promises (remember each minor party on the left has $$$ demands for support) we will be screwed.
            By the way the Conservatives have no minimal $$$ bottom lines for support.

          • rockape

            your like a second hand car salesman trying to sell me an old banger when I drove up in a jaguar. I dont want a exterme right wing Government, I dont want binding referenda, they work both ways and can detract from the government doing its job. How do you think getting 67% to vote for drop in welfare is going to work when you look at the number on Benefit myself included as a pensioner) I think your 67% requirement might work against that dont you!

          • justin

            Your Jaguar is about to be repossessed because of all the outstanding debt you have on it.

          • Kimbo

            Ho hum, bait and switch

          • justin

            Sorry ask me again? I thought we were talking about bad financial $.

          • rockape

            To quote russel crow from Master and commander”dont tell me that wasnt fun”

  • cows4me

    The ducks don’t seem to be in abundance today and the weather isn’t the best, fine. Shifted cows about 7am didn’t hear any shots, plenty of dams and waterways around, I think the hot dry summer has limited their numbers. Quite a few paradise and Canadian geese around but the bastards are as cunning as shit house rats. Use to shoot opening morning but now refuse the $90 for license fee, will shoot later in season on own property and don’t have to buy license. Will head up to woolshed later to help with the duck plucking and bottle top removing.

    • It is too warm…they aren’t migrating.

      My mate in the Hawkes Bay says the leaves are still on the trees, no frosts so undergrowth is thick as for upland game…reckons it will be the worst opening in a long time.

      • cows4me

        I say your mate is probably right WO. Have one river and several streams on farm but the numbers just not here this season. There were quite a few ducks on the shit ponds early in the year but they left about February.

        • I have ponds around my place…no shooting int eh city, but fuck all ducks on them, and fuck all in the lead up…they will all be down south

    • BJ

      Plenty of shotguns busy from first light where I am. Hopeful my son arrives home with a few. There’s a couple on our dam that I am looking at right now – an oasis for the ones that get away (haha)

    • Gazzaw

      It’s standing room only at the Auckland Domain duckpond.

      • Travis Poulson

        Shit, I might have to pop down with the .270 when I get home from the fishing trip.

    • Mr_Blobby

      A License. What don’t we need a license for, what is the, sad arse, excuse/justification for a $70 License.

    • unitedtribes

      4 pheasants and two paries outside my window this morning. Left them though

  • maninblack

    wonder what large scale nationalisation scheme that ginga commie Norman is cooking up.. haven’t heard from him for a few days..

    • Pete George

      He’s been overseas on leave since he dropped the Power bomb. Turei has been speaking on their Empower scheme over the last few days, since Clint pulled Hughes from media exposure.

      • Gazzaw

        Not burning up avgas for his own frivolous use I hope. Not exactly environmentally responsible and a very poor example to the rest of us. Almost hypocritical in fact.

    • TomTom

      Jesus. Don’t wanna know.

  • amerikiwi

    Wondering how many Labour/Green MPs purchased MRP shares yesterday? If the shares end up going for less than anticipated would their purchase be considered insider trading?

  • PlanetOrphan
  • Pissedoffyouth

    No wonder people preload before going out for a night, went out last night and paid $12 a beer, way too expensive.

    • justin

      That bar maid must have had a great pair coz I heard you went back from round after round.

    • Mr_Blobby

      It costs thousands for all the licenses, certificates and other associated bullshit. All that cost has to be recovered.

    • LabTested

      I’m having breakfast at Hong Kong airport. A 1/2 litre of Japanese imported beer NZ$6.30 & this has to be the most expensive place in HK. A handle of beer in MT Eden costs more than a 1/2 litre in Berlin & most other places I have done research at

  • Ronnie Chow

    Now that Minarchist Kiwi has gone silent , were there telltale signs in some of his more over the top statements ?. There’s bound to be another leftist shill along soon .

    • Mr_Blobby

      It was all a bit creepy if you ask me, he has attached himself as a follower of my discus account.

      • Travis Poulson

        As well as a few others.

    • Travis popped his balloon

  • Macca

    Question: Why is it that a National backbencher that makes a bit of a Cyril Hunt of himself out on the large makes the top news item on TV1 yet the ‘Lets ruin Nationals Mighty River share float policy’ from Liarbour and the Gweens, looks like costing NZ Inc approx 400 million and never even gets a mention?

    Question No 2: Did any one see the massive, 6 point Roy Morgan Poll reversal getting any air time on the same news channel?

    • Phar Lap

      Quite right over the top.Also Doom Post has headlined I,t by the guess who cub reporter pillow talk mate, of LIE-bours bully boy Robertson, a shelia called Vance.Seems LIE-bour also controls that daily rag ,as well as their tv channel TVNZ.

    • Gazzaw

      It would make for a fascinating column on how much health and education infrastructure $400 mill would buy but I won’t hold my breath waiting. Fran O’Sullivan might oblige but whether Currie or Murphy would approve it is of course highly debatable.

    • Gazzaw

      Deleted. Dupe post

    • Ian

      Fairfax have a stable of left-wing messengers, they are not fit to be referred to as journos. One of them, Vance, has been heard to state that she will do anything to knock JK over. Lovely, where is the unbiased news reporting they profess to support?

      • Mediaan

        They also employ a “Letters Editor” for The Press called Michael Vance, who pursues the same line. He relentlessly publishes pages of sometimes idiotic comments that satisfy his core criterion. This is, complaining about Key or National.

        Are they breeding strings of these Vances?

  • unitedtribes

    Quinton Wintors is wanted by the police in regard to the shooting of the Stop Go guy.
    He was discribed as a right wing loner. Wonder if he was a contributor to WO

    • Mr_Blobby

      With the exception of me, you have just described everybody else who posts here.

  • justin

    Oh crap time has flown. Highlanders in it against the Sharks (see I support underdogs). Missed most the first half. Rock and Kimbo – cheers for the robust debate.

    • Kimbo

      sweet – catch you later

  • Pingback: Better options than referenda? | Your NZ()

33%