Quote of the day

. . . Tonight’s poll basically has no change in the party vote from February. The one area where there was significant change was Preferred PM. Andrew Little went down 1% to 11% and Winston went up 3% to 10%. So the main impact of the by-election has been Andrew Little coming close to ceding the title of opposition leader to Winston Peters.  Labour may want to reflect on the difference between a strategic decision and a tactical one.David Farrar

10 Responses to Quote of the day

  1. Gravedodger. says:

    If Corin Dann, Katie “it does not seem to mater what we do” Bradford and all the other wannabe NZLP shills masquerading as political journalists were half way to competence they would have hit on the nub of that poll in the ‘boil on the bum’ message that The abrasive cleaner had in his too clever by a half move to boost The Dwarf, only handed him the defacto leader of the opposition anthill.

    The total disbelief in the perception they cling to that the current government is on the skids was palpable.

    Political journalism in this backwoods is woeful in the total absence of any ability to understand and analyse what presents, due entirely to the misplaced belief in the tiny minds of the participants that they are the story.

    That said Mr Key and his increasingly perceived sycophantic minions, need to show they are leaders and not followers. Mr Key needs to get out more and more importantly stop allowing himself to be reactive , listening to those closest and a great first step could be to acknowledge that in the centenary of what many see as the forge that the modern NZ was cast from, is not the time to be talking about the bloody flag.

  2. homepaddock says:

    We’ll have to agree to disagree on the flag, Gravedodger. I am very keen to get one that is distinctively NZ’s.

    The referendum was an election policy and you could just as easily argue that one with a silver fern, which marks the gravestones of soldiers who died, would be honouring them.

  3. Mr E says:

    Ele,

    When it comes to the yachting you say: ‘More than difficult, it would be all but impossible to convince people that funding ……………………would be good news of public funds.’

    When it comes to the flag you support change. Yet it appears the public don’t widely support flag change.

    Politicians live and die on their popularity. I think the flag debate could be an unpopular one and I think Key could be taking a risk with the support base.

    On the other hand , it is most definitely an issue the left will sink their teeth into, a distraction of sorts. A rope-a-dope

  4. Andrei says:

    The referendum was an election policy

    I see

    (1) The National Government will give us a referendum on a banal issue that they decide upon, one that only matters to upper middle class twits but not to the ordinary folk struggling to make ends meet

    (2) The National Government will ignore the results of citzens initiated referenda telling the voters who have over whelmingly told them that laws thy have passed aare way out of line ie Sue Bradfords anti smacking

    (3) And will impose upon New Zealand Satanic changes onto the sacred institution of marriage without this even being a policy discussed during an election campaign, let alone being permitted to be put before the voters in a referendum

    Thus does the National Party of New Zealand treat the citizens of New Zealand with contempt

    Our electoral process is a joke, a farce which delivers only mediocrity to the halls of power

  5. homepaddock says:

    1. Governments, and people in all but the most desperate of circumstances, can deal with more than one issue at a time.

    2. CIR are non-binding for good reasons. I thought Bradford’s legislation was wrong, and still do, but I still voted against the referendum question. It was badly worded and a blunt instrument for a serious problem requiring much more finesse.

    3. This was a private member’s bill not a government one. If polls are any guide had the issue been put to a referendum those wanting the change we’ve got would have won. I would have preferred Eric Roy’s suggestion to follow the model used by many European countries to separate civil arrangements from church ones.

  6. Andrei says:

    The flag debate is just political bullshit that wastes taxpayers money and allows vapid politicians and to posture.

    There is no need or call for this change except from a few well off republicans with more time on their hands than they know what to do with and not anything better to worry over

    The smacking bill is all about undermining parental authority and slowly transfering ownership of citizens children to BIG GOVERNMENT so that BIG GOVERNMENT can raise them in their image – Godless Marxism in other word. Should be an anathema to a so called right wing politician,

    Bills passed under John Key’s watch with his affirmative vote will be part of his political legacy and no amount of spin about private members bills will change that ever!

  7. TraceyS says:

    “The smacking bill is all about undermining parental authority and slowly transfering ownership of citizens children to BIG GOVERNMENT so that BIG GOVERNMENT can raise them in their image…”

    What complete and utter nonsense, Andrei. Here is Section 59 of the Crimes Act: Parental Control, reproduced for you…

    “(1) Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of—

    (a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or

    (b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or

    (c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour; or

    (d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.

    (2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.

    (3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1).

    (4) To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.”

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM328291.html

    …because I don’t think you’ve read it before, Andrei. Where does it say or even imply that “BIG GOVERNMENT” wants to raise our kids in “their image”?

    That is just a figment of your fertile imagination.

    There is every reason contained in the following news item for not excusing or condoning violence or threats of violence towards children:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11435540

    Sure, changes to Section 59 didn’t not prevent this tragedy. All this demonstrates is that there clearly remains a lot to learn – particularly for the wider community.

    Growing up I am aware that my mother knew of physical child abuse within her circle. She justified it by saying “everyone did it”. The only problem is that kids grow into adults and soon find out that no – not “everyone” did it. Mine did. My husband’s did not. And he grew up just fine – not in the image of his parents, not in the image of BIG GOVERNMENT (lol) but in the image of himself and who he was meant to be.

    Violence toward children is not critical for correction purposes. There are other and better ways.

  8. TraceyS says:

    *did not*

  9. Andrei says:

    It works like this Tracey

    I don’t tell you how to raise your children…….

    and you don’t get to tell me how to raise mine (you’re too late anyway – they have grown and are off in the world carrying on from where we are going to leave off).

    What the hell makes you think that you have the authority to dictate to other people how best to raise their children?

    Who granted you that mandate?

  10. TraceyS says:

    Andrei, the State also tells parents they must send their kids to school (or get an exemption and meet the State’s criteria for educating at home). How children spend a large part of their daytime hours over some 13 years is a big part of their upbringing, and the time, place and content of that, is largely dictated by the Government. Sure you have choices as a parent; of schools etc and parents can influence their school by getting themselves elected to the Board or contribute in other ways. But even still, your individual wishes go into the melting pot along with everyone else’s, and some things are not able to be changed at the community level – such as the majority of the curriculum.

    “I don’t tell you how to raise your children…….

    and you don’t get to tell me how to raise mine…”

    Mind-your-own-business…yes, this was the prevailing attitude in the 1970s when I was growing up. Turn a blind-eye to what, in some cases, was serious, repeated, and/or misdirected abuse in the name of parenting. I’ll tell you that it does none of the parties involved any good, even taking a toll on the witnesses who did nothing to protect children in their community because, at the time, they didn’t want to interfere with the parental authority of others – but later regret oh so much that they didn’t. I also think that the denial and self-deception required to ignore the violent behavior of friends, family, neighbours, etc. has very unhealthy effects for some people later in life when maturity changes the way they think and cultural norms evolve.

    Edward Livingstone gave his children bullet shells as presents. That’s not my style of parenting but hey, each to their own isn’t that what you are saying? I say no. That culture has to change. When parenting goes terribly wrong often whole communities are deeply and permanently affected. So people within communities should interfere when they see things are not right. I have instinctively stuck my nose in before and almost lost it but I would do it again in an instant because it did make a difference.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: