Mulholland Drive

The End of Mulholland Drive

After some thought, I've decided to finish up here at Mulholland Drive.

I've been blogging for over five years now, on and off.  I first started when I was working for Richard Prebble at the ACT Office in Auckland, at a time when there weren't many blogs about in New Zealand, political or otherwise, and it's been great to see blogging flourish as a pastime and a source of news and fresh opinion.  I've had a great time ranting about current events, engaging in blog wars, being provocative, and most importantly making people think about fresh perspectives that may have been outside the standard mindset of popular discourse.

After five years I feel like I've exhausted myself creatively in the blogging medium, at least as far as the short and pithy stuff goes.  People know where I stand on most things, and I don't have the same capacity to shock and surprise.  There's not much I can say with my own blog these days that the blogs on that list to the left of the screen aren't saying equally well, or better.  If anything, I would like to write longer, better thought out stuff, but I don't think my own blog is a good medium for that.  I want to do other things with my spare time.

I'm also a different person now than when I started, which getting hitched and having kids will do to you.  Some of the things I've written and done in the past embarass me now, but I don't have too many regrets inasmuch as I wouldn't be who I am today otherwise, and at the risk of sounding cliched, mistakes are how you learn and grow.

Thanks so much for reading, it's been a privilege to have your attention.  I'll be doing other stuff on the interwebs I am sure, but as far as Mulholland Drive is concerned, this is goodnight.  :-)

Moves Against David Garrett

Once again, the bunch of amateurs at ACT are playing petty politics with their own.

If Garrett has been boorish towards a staff member, and that staff member went to Hide and complained about it, that's only three people who knew about it.  That means either the staff member or Hide is responsible for this story.  Either way, somebody in the ACT office clearly has it in for Garrett. 

Hide has not helped with his comment about "hoping it didn't end his political career".  That sort of damning with faint support is unbecoming of a leader, but nothing those who have dealt with Hide over the years have not come to expect from him.  It makes me suspicious.

While I disagree with Garrett on some issues, I like him as both a person and a novice politician.  I feel sorry for him, because while he is a crusader and activist he should never have been parachuted into parliament the way he was, and ACT should have learned by now that parachuting does not work - it just pisses off all your hard-working activists, and the people sent in to bat are not sufficiently schooled in politics or ACT's philosophy and policies to know what they are doing.  But in Garrett's case, he is there now, and it is disgusting that someone in ACT is now trying to knife him in public.

I said with Worth that if the standard for MPs was to refrain from boorish behaviour, we'd have very few MPs left.  Garrett's situation is a little more serious, as it directly relates to his work as an MP, and unlike Worth there is a public interest in knowing about any problems in the office.  But this should not have gone public before any formal complaint has even been made.

No Cowboys

I really don't see the problem here.

If companies think they have been unfairly defamed on the No Cowboys site, they should sue.  It's as simple as that.

Nobody has the right to publish anything on a website, and if No Cowboys wants to charge some people and not others for the privilege, that is just tough.  Either pay up for the service, or sue, or stop complaining.

Teach Your Children Well

The child may be a bicycle thief, but the parents are oxygen thieves.

For starters, the child was unsupervised at three years old.  But worse than that, the parents have clearly let him keep the bike!

It is one thing for a child not to know the difference between right and wrong, but clearly this one is never going to learn that distinction from home.

The Burden of the Three Term Legacy

There have been four National-led governments so far, and they have all lasted at least three terms.  No National government has ever been elected and not won the next two elections as well.

That's why, despite present polling, recent developments are worrying.  Key's handling of the Worth debacle was appalling.  The Nats have already misread the public appetite for transparency on their expenses and on the Smacking Referendum.  And it's odd to agree with nearly everything M-m-m-Matt M-m-m-McCarten says in a column, but he has nailed it as far as the Mt Albert byelection goes.  Dangerous vulnerabilities have been exposed.

All Labour has to do is look competent, refresh their ranks a bit, and shear off a few of their rough nanny-state edges and they may get another crack in 2011 at this rate.  Don't let those high poll ratings fool you.  As Brash's Orewa speech proved in 2004, shifts can happen quickly.  And while this National government does not have the polarising nature of the last one at this point in the electoral cycle, the lack of competent management does not bode well.  Bolger and Richardson (at least in their first term) had conviction and a willingness to take tough decisions that Key and English simply do not possess.  And while Key has followed Clark's lead of attempting to neutralise issues quickly, Clark had Heather Simpson bringing up the rear with a large strap-on. Key has... Mr 21%!  Add to this a cabinet whose top tier are all new to government and it all combines to make them rather vulnerable.

Key's own point about remaining in touch with people needs to be adhered to.  He could start by recognising the community's concern about the smacking referendum, which, due to the liberal media moving in the wrong circles, has probably flown under the radar for him.  And while cruising and being unflappable has got him this far, more homework needs to be done on the PR front.  If he loses that, he won't get the three terms that Holland, Holyoake, Muldoon and Bolger gained before him.

Customer Service FAIL

I often complain about customer service in New Zealand, which in some instances appears to be non-existent.  Service workers really do seem to have no idea just who pays their wages.

Case in point air carrier Jetstar.  My friend Mike, who has a crew of DJs, was booked on a flight to Wellington this morning.  The Jetstar staff then made a series of grave errors:

• Refused Mike and his three colleagues entry onto the flight for being "too late", despite having arrived with ample time to spare;
• Refused to give him his money back, or book an alternative flight before 6am the following morning (long after Mike was supposed to be playing in Wellington);
• Let another passenger board, despite him arriving later;
• Dared Mike to contact the media, which of course he called their bluff on;
• Attempted to stop Mike taking photos of them and disgruntled customers with his phone;
• Called the police on Mike;
• Refusing to let Mike leave the check-in area;
• Calling over the loudspeaker for passengers who had not arrived on the same flight.

It appears Jetstar is effectively conning its passengers out of their hard-earned cash.  My suspicion is that Jetstar are overbooking their flights and pocketing the extra dollars.  They won't stay in business if they keep that up, or indeed any of this appalling behaviour.  In a recession, it's hard to imagine how these cretins have jobs while so many others do not.

Fifteen Years On and Still No Justice for the Bain Family

On 20th June 1994, David Bain woke up, took his gun and shot all five of his family members one by one.

Fifteen years later those five people still cry out for justice that they have not received.  And Robin Bain lies slandered by David Bain and Joe Karam as the supposed instigator of a murder/suicide. Of course, in this scenario Robin was thoughtful enough to wear gloves, change out of his bloody clothes afterwards, put them in the washing machine, then shoot himself at an angle where he had to curl his head into his chest and bend over while resting the butt of the rifle against the floor.

Well even if a jury couldn't see the implausibility of this scenario, it is obvious to any thinking person.  Robin Bain is innocent.

There's a great article from Martin van Beynen in the Press today that everyone with a passing interest in the case should read.  It talks about the bizarre verdict of the trial, and the jurors involved:

"Several aspects about this jury should worry us all.

The two jurors a man and a woman who were seen to congratulate Bain after the verdicts and who went to his celebratory party were the same two who spent the last three weeks of the trial paying little attention to the evidence and closing addresses. They giggled and wrote messages to each other.

The man would often sleep through parts of the afternoon.

Initially, the woman was so disturbed by the images shown as evidence that she turned her computer screen away. By her own admission, she spent the first two weeks of the trial in tears, and the trial lost half a day because of her anguish.

Another juror, known to another member of the media covering the trial, had a serious question mark over her ability to follow the evidence. Yet another went to congratulate Bain's legal counsel after the verdict."

This jury was flawed and has made a grievous error.  Many will want to move on, but those who know the truth will not allow it to be forgotten.

Rest In Peace, Robin, Laniet, Arawa, Stephen and Margaret.  God will give you justice, even if we cannot.

More Economics Fail

Economics is the only discipline where you can claim that 2+2=5 and that the moon is made of green cheese and, not only will nobody call you out on it, but government policy will be set on it and you will receive the acclaim of your peers for your gross errors.

Case in point the BERL alcohol harm study.  It's absolute bollocks from start to finish, and assumes that any consumption over 1.8 standard drinks represents a cost to the economy!  That's just a pint of good pilsener, or a single glass of shiraz!  And the study even footnotes none other than Karl Marx.  Ummm... yeaaaah....

So who was the tool that wrote this report?  Why, it's none other than our old friend Ganesh Nana!  You remember Ganesh, he was the twat that last year decided the fight against inflation should be abandoned.  I pointed out what complete bollocks he was talking at the time.  It seems Ganesh is not only wrong about that, he is also completely barking about a whole pile of other stuff too.

Of course Nana is entitled to his crackpot economic theories, but the real problem is that those crackpot theories are listened to.  Foolish decisions are made on foolish advice, and we need to point out which advice is good and which is tosh, because God knows I don't trust our MPs to know the difference.

Economics FAIL

This article is just one ginormous FAIL all round.

First of all, not even the economist in the story would be stupid enough, or have such a lack of a grasp of economics, to believe that "Banking Profits 'Bolster Recession'".  That's the invention of the subeditor at the Herald, who should be fired for saying something so cretinous.  Profits are a good thing.  Making money is a good thing.  If people are making money, that doesn't "bolster recession", quite the opposite.  A recession is when people don't make money, and if the banks are making money, it's a sign that things aren't as bad as they could be.

Secondly, IF the banks weren't making healthy profits... um... well, banks that do the opposite tend to collapse and spark... that's right! recessions!  Do you really want the banks not making money?

The complete misinterpretation of Ulf Schoefisch aside, let's look at what he actually says, which is almost (but not quite) as asinine.  Firstly he says the profits are an indicator of the recession, which is not the same as what the story wants to imply, but, as already explained, is nonsense, because for our own financial health we want banks to make as much money as possible.

Having said that, he then goes on not only to suggest that banks should "reduce their profits" and "share the burden", but implies that the government should take back monetary policy from the Reserve Bank!

I'm not sure this guy has actually studied economics, because in the real world, when banks voluntarily reduce their profits, they can only do it one of two ways.  Either they become less efficient, which in itself contributes to economic shrinkage, or they cut their fees and charges, which would still collapse their share price, hinder their ability to raise capital, and potentially hurt them long term. 

Profits aren't some carveup where the vendor automatically wins and the consumer automatically loses - they're the result of transactions designed to grow the wealth and/or life satisfaction of both parties.  If you constrict that for one side, it just means somebody at the other end, probably a shareholder, has less money to invest in new jobs and enterprise.  And that's how a recession happens in the first place.

All this would be complete ivory tower irrelevance were it not swallowed hook line and sinker by the people who are supposed to be in charge - our Members of Parliament.  It really is rather scary.

Perspective on Sue Bradford's New Bill

A gentle reminder for Sue Bradford and her attempts to veto the only direct democracy outlet that the general public have in between elections:

Number of people required to hold a referendum: 

285,027

Number of people required to elect Sue Bradford as a list MP:

17,513

Gee, I wonder who has a bigger mandate to determine the validity of a referendum question?  Is it the people who slaved for a year to get nearly 300,000 signatures, or is it some failed parent and failed communist who gets in because a handful of voters like to hug trees?

The politicians are not listening on this one.  There will be blood.

The Smacking Referendum

Both Phil Goff and John Key are doing their level best to try and discredit the smacking referendum to be held this coming August.  They will fail.

Goff is trying to claim that the question is misleading.  He is talking horseshit.  The question could not be plainer or more straightforward.  It reads:  "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"  Before Sue Bradford's legislation, a smack as part of good parental correction was not a criminal offence in New Zealand.  After the legislation, it is now a criminal offence for parents to smack a child.  The question is precisely about the legality of a correctional parental smack.  Should it be a criminal offence?  Yes or no?  It's easy stuff.  Pretending the legislation does not actually criminalise smacking is sheer bullshit that nobody should buy.

My personal answer is a firm "NO".  While the MILF and I do not plan to use physical discipline on our children, I was physically disciplined as a child myself and cannot see that it personally did me any discernable damage (although I am sure our friends on the Left may argue otherwise!).  There is no serious harm done in using properly administered physical discipline on a child.  I support the Burrows amendment which would have excepted "transitory and trifling" discipline.

The referendum is not about the rights and wrongs of smacking, over which I am dubious.  And nobody is suggesting that real child abusers should be let off the hook by any legal loopholes.  The real issue is the rights of parents to use the method of discipline they feel is best for their child, without having nanny state, or their busybody neighbours for that matter, telling them what to do.

John Key's assertion that the legislation "is working" is, to my mind, naive.  The real damage of the amendment was not that parents might get sent to jail or hauled before the courts (although the latter has happened more than Key would care to admit).  The real damage was that parents can use the legislation as a weapon against each other in the Family Court.  It also gives New Zealanders, who are by nature notorious busybodies, the right to rat on their neighbours and tell them what to do.  Kiwi parents are not scared of being sent to jail, they are just pissed off at the nuisance of having others question their every move.

From that, one could argue that the issue is trivial - why should we change the law back?  Well... why change the law in the first place?!!!  It's just one less freedom that New Zealanders have.

Both Key and Goff will be hoping for a low turnout for this referendum, so that they can continue to declare the issue dead.  An organised "NO" campaign will need to work hard to get the turnout to make the result legitimate.

Defeat is an Orphan

Oh dear.  Now we have finger-pointing going on amongst the Nats.

Judy Kirk is all like "Oh that's so totally not fair!  Jonathan told me not to come!"

That ain't the way that it's done, son.

More proof that nobody was running this campaign properly.  I would have been begging and screaming for senior Nats to be there and using four letter words if they made excuses.  Also, nobody has pointed out the obvious - that the Governor General only sets the byelection date on the Prime Minister's advice.  If Key knew he couldn't be there in February, it was awfully convenient of him to have something else on on the same day wasn't it?  Sorry, not a good enough excuse.  It shows gutlessness on Key's part.

Then there's this priceless quote:

Mrs Kirk said she had been in regular contact with the candidate.

"Every time there was a little issue during the campaign I would phone her and talk to her about it and the importance of the campaign and how things were going just to give her support because she is a very, very smart lady and it is tough for her.

"I gave her huge support or as much as I could."

O. M. G.  If Judy really thought this would cover her arse, she has another thing coming.  Ringing a candidate up occasionally is not the sort of support one needs from a Party President.  The sort of support I'd want would be "here's some money, here's a professional campaign manager, here's where the cabinet is at so you don't get caught wrong-footed, and here's my arse-kicking boot in case I need to troubleshoot."

National needs a Heather Simpson.  Actually, I'm volunteering.  Stick me on one of these new-fangled 90-day trials if you like.  I'm sure John Key doesn't want to be the first National Prime Minister not to go three terms.

More Damning Evidence Against the Murderer David Bain

The Sunday programme has revealed several items of evidence that were withheld from the Bain trial jury.  I am not too bothered by the "rape plan" evidence being withheld - it marks Bain out as creepy, but is of low relevance.  However, Arawa's assertion that David had threatened the family with his gun is about as relevant as you can get.  It would have shattered the defence's impression of David as a "nice young man", and shows that he could easily have turned these threats into action.

David Bain is still a murderer and your fluorescent woolen jersey is not cool.

Mt Albert Byelection All Over

I don't think anybody comes out looking good from this byelection, except perhaps Ravi Musuku.  Every party could have done much much better.

Labour threw everything into defending this seat, but a huge chunk of its voters stayed home.  They were always going to win, but never covered themselves in glory throughout the campaign.  Most of their campaigners were ring-ins.  The only positive for them is that the Nasty Party now has a fresh face who is not tainted with the corrupt misgovernment of the past.

The Greens had weak opponents and a real opportunity to get their vote up and take the seat.  But they're weak in Auckland, their candidate was crap, and they couldn't capitalise on Labour's unpopularity.  They picked up some disillusioned Labour supporters, but shouldn't be too smug about coming third.

ACT, I have no idea why they ran.  Since their equivocation on the Gang Patch legislation, they no longer have a reason to exist.  It's hard to see what they are achieving in government, and their campaign reflected it.  They asked for a mandate for Three Strikes and... didn't get it!  They would have been better not to ask.  I don't know what they are trying to achieve any more.  As for the Libertarianz, it's all very well to be the only party of principle left standing, but 35 votes?!  Whatever you are doing, change it.  It's not working.

Which brings me to National.  Words cannot describe my disdain for National's campaign.  It was all so naive and gee whiz.  National are doing great things in government, but you wouldn't have heard about them in Mt Albert over the last month.  A campaign is a little bit more than putting up a candidate and saying how nice she is.  It also helps to have a candidate who takes campaigning seriously and is prepared to come up with some lines and talking points before a public meeting or interview so as not to look like a complete tool. 

The Nats went from a situation where they could have won the seat to one where Melissa Lee shaved a good ten points off Ravi Musuku's 2008 total.  Bravo!  Can we have some grownups running the campaign next time?  Sticking a blue rosette on someone and crossing your fingers ain't going to cut it anymore.

And the people of Mt Albert themselves?  They get a new MP, but they still get a government that takes 40% of what they earn, for little return.

The Delicate Sensitive Souls at Unite

Those poor union folk.  They obviously can't take a joke.

I'm not sure why this is news.  I suspect anything Melissa Lee said at this meeting would have been news regardless.  Personally, I would have been a lot more "offensive" towards the Unite union than that, and it would have been specifically designed for front page consumption.

revoL

Mr. Lenin - awaken the boy
Mr. Stalin - bisexual epoch
Kruschev - self love in his mirrors
Brezhnev - married into group sex
Gorbachev - celibate self importance
Yeltsin - failure is his own impotence

So let me get this straight...

Richard Worth was unfaithful to his wife, but has done nothing illegal.

But yet he should resign from parliament and the National caucus.  Why?

What has he done that Ian Ewen Street, Deborah Coddington, Richard Prebble, John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, Don Brash, Bob Hawke, Bill Clinton, John Major AND Edwina Currie, David Blunkett, David Lange, Kevin Rudd, Mark Oaten, Prince Charles, Jim McGreevey, John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Ted Kennedy and Martin Luther King haven't done before him?

Nothing worse is what.  Nothing worse at all.

I don't care who Worth has bonked or tried to bonk.  This is a media beatup, and as far as I am concerned, politicians can have sex with whomsoever a consenting adult or adults as they so choose.  Personally I think Worth is a silly twat who is unsuited for politics, but please, he was duly elected on National's list and has a right to be there and a right to stay there.  Leave him alone.

Minor Candidates Bitchfight in Mt Albert

Two press releases on Scoop at the moment which should be highlighted for wider consumption.  The first is from Rusty Kane:

Rusty Kane speaks out.

The Mt Albert electorate will only vote for a smaller party like The People's Choice Party. Not because of their candidate, but because of what the candidate represents or is saying. I and The People's Choice Party are saying, the Mt Albert electorate themselves should be the ones who decide what is best for Mt Albert. If the Mt Albert voters believe this also, they will vote accordingly. As a protest vote, sending a direct message to the Government itself. The voters of the Mt Albert electorate are not fools. They know the by-election is not going to change the Government. But they do know that their votes and how they vote will decide the outcome of their views. If that view is for the people of Mt Albert to decide what is best for Mt Albert not that of a political party. Then there's every chance they will protest their vote to a smaller party with those same views. Sending the strongest possible message to the Government leading up to a general election. There is no reason for Labour not to win the Mt Albert by-election. But what is more important in a by-election is the percentage of the remaining votes that are divided up among the smaller parties and why is the real message.

...which generated this response from Jackson Wood:

Wood Applauds Kane's Bravery

Mount Albert Aspirant Jackson James Wood today applauded fellow candidate Rusty Kane for his press release, visible at http://scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0906/S00083.htm

"Politics is an avenue that should be open to everyone, and I think it is wonderful that Rusty is proving that illiteracy is no barrier to political expression" Wood said.

"Whilst I will not be voting Kane on the day - in fact, will not be voting at all on the day due to the dictatorial laws that prevent a Wellingtonian voting in the Mount Albert by-election simply by virtue of geographic coincidence - I still applaud his efforts in attempting to secure political representation for the unlettered community."

LOL.

Nothing to LOL About

This Quote Instantly Made Me Feel Better About the Bain Verdict

"Let’s not forget that no matter where the truth lies, David Bain is the loser in this. He is either a mass murderer from a screwed up family who’s going to have to maintain a lie for the rest of his life, or the son of a mass murderer from a screwed up family who spent 14 years in jail trying to clear his name."

Silliness Abounds

From Scoop:

Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party - Cannabis Party Has Answer To The Recession

Let me guess... does it involve...

...

oh.... I don't know....

...

CANNABIS?!

...

I haven't actually looked at the release yet.

UPDATE:  Yes, it is as I suspected.  But worse, they omit the inconvenient truth that non-THC hemp ISN'T ACTUALLY ILLEGAL!!!  Nice one, dickwads.  I eagerly await you making a killing out of this renewable resource... but I suspect you are too stoned to get off your arses and do it.

Dear David Bain

You sir, are a murder.

You murdered your family in cold blood.

You murdered your mother, your two sisters, your brother and your father.

You don't like me saying so?  Sue me.  Sue me, you murdering filthy lying bastard.

Her Majesty's Realm of New Zealand may not have given you justice, but one day you will stand before your Maker and give account of the things you have done.

It is not too late.  Redeem yourself.  Confess.  Or know that you will perish.

Worth Has Been Punished Enough

I've never thought all that much of Richard Worth.  Which is why I find it so strange to be in the position of defending him.

The reason Worth should not be a cabinet minister is that a woman advised him that she was going to make a sexual complaint AND Worth did not immediately give the PM a heads-up.

That's it.  That's why he's gone from cabinet.  It is simply a matter of the PM's trust.  Worth lost it and therefore he is gone.

Worth did not get fired for offering a woman a job.  Worth did not get fired for wanting a job of an entirely different sort from a woman.  Or at least I hope not, because if so, if one's ability to be a cabinet member rests entirely on one's ability to make oneself a eunuch, then I dare say we'd have very few qualified people left.

In the absence of having done anything illegal, Worth's personal antics are a matter for him, the women concerned, his wife and his God.  Not me, not John Key, not the media, and certainly not the public.  They in no way disqualify him from being an MP.  So anyone who honestly believes he should be suspended from the National caucus and should resign from Parliament had better come up with a better reason than "Richard Worth likes girls".  (that logic only works in the Labour Party, where the only straight man allowed is Trevor Mallard).

Had Worth given Key a heads-up in time, it may even have been a case of standing down while his name was cleared, then being restored later.  Alas, he was foolish and that door is now closed to him.  He should not be in cabinet.  But he was elected a National MP for this term, and I see no reason, given what we now know, why he should not continue to serve as one for the remainder of the parliamentary term.

Bain Must Be Found Guilty

Well after three months, and hearing all the evidence, and sordid tales of incest and red herrings aplenty, the David Bain trial comes down to just one question:

Why would Robin Bain wear gloves to murder the family if he was going to kill himself and announce himself the murderer with a note left on the computer?

A plausible answer to that question should see David Bain acquitted.  The problem is that there is no plausible answer.  Robin Bain was not a neat and tidy man for starters.   The defence says that he wanted to be wearing fresh clothes to "meet his maker", but this is not something depressed people do - they tend to believe, if anything, that God has given up on them.  The only way the defence could make his alleged actions make sense was if Robin were schizophrenic, and he had ritualized the killings in the name of obedience to the Voice of God, but there is no evidence of this at all either.

Now of course the defence does not have to prove anything in this regard.  But if it is not reasonable to believe an outsider killed the Bain family, and not reasonable to believe Robin made those aforementioned incongruous decisions, then the only reasonable explanation left is that David Bain murdered his family.  It is beyond reasonable doubt, because to do so means it is plausible someone else did it, and personally, on the evidence I have seen thus far, I believe it is not.

David Bain is a very clever guy, and by all accounts a very nice guy too.  But even intelligent nice guys can be murderers, as we know from guys like Ted Bundy.  Perhaps even if found guilty Bain has spent enough time in prison.  But he did it, and we need that confirmed once and for all.

UPDATE:

NO FREAKING WAY!!!!!

The lying bastard has finally got his way.  Clearly the jury felt there was reasonable doubt.  I can't understand that decision.  Not at all.  David Bain is a murderer, and this is a jury with no balls to say so.

Slater on Close Up

I never watch Close Up, mainly because, as a current affairs show it is about as deep as a child's paddling pool.  The modern day current affairs programme is actually less insightful than the six o'clock news.  However, last night I made an exception, and was surprised to see Whale Oil as the featured interviewee!

The interview was crap, although that is no slur on Whale Oil, who was just happy to be on television, and did at least have an amusing quote about National slitting throats and dumping the body out the back door.  But essentially the programme went like this:

Sainsbury:  Welcome to Close Up.  We don't know anything about the allegations against Richard Worth and nobody else does either.  Nobody important would talk to us, so here's Cameron Slater instead.

Slater:  I know about as much as you do Mark, which is not much.

Sainsbury:  That's okay, we need to fill up a ten minute slot somehow so I'll ask you some more inane questions.

Slater:  And I'll just tell you stuff that you and all the viewers have already figured out for yourselves.

Sainsbury:  That's great!  Here's Therese Arseneau to give us some insight into what we don't know.

Arseneau:  I'm a boring Canadian academic who doesn't know anything either.  I will also tell you stuff the viewers have already figured out for themselves, just to fill in time.

Sainsbury:  Brilliant, we can just fill up time with you because people are too busy snickering about the word "arse" in your name to actually care what you say.  Next up, a story about cute animals! ...

The most interesting part of the programme was learning that Phil Goff refused to appear with Cameron Slater!  Bizarre!  Now to be sure, Whale did publish a photoshopped image of Helen Clark as a nude ladyboy, but nothing he's ever said or done on his blog ranks close to being as offensive as Goff holding hands with Yassir Arafat.  If anything, Whale should refuse to go on camera with him!

On the Take

MPs in this country may not be claiming for cleaning their moats, but there is another widespread practice which deserves scrutiny, and that is OOP office rental.

It is fairly well known that many MPs use offices owned either by their political party, or by supporters.  The rent then finds its way into party funds, and voila! state-funded political parties!

This practice needs to be put at an end.  Parliamentary Services needs to own each office - a great deal of money would be saved and the playing field would be a lot more level.  Not to mention that it is a legitimate function of parliament to have those offices owned by the taxpayer.

The Genius of Herald Subeditors

Two brilliant headlines in the Herald today.  If they were deliberate, they are genius.  If they were unintentional, somebody should be fired:

No sex with Berlusconi, says boyfriend;
Noise may have stopped man from hearing oncoming train.

LOLOL

With regard to the second headline, it confirms my belief that people who honestly can't hear or see an oncoming train, ie. a big noisy heavy hunk of solid metal on tracks coming your way should make us grateful that they have been removed from the gene pool.

Historical Revisionism

Jeanette Fitzsimons is obviously an advocate of Goebbels' epigram that lies become truth if you repeat them enough:

"Ms Fitzsimons said she had entered Parliament to "protect the vulnerable from the violence and degradation inflicted by the powerful".

She said she remembered the 1990s - a time of "political cruelty" and rising unemployment and said she and the Green Party would work in the current recession to protect vulnerable people."

I don't know what '90s she lived through, but in everyone else's '90s unemployment stopped rising in 1992 following Ruth Richardson's Mother of All Budgets, and, apart from a brief blip during the Asian Crisis, dropped steadily ever after.  Unemployment hasn't risen since Kurt Cobain decided things were less dangerous with the lights out.  What a stupid leftie liar.  Good riddance to her.

My Enemy's Enemy is Not My Friend

Anyone who thinks the Dalai Lama is a nice old man travelling the globe to promote world peace should read this story.

The old clown should not be given any more oxygen.  Let's Free China and Tibet will take care of itself.

More Inconsistency

I am still confused as to when ZenTiger thinks it is okay to kill and when it is not.  But I really do hope this puts my sympathy for Jan Molenaar in context, when you now have folk saying that a man who spent his career saving women's lives is actually a murderer.  Nice one.

Guess We'd Better Bugger Off Then

This is pretty freaky.  Fortunately my spouse has had no such problems with immigration... thus far anyway...

I've been pretty horrified at the way Jonathan Coleman is running the immigration department these days.  Any immigration where the immigrant is not a career criminal or throwing herself at the mercy of the welfare system is positive for New Zealand, and increases our GDP, increases our tax take, and increases our standard of living.

These students all paid full fees to reduce the fees of NZ citizens and reduce the need for government subsidies to our education system.  While they are going to put extra strain on public health services, their outweighing contribution to New Zealand is being ignored.

Did it ever occur to Dr Coleman that, instead of kicking these people out, he might want to ask Tony Ryall why our public health system is so shit that it has no capacity for these people?

We need profit motives in our healthcare system very badly, and the problem will not be solved by kicking out people who want to make positive contributions to our country.

Patty and Selma Made Me Smoke Cigarettes

Patty and Selma are of course, the main characters on the Simpsons.  They have widespread appeal to children, who are often seen mimicking their raspy voices.  Patty and Selma merchandise is widespread, and targeted at children.

This all must be true, because otherwise, how would the International Union Against Cancer justify such unmitigated tosh?

Poor Quality Sauvignon Blanc

Finally someone has pointed out that the Emperor has no clothes.

There are some shocking Savs out there - I had one yesterday.  It was a Montana Reserve 2008.  No complexity at all - it tasted like straw.  Maybe it just needed to be aged a couple of years, but if so, why put it on the shelf at one year old?

It's a shame, because a nice, crisp, complex Sav is one of life's delights.  Fortunately, there are plenty of other wines that New Zealand does well, not least Otago Pinot Noir, Gisborne Chardonnay and Syrah, and there's even a few vineyards figuring out how to do Sangiovese :-P  Yum!

Reichstag Fires

The much-touted proof positive that Germany was still a fascist state, that infamous event, the one that sparked the formation of the first Green Party, the Baader Meinhof militia and the German Autumn... was committed by a Stasi agent.

Deliberate or no, Herr Kurras had a vested interest in perpetuating and fleshing out the mythology.  He knew that a cavalier approach to policing the demonstrators would be inflammatory.  And so it came to pass that that great German martyr, Benno Ohnesorg, was killed by a commie.

It's now clear that the DDR was playing the Acht-und-Sechzigers and the RAF like a Stradivarius.  You almost have to admire it.  Fortunately, the free Germans realised that you don't just acquiese to commies simply because they blow up a few department stores and hijack the odd plane.  The RAF's murderous rampage was countered with an almost hysterical countercampaign on behalf of the authorities, the show-trial of the century for the top four, and (it is suspected), their eventual extrajudicial execution.  The commies got owned.  Sadly it was too late for Hans Martyn Schleyer, and so many other victims.

To paraphrase a popular Facebook group:  Ulrike Meinhof was a murderer and your sunglasses are not cool.  Anyone who finds New Zealand leftists amusing or appealing might like to remember that, at heart, these people are simple authoritarians.

The Definition of Stupid

A public holiday for the birthday of a Head of State who doesn't even live here, whose own country doesn't honour it, and who wasn't even born on the day celebrated.

Utter, utter nonsense.  Let's get our own Head of State instead of continuing to borrow someone else's.  And let's have a public holiday on a day worth celebrating.

Greens Make Wise Choice

The Greens have shrunk from repeating their previous mistake of choosing the commie over the capitalist for a leader and gone for Metirea Turei.  Smart.  They will never advance environmentalism as long as it comes poisoned with socialism.

Bragging

This woman gave birth to twins ten days ago, and I'm the lucky guy that gets to be married to her.  Being me is awesome :-P

Gentlemen, We Are Making Progress

"National candidate Melissa Lee's campaign spokesperson said she did not wish to comment."

I think we can still win this thing.

Immaturity

What a pack of crying, whinging babies.  From someone who has dealt with that sort of thing of late.

One equal vote with their peers will never be good enough for some people.

I don't think being Maori makes you special.  In the parallel universe that some of these people live in, that makes me a racist.  In my world, that makes them racist.  They're not prepared to stand themselves and work for representation the way I am forced to do.  They think their brown skin entitles them to something that is denied me.

Well whatever.  These bigots may have "mana" amongst their own people, but I won't respect them until they put their names on a ballot for all races to decide on.  The reality is that Maori have largely declined to participate in local politics in Auckland, so for them to come whining with a begging bowl now is a bit rich.  Would Arapeta Awatere have gone begging on some hikoi for a seat at the table?  Hell no, he had real mana, which is why so many pakeha voted for him to serve on the council in the 1960s.

It seems likely that the best solution to all this would be to have two non-voting iwi councillors on the new council, giving both sides some measure of satisfaction.  However, if Maori want a vote on it, they should stand and get elected.  Nobody is disputing that Maori should have input into the new council, they just have to work for the right as all other New Zealanders must do.

God Helps Those Who Help Themselves

I spent an afternoon with Melissa Lee's team out canvassing in Mt Albert today.  It was enlightening.

Although I was doorknocking in a more affluent part of the electorate, the warm response for National was encouraging.  I was getting about a 50/30 National/Labour split.  Very few people seemed undecided, and of those, none could name the Labour candidate.  Everyone knew who Melissa Lee was.  Most undecideds were unconcerned at Lee's gaffes, regarded the motorway and supercity issues as red herrings, and were waiting for the candidates to tell them what they would do for the local electorate.  In other words, they were waiting for an actual campaign to begin.

While many people were negative about Melissa Lee, these were all solid National people.  Most of them said they would probably still vote for her, and the one voter who said he had changed his vote was planning to vote for John Boscawen.  So it seems the only way Labour will benefit from her stumbles will be if enough National voters shift to John, but I saw precious little evidence of that.  No doubt ACT will be campaigning hard, but they will effectively be campaigning for Shearer.  Which is fair enough - he is an ACT man for all intents and purposes.

Nobody I talked to was planning to vote for Russell Norman, so I don't know why the hell the media are hyping him so much.  Forget about him - he is nowhere.  In fact, I met a Kiwi Party voter, so if my small sample is to be extrapolated, he's even trailing them!

Far from being dead and buried in Mt Albert, Melissa Lee is very much still in the hunt, and not to come second either.  She's not losing votes, but people are sick of the crap and want to know what she or Shearer are going to do for them.

As for Labour, they have a helluva lot of signs up, but their candidate is hardly setting the world on fire.  I forgot to ask the one canvassing activist I came across whether the union had bussed her in or not, but I suspect that some of that is going on.  She is probably wondering where the business cards she so delicately placed in the doorcracks up and down the street all went...

I am happy to report I have tracked down the culprits:  ;-)