Mulholland Heft Meer Mmmmmmmm...

FIngerpointing

My understanding of defamation law is that this is actionable.  You know, the most logical thing to say would be that whomever put the Green Party posters up (a disinterested contractor presumably?) trimmed the bottom off.  If this is indeed the case, why have the Greens not once used this as an excuse thus far?  Well naturally, it's because they are filthy liars.  And I know this because these weren't the only posters I saw up without authorisation.  There were some at the corner of Richardson and New North Road as well.  I didn't take a photo of those ones because frankly I'm lazy, and it's only the fricking Greens.

I'm not going to bother with pursuing the defamation for the same reason that I didn't do what they're accusing me of, which is that I simply don't care what they say and they are welcome to print as much bullshit as they like in an election year.  Frankly I hope they put up as many of those poor Banksy imitations as possible - they're not particularly clever.

What does piss me off, however, is, as I said on television, when you vote for legislation, then break it, then lie to avoid prosecution.  Even NZ First has shown some sort of contrition on this count, and they voted for it too.

But even then, I don't care.  What I really want is not for the Greens to be more honest, or to be prosecuted, or to stop voting for dumb legislation (that's never going to happen).  What I want them to admit is that they f*cked up and that they are going to loosen the restrictions on free speech which they have helped put in place, because frankly, in an election year where they should be cannibalising Labour's vote, it's probably hurting them a lot more than it is the eeeeevil National Party.

Schiifahren

Blogging will be light until at least Monday.  I'm buggering off to the South Island to do some skiing with my TPOA* and I suspect access to electricity and civilisation will be limited.  But you never know...

While having the time of my life on the slopes I shall try and spare a thought for your miserable, impoverished lives slaving for the Man over a warm computer, the odd peek at Mulholland Drive your only solace from the daily grind.  But don't count on it.  :oP

*Tasty Piece of Ass

Bassett vs Lange and Pope

I still have only read the first couple of chapters of Michael Bassett's book.  But what is noticeable is who is using what rhetoric.

"It's clear he must have dropped him."  - Lange commenting on his father's delivery of baby Michael.

"The first time I met him I felt my flesh creep."  - Pope on Bassett.

Like I say, I haven't read the book all the way through.  But frankly, you have to wonder who exactly is being bitter and twisted here?  I have yet to hear or read of any quotes from Bassett of such a scathingly personal nature.  And yet he is the one who is having scorn poured on him for bearing a grudge?  Get real.

I will not pass full judgement as yet, but the criticism of this book seems, so far, greatly undeserved, and perhaps some fingers should be pointed back in the other direction?

Mulholland Drive: As Seen on TV

I did a short interview with TV3 News earlier today on the Electoral Commission findings.  Tune in tonight to watch the fun.  :oP

UPDATE:  Excellent Smithers, they used the exact soundbite I wanted.

Ya Think?!

Study confirms men like casual sex more than women.

Your tax dollars at work.  Who would have thought?

The Greens Are Liars As Well As Hypocrites and Lawbreakers

So the Electoral Commission released it's findings on my complaint regarding Green posters yesterday.  Let me first clarify (again) that I believe this is theoretically a free country and the Greens, subject to the laws of defamation and public decency, should be able to poster about the place as they please.  But as long as they vote for legislation that restricts my free speech I will be damned if they have any.

As far as the decision goes, it's an odd one.  Essentially the Electoral Commission seems to be saying that, if the financial agent denies authorship of the material, and it's not a permanent fixture, then the Act is not breached.  How interesting.  That strikes me as an extremely relaxed interpretation of the law.

But of course, this is all student-politics-style wankery.  The really interesting part of the decision is the Green Party's response:

• the photos submitted all appear to have the promoter statement removed or covered over, and are not in the original state in which they were printed or published
• the line "Support the Greens.  Buy the t-shirt" on the posters has also been removed
• the Party did not publish, or cause or permit to be published, an election advertisement that was not duly authorised by the Green Party's financial agent

Bollocks!

So I'm basically being accused of photoshopping, because the Party would, of course, never allow election advertising without the authorisation on it!  I don't think so, Tim.  Check out the proportions - it's a full A0 poster.  Check out the loose end circled below.  There's no chopping or trickery going on here.  And as I've noted, subsequent posters have had the authorisation added.  Nope these posters are au natural, as I originally saw them, and undoctored.  The Greens have essentially lied to the Commission to wriggle out of their mistake.  Lefties lying for political advantage.  Humph, what else is new?

Friday Fun - Talk About Mudflaps...

Apologies for the lack of posting lately, I've been:

• Making money;
• Spending money;
• Drinkin' wine;
• Feelin' fine;
• Doing temp work; and, oh yeah...
• Reading Michael Bassett's awesome new book (buy it at Dymocks, it's ten bucks cheaper).

I should be able to provide a review of the latter at some stage.  Until then, here's some Spinal Tap for your big ol' asses:

Rugby is a Free Pass for Rape

She
Was
Asking
For
It.

Thanks for clearing that up, Granny!  Now excuse me while I go throw up somewhere in disgust.

The Ghost of Keynes

I cannot believe it.  I cannot seriously believe that a professional columnist would write something so obviously and blatantly wrong.  But by gum, Will Hutton has done it.

Keynes has been completely discredited by anybody with half a brain, and yet here is Will Hutton in the Grauniad saying that "...it was Keynes who pointed the way; without public intervention, financial markets go badly wrong."  F*ck off!  Yes I know that's not an intelligent response, but seriously!  How can you say that with a straight face?!

Will wants to blame the banks and the free market for the economic downturn, but completely ignores the elephant of fiat money still stomping about the room.  He also fails to see that the cure may be worse than the disease:

"So what public intervention is needed? The US provides the answer. In these conditions, central banks slash interest rates despite what is happening to oil prices; the risk of a credit implosion is vastly higher than an upward wage and price spiral. Also, the US has only been able to avert disaster in its mortgage market via the guarantees offered by two huge public mortgage banks - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - which directly or indirectly have provided 80 per cent of all new US mortgages over the last six months. Together, they guarantee more than half of the US's £5 trillion of mortgage debt."

Again, how he can say this with a straight face I have no idea.  I can think of no quicker path to disaster than to follow America into economic oblivion in this way.  The lower you keep interest rates in a country, the more money you print.  Printing money does not make money.  The more money you print, the higher inflation gets, and the more capital goes offshore.  At this rate the US dollar will continue to fall, all because the Government and the Federal Reserve is artificially propping the economy up.  Eventually something will have to give, and when it does, we won't just be talking about a recession, it will be a second Great Depression.  Which of course Will Hutton will blame on the free market.

We have been lucky in New Zealand so far.  We have some of the highest interest rates in the OECD, and therefore the RBNZ is printing less money than other countries, making our dollar more valuable.  You can thank Ruth Richardson's strict legislative genius for that.  Bollard has to keep putting rates up by law.  Even then he has kept them too low.  We will survive the worst of the economic weather because of it.  As other economies continue to tank, investment money will continue to flow into the country and hold us above the ferment. 

So why are we still in trouble, especially with record Fonterra payouts?  Three reasons - first there is the oil supply - the result of a combination of a foolhardy war and a reluctance to drill anywhere new.  Then there is the food prices - the result of American and European agricultural subsidies.  Those chickens are coming home to roost, and sadly, apart from inventing a nuclear powered car or something, there's little New Zealand can do about it.  What we can do something about is the third problem - the housing bubble.  Planning laws and the RMA create a low supply environment.  That means the government is distorting the housing market to make it the most attractive investment.  So when all this lovely capital flows in like refugees from more Keynsian climes, guess where it ends up?

What is now happening is that the bubble is starting to burst.  People have stopped buying - either they have given up on the idea of owning a house, or they are continuing to rent, because in most cases the interest and rates you pay on your own home will be higher than the rent you'd pay on the same property owned by someone else.  Something must give - either rent will go up, or house prices will come down, but either way it won't be pretty.  And since Nick Smith and Bill English are still on National's front bench it will continue - unless ACT are part of the next government.

Yes, our ideas are twenty years old.  That's because they worked twenty years ago.  They will still work.  I don't see your ideas working, Dr Cullen.  Or Will Hutton for that matter.

Friday Fun - Nietzsche in Musica

Nearly forgot Friday fun.  That's what self-employment does for you ;o)  Here's the greatest singer songwriter of all time for your amusement:

South Africa Still Under Apartheid

I thought the days of official classification according to race were over in South Africa.  Guess I was wrong.

More Thoughts on Liquor

It's fairly obvious from the stats that South Auckland has a lot fewer Off Licences than much of the rest of the country's urban areas.  So why try to clamp down on them?

It's deeply ironic that Labour, supposedly the party of the working class and working people, are now the party of making liquor less accessible to poorer people.  Both Labour and National have become parties of privilege.  They want to keep alcohol as a privilege for themselves and their class, putting it financially and geographically out of the reach of ordinary people.

Of course ordinary people will still drink, it will just be more expensive for them.  The working poor, the very people whom Labour was founded to protect, will once again suffer the most under "their very own" government.

The Return of Sly-Grogging?

Via Pacific Empire's excellent post on liquor stores, an excellent paper on NZ's puritan history.  It starts on Page 20 of the PDF.  The key excerpt:

In December 1963 the bodies of two men, Frederick Walker and Kevin Speight, were found in a house in Auckland’s Bassett Road. The men had been shot with a submachine gun, earning the killings the label ‘the Bassett Road Machine Gun Murders’. Not surprisingly, this was a drug related murder. More surprising, perhaps, is the fact that the drug in question was alcohol. Speight and Walker had rented the house two weeks earlier and were using it as a base from which to sell liquor without a licence, a practice known as slygrogging. Their killers were rival slygroggers who objected to these newcomers muscling in on their turf. So why, in 1960s Auckland, were criminals illegally selling a drug whose sale has always been legal in New Zealand?

…In Auckland in 1963 there were around 90 pubs in a city which, even then, had over half a million people. This dearth of drinking establishments was for two main reasons. The first was that the law from 1893 to 1948 all but prohibited new liquor outlets… The second reason for the lack of pubs was the entrenchment of what are known as ‘dry’ districts – electorates in which the sale of alcohol was prohibited… So we had in Auckland in 1963 a sprawling city in which some 200,000 people lived in suburbs where liquor sales were illegal. Most of the rest lived in areas where liquor outlets were scarce and were prohibited from selling after 6pm. There were few licensed clubs and the first licensed restaurant in Auckland opened in 1961. It is perhaps small wonder that slygrogging thrived.

What a bizarre attitude to alcohol this government has.  Not only does it make it a woman's fault if she gets raped, it also makes it a liquor store owner's fault if he gets shot.  But as you can see, alcohol has been a convenient scapegoat in New Zealand for 120 years - why change now?

Camp-out for Freedom

In a Parliament of whores and kneejerks, somebody has to stand up for the right of adults to buy and sell alcohol as they please.  And that woman is Heather Roy.  Thank God for ACT.

It's not going to be quite on a par with Strom Thurmond's infamous antics in the US Senate in the 1960s, but I am hoping that Heather will camp out in Parliament for the whole seven hours today and stop these pig-headed wowsers from having their way.  Though I hope that may not be necessary.  As usual, MPs simply want to be seen to be Doing Something (TM) rather than actually reform our liquor and policing laws to make South Auckland safer.  It may well be enough for Hawkins, Key et. al. to bluster about trying to introduce the legislation and be repeatedly shot down by Heather - giving both sides the opportunity to grandstand.  That would be ideal.

All this shows the vital nature of a liberal voice in parliament.  We need a lot more than just two of them.  Hopefully come October we will have more - and NZ's greatest living politician in Cabinet, whether John Key likes it or not.

UPDATE:  Crap.  He snuck it in there after dinner last night.  So this is how freedom dies - to thunderous applause?

My New Website

I've finally cast myself adrift as Blair Mulholland Liquor Licensing Consultant, complete with my new professional website at the link (Mulholland Drive is, of course, my unprofessional website).  It's a bit basic at the moment, but it will do.  If you know anyone purchasing a bar, restaurant or bottleshop, I do applications nationwide, so you now know whom to call ;o)

Chutzpah

Ahhh, looks like the Government has finally woken up to the problems of exorbitant oil prices and are finally promising to Do Something (TM) about it.  Except...

"Oil companies will have their pricing structures scrutinised by a Government-ordered inquiry."

Listen very very carefully Lianne. I will say this only once:

HOW ABOUT LOWERING SOME OF THAT EXORBITANT BLOODY TAX ON FUEL BEFORE YOU START WHINING ABOUT THE OIL COMPANIES?

The problem with oil prices is not the "greedy" oil companies that make about a ten percent margin on petrol.  It's the greedy government that makes about a fifty percent margin.  But you'll never see an inquiry into that.

Darwin & Grim Reaper Keep Doing Deals

Oh dear.

I Heart Bob Jones

Bob Jones is a living treasure.  He should be an ONZ, or Governor General, or Dictator for Life or something.  He is New Zealand at its best, and as it should be.

That he now intends to deliberately break the law by campaigning against the government is the best political news I have heard all year.  Sir Bob is about to take all those skyrocketing Wellington property profits gained from the fastest growing industry in the country (the bureaucracy) and train them on the corrupt pack of authoritarians that now occupy the Beehive.

The ensuing results will be a lot easier to envisage if you imagine Bob Jones as Samuel L Jackson, as below:

The tyranny of evil men is about to end.

Friday Fun - Welcome to My Life TATU

Let's see here...

• Lesbians;
• Teenagers;
• Russian; 
• School uniforms;
• Wet blouses.

That about covers the Mulholland Drive sexual fantasy checklist:

:oP

The Really Actually Truly Freaking Sensible Sentencing Trust

I hereby announce the formation of the Really Actually Truly Freaking Sensible Sentencing Trust.

Our purpose will be to ensure that Russell Fairbrother is incarcerated in an IHC home and remains there for the rest of his natural life.

Apparently the criminals are just victims of society, which sounds like a classic caricature of what a right-on leftie twat might think, but never be stupid enough to let escape his mouth.  Well it turns out that Fairbrother really is an A-Grade Penis and is 100% serious.  He literally told Kerre Woodham on the radio this morning that we should be nicer to criminals because most of them aren't bad people.

The really actually truly freaking tragic thing about it is that we need this sort of debate on prison reform.  Prisons are ultimately a very 19th Century way of dealing with crime.  Alternatives should be explored.  But you don't start the debate off by making crims out to be victims of capitalism or some bullshit like that.  You start from the point that you want to help victims, punish offenders, and make sure that they don't offend twice.  The focus should be on the victimhood of the er... victims (remember them Russell?).  No wonder this maroon lost his safe Labour seat!

Oh, So We "Donated" To Labour, Did We?

It looks like anything a party puts out with a parliamentary crest on it is considered a "donation".  I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Can I have my "donation" back?  I really didn't want to support the Labour Party.

Discretion My Arse

Have you noticed that every time Labour come up with a new form of oppression, they always use the D word?  Whether it's smacking, or electoral law breaches, or now cellphones in cars, it's always about giving the police as much discretion as possible.  We can trust the police.  They will be sensible.  They will do the right thing.  Oh yes.  It's only Bad People who will get caught out...

Bollocks!  What kind of discretion is there when you are talking on a cellphone?  Does it depend on whom you are talking to?  Or how loudly?

God help us, when can we get some politicians that won't treat us like children?  Will National repeal this?  I doubt it somehow.  It'll be yet another WWJKNC.

Oh and big ups to my homeboy Hone for telling a Pig to go f*ck himself.  You da man.

Labour Keeps Digging

Despite spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of our money to promote themselves, Labour can't even find a supportive family to front their campaign:

You FAIL at campaigning.  Maybe if your party wasn't riddled with bewildered GLBTWTFs and childless, snotty arrogant academics, students and unionists, you might have some actual New Zealanders on the front of your leaflet.

The "Hard Right Agenda"

This is about the most damning evisceration of the National Party I have seen so far.  And God knows they need a few bitchslaps. 

Of course, the Libz still believe in keeping our armed forces and police, and probably support prisons as well, so they're far too moderate for me ;o)  But seriously, even though I am supporting ACT this election (politics is, sadly, the art of the possible), I am glad somebody is making these arguments.  They sorely need to be made.  As they have rightfully pointed out, National is not going to move us towards freedom, and last time they moved us away.  Only ACT or the Libertarianz are advocating policies to improve this country's fortunes.

I'd love to see some Libz in Parliament but the 5% threshold really does bugger things up.  They need to win a seat first, but even that is pushing uphill.

Baberaham Lincoln

Say what you like about Klynthun, evil Witch Queen of Arkansar, she did break through that glass ceiling.  Women can now be considered serious candidates for America's top job.  Which is fortunate, because McCain's only serious choice for a running mate is luscious Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

It's a no-brainer for McCain.  She's a family woman, she's young (44), the most popular Republican Governor in America, she has a track record of cutting government expenditure, pro-life, life member of the NRA, and she vetoed the infamous Bridge to Nowhere.  She would not only help mop up the middle aged women left behind by Clinton's failure, but her working class husband would help appeal to Clinton's other favoured demographic.  Oh yeah, and as a former beauty queen, she's like, totally hot.  So hot she's making me sexist  :oP

I think it's about time we had a PILF in the White House, and with McCain likely to buy the farm in office, Sarah Palin would be ideal for the purpose.  And unlike the Hilldog, she would be there on her own merits.

Evidence of a Sick Society

Words cannot express my sorrow over the death of Navtej Singh.  I never met him, but Riverton Liquor is a former client of mine and I had spoken to him on the phone.

It's hard not to fire anger in so many directions over this.  Liquor store owners are pariahs in South Auckland, but they are model New Zealanders.  They work very hard for a living, and are just trying to get ahead in life.  They do not create problems with liquor, just supply existing demand.  In fact, the very existence of such small shops is a byproduct of the ridiculous restriction on spirit sales in supermarkets.  Ever heard of a supermarket being robbed?

Then there are the draconian drug laws in this country, which guarantee that prices of methamphetamine go through the roof, guarantee people will manufacture the drug in as pure and strong a form as possible, guarantee addiction, and guarantee crazed addicts who haven't slept in a week will go around toting guns and shooting people for their next fix.

Speaking of guns, why couldn't Mr Singh legally arm himself?  As Ted Nugent once said "I would rather he was alive and the criminal was dead.  Am I weird?"  But of course he couldn't do that, and if he'd tried, the police, who don't like efficient competition, would haul him in on a murder charge.

The fact that a customer chose to loot the store rather than assist the wounded man tells you everything you want to know about how the social policies of Marshall, Kirk and Muldoon, and our failure to reform that blueprint, has destroyed South Auckland society.

And then there is the police.  Ah, yes, my favourite bunch of guys.  Well done!  Your incompetence in waiting half an hour before entering the shop just shines right through.  Can you say "chickenshit"?!  Gawd, go back to sitting on your fat arses on the motorway with a speedgun!

Some people see liberalism as a "do anything you like" philosophy that is selfish and amoral.  But it is always "do anything you like... and be responsible for the consequences".  Freedom with individual responsibility is the only system of governance which encourages good morality - which is by definition voluntary.  If governments give people rules and forces them to follow, the morality underpinning those rules ceases to be our own responsibility - it rests with anyone but us.

I fight for a freer, more liberal society because it would help prevent tragedies like this happening.  The motive of the assailants and the victimisation of the deceased and his family would not have eventuated.  When will we learn that government intervention always has unintended consequences?

Don't Save Power

It's not often that I advocate a scorched earth policy with regard to political opponents, but frankly, nothing else is going to make them come to their senses.

There's reasons we have a power crisis.  They are:  State ownership and regulation of electricity, the Resource Management Act, and our nuclear free policy.

At least one of those three has to give.  But if we all save power and live like mediaeval peasants, all of those policies will stay.

So burn those lights brightly, take long showers, heat your house to sauna-like levels.  Create enough of a crisis and Labour will be down to 12 MPs and we'll win our freedom back.  Roll on the Winter of Discontent!

Yuck

I was greeted with the unappetising sight you see below when I opened up Facebook yesterday.

Frankly, I'm disappointed.

UPDATE:  WTF?!

I Heart the Blogosphere

Whale Oil vs Corpse Cuddler!

Step right up!

I can't wait to watch this.  But Slater has already delivered the best smackdown:

Sheehan:  "You are on bro - you versus one of the Muliaga boys - take your pick which one. I will pay the $150 entry fee for them. Post the entry details and the venue."

Slater:  "So you can pay the $150 for their entry fee but you couldn’t see your way clear to pay their mum’s power bill…says more about you than anyone else Brenden."

Priceless!

An Insult

I'm not against Best Of collections.  I own quite a few.  In fact, the majority of bands do not really justify buying the individual albums of their work.  And in most cases, there are a lot of casual fans of bands out there who would not waste thirty bucks on a singular release, but would happily shell out for all the stuff that they've heard on the radio over the years on one easy-to-manage CD.  If they haven't already downloaded what they like off the internet of course.

Which brings me to The Best of Radiohead.  Why would you bother?  There is just no such thing.  Nearly all of their stuff is exceptional.  Other than Creep, none of their singles have been catchy radio singalongs.  There are simply no inessential tracks on their three best albums (The Bends, OK Computer and Kid A), and to pick some choice cuts off them and dump them on something else is sacrilege. 

Basically, EMI are having a good cry over losing one of their top earners and are milking the music for literally all it's worth.  But don't be a dumbarse.  Buy Kid A, buy OK Computer, buy the Bends, buy I Might Be Wrong, download In Rainbows, anything but purchase this insult to your intelligence.  If you want a mere sampling, you really should reconsider whether Radiohead is right for you.

Let's finish with some awesome Radiohead music that isn't on the Best Of:

National Joins Labour and ACT in Eroding Fair Justice

F*ck this, I'm going to stop congratulating National on anything.  I swear the National Party caucus reads my blog to see which way I lean before heading in the opposite direction.  Maybe I should start on some reverse psychology.  Let's build more state houses!  Superannuitants really don't get enough money!  Privatisation is bad!  Progressive taxation promotes equality!  The minimum wage is too low!  Education bulk funding was a terrible idea!  State funded health services would work better if only we gave them more money!

Maybe we might get some more policy u-turns out of that.  Here's hoping.

In consolation, at least there is still going to be a pre-trial hearing decided on the papers.  That is crucial.  But witnesses should still be sized up.  People forget that, whatever the trauma a witness/victim suffers, they are still the agressors before the Courts.  If the purpose of a criminal court hearing is not to justify making a fellow human being suffer and deter them from past behaviours, then what is it, pray tell?  The purpose is always to prove that an individual must suffer for their malevolent actions. It has to be worth it to the people testifying.  It should be hard, because these people are asking the State to do harm to another.  That is a grievously evil thing to do, unless someone can prove it is deserved.  That is where the onus lies, and National, Labour and ACT have forgotten that today in their rush for the cheaply won ZB voter.

Cool, I Have a Namesake!

I thought I was the only Blair Mulholland on earth.  Apparently not.  There appears to be a 10 year old Blair Mulholland in Kimberly, Wisconsin.  The things you learn while vanity-googling huh?

UPDATE:  Obviously an athlete.  He's the kid in the 81 jersey.

Friday Fun: WTF Does "Sussudio" Mean?!

Phil Collins' retirement is cause for great celebration.  But he was responsible for some gems, including this kitsch classic.  Coming to a Scientology protest near you:

What a 'Nana: Keynes Rears His Ugly Head Again

Did we learn nothing from the 1970s?  Some 'Nana of an economist has come out and called the fight against inflation "a failure", which we should ditch.  Honestly, who trains these people?!  Imagine if they did this with another discipline like mathematics - we'd have "experts" saying trigonometry is a failure and the Leaning Tower of Pisa is perpendicular to the ground after all!  Madness!

What ba-Nana-man is advocating is simply old-skool Keynesianism.  The principle behind this is that if you create a whole bunch of extra money, it stimulates the economy, encourages investment, and digs you out of recession.  Just like taking out a loan to help you start a business.  There's only one problem with this idea - it's complete bollocks.  Keynesianism is to economics what the plum pudding model is to nuclear physics - a once universally lauded theory that no serious expert should believe anymore, based, pertinently, on the research of the man on our hundred dollar note.

Inflation is nothing less than a reduction in wealth.  If ten bucks used to buy you a kilo of cheese and now only buys you 750g, and you haven't made more than $3.33 in income to compensate, you are officially poorer. Of course, many people do earn more to compensate, but the higher the inflation, the harder this becomes.  With low inflation, keeping pace becomes reasonably easy.  With higher inflation only a few will do so.  If the Left want a reason for "the widening gap between rich and poor", inflation might be a good place to start looking.

The 'Nana should know all this, but he is either stupid or ignorant, or thinks that atoms really are little plum puddings.  The best way to grow an economy is to increase productivity to start off with, not to print money and hope the stimulus turns into something economically tangible later on

ACT's Unfortunate Position

It's unusual these days for me to be in the position of praising National and slagging ACT.  But I'm afraid Rodney's stance on the Criminal Procedure Bill rubs me the wrong way.

Let's get airy-fairy for a minute - I believe that this Bill messes with the very foundation of our civilized society and justice system.  Ever since 1297 Anglo-Saxon justice has been based on the precept that one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  We play games with that at our peril. 

The complaint seems to be that the justice system is biased heavily in favour of the accused.  Well no shit.  There's a very good reason for that.  Our society holds valuable the idea that it is far better to risk a guilty man walking free than it is to imprision the innocent.  The alternative is the equivalent of martial law or a police state, where people are jailed first and asked questions later.  There are fewer justice systems more effective in the fight against crime than the Saudi Arabian model, but there is always a tradeoff, and that is the loss of liberty.

So coming back down to earth, I can see why pre-trial hearings are criticised.  It must indeed be awful for a rape victim to have to testify twice.  It must be worse to have one's personal life smeared by a defence lawyer when you are the victim.  Perhaps there are alternatives to be explored here.  But as bad as it is to be raped, beaten, stolen from, or lose a loved one, nothing in those experiences justifies denying justice to the falsely accused.  An acquital or conviction makes no difference to a victim beyond peace of mind, but for the accused it is life-changing.  Prosecution lawyers can be snakes too!  Without pre-trial hearings, they can spring any manner of slander on a Court, with no adequate chance to rebut or research.  As Louise Nicholas herself may find out should Clint Rickards bring a private prosecution in the near future.  She may come to regret her current views.

I applaud National for (for once) standing on principle for something in which there is precious few votes.   The number of voters afraid of becoming victims of crime vastly outnumbers the number of voters afraid of false arrest.  Personally I fear both, and ACT's support for this bill will allay neither fears.

NZ Labour Stands Alone

NZ Labour is now not only isolated from mainstream political thought around the world, it is out of step with other Labour parties.  Its hitherto closest counterpart of UK Labour is now doing what no National politician would ever even dare - privatising hospitals!

We are fast becoming the Albania of the South Pacific.  And a National government is not going to help change that.

She Wouldn't... Would She?

With the Hilldog so reluctant to throw in the towel, a horrid, horrid thought occured to me...

Would she run as an independent?

As much as a nightmare scenario as this would be, why not?  She has shown precious little sign of preferring Obama as President over McCain.  Many of her supporters would vote for McCain over him.  She may not ever be in a better position to get there.

Is this what she is now considering?!