Bassett on UK and NZ Labour

April 26th, 2009 at 9:46 am by David Farrar

Michael Bassett compares NZ and UK :

Over the last few weeks evidence has seeped out that Britain’s Labour Party had started a Dirty Tricks Department within ministerial offices to smear political opponents. Gordon Brown’s most trusted spin doctor, Damian McBride, has been forced to resign because of the part he played in putting together a series of on a website against the Conservatives’ leader, David Cameron, and the Tories’ Finance spokesman. Today comes the news that Brown has asked the head of Britain’s civil service to tighten up a code of conduct governing ministerial advisers whose salaries are paid by the taxpayer. Brown says that they should sign a contract acknowledging that if caught “disseminating inappropriate material they will automatically lose their jobs”.

It’s high time we had such a system in place in New Zealand. Those with memories might recall the parade of dirty tricks used by the beleaguered Labour Party prior to the last election to smear their opponents.

H-Fee anyone?

Tags: , , ,

93 Responses to “Bassett on UK and NZ Labour”

  1. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    The vicious and intense smear campaign against Sarah Palin, (that the left wing NZ mainstream media participated in so enthusiastically) is another example of the left’s utter and complete moral deterioration.

    Palin didn’t think like them. She was popular. She had to be destroyed.

    Same old same old.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. tvb (4,315 comments) says:

    But surely all this starts with the political masters, though a code of conduct will give some protection to the staffer against an unlawful request from the politician. Well perhaps. Does anyone seriously doubt that Mike Williams took time off during the middle of an election campaign without Helen Clark’s approval and CONSENT and encouragement. As for the goings on in Brown’s office, Gordon Brown has a toxic personality and has played it dirty for years and years – mainly against his own tribe. What is delicious about this scandal is Brown got caught out dong it against the Tories. Brown’s call for a code of conduct is a deeply cynical attempt to give himself political cover — “who me he asks??? – yes you Brown”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. big bruv (13,678 comments) says:

    Red

    “The vicious and intense smear campaign against Sarah Palin”

    Read same for David Garrett, the left (including the Greens) are out to get Garrett for no other reason than he is popular and he supports legislation that the public want to see put in place.

    They (the left) cannot attack his argument as that would alienate them with mainstream NZ so they go after him personally.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Indeed David. It would make interesting reading to know who was/were the real architects of the vicious Labour smear tactics for the past two elections.

    Anyone know if it was just Hels and Mickey C, or did they have a few spin weasels and cabinet members in the mix as well?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Owen McShane (1,226 comments) says:

    And what about this one, which has been used to abuse me and my colleagues:

    Revkin should issue a retraction for this shoddy article?! Plus, NYT timed it perfectly so Gore couuld tout it on the day of his testimony. Orchestrated anyone?

    Climate Resistance Excerpt: The allegation made in the NYT article focuses on two quotes, one in the material published by the group, the other is from the review.
    [Published, early 1990s] “The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood,” the coalition said in a scientific “backgrounder” provided to lawmakers and journalists through the early 1990s, adding that “scientists differ” on the issue.
    [Review, 1995] “The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,” the experts wrote in an internal report compiled for the coalition in 1995.
    But the full paragraph from the review reveals that no contradiction exists in the evidence given.

    “The potential for a human impact on climate is based on well-established scientific fact, and should not be denied. While, in theory, human activities have the potential to result in net cooling, a concern about 25 years ago, the current balance between greenhouse gas emissions and the emissions of particulates and particulate-formers is such that essentially=2 0all of today’s concern is about net warming. However, as will be discussed below, it is still not possible to accurately predict the magnitude (if any), timing or impact of climate change as a result of the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. Also, because of the complex, possibly chaotic, nature of the climate system, it may never be possible to accurately predict future climate or to estimate the impact of increased greenhouse gas concentrations.”

    http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/04/gore-mouthing-off-about-make-belive-madoffs.html

    Sat, 25 April, 2009
    Gore Mouthing-Off About Make-Believe Madoffs

    The story was used by Al Gore in testimony to congress, in which he accuses the group of a fraud larger than that committed by Bernie Madoff, as Think Progress reports. They also upload a video and trans cript of Gore’s speech, which makes this post much easier to write.

    Gore says:
    “The largest corporate carbon polluters in America, 14 years ago, asked their own people to conduct a review of all of this science. And their own people told them, “What the international scientific community is saying is correct, there is no legitimate basis for denying it.” Then, these large polluters committed a massive fraud far larger than Bernie Madoff’s fraud. They are the Bernie Madoffs of global warming. They ordered the censoring and removal of the scientific review that they themselves conducted, and like Bernie Madoff, they lied to the people who trusted them in order to make money.”

    But as we point out, this is just wrong. Here’s a quick recap of why.
    The review took place in 1995, but the information it allegedly contradicts was circulated in the early 1990’s, according to the evidence. Logically, therefore, no contradiction emerges from the evidence.
    The documents only contradict each other when quoted from selectively. (See below for quotes).
    The claim of fraud can only be made
    by blurring distinctions between logically distinct categories of knowledge
    by ignoring the order of events
    by reducing matters of degree to binary true/false axioms
    by exaggerating the influence of the alleged conspiracy.

    But here’s the most absurd thing. Gore begins his account of the alleged fraud with these words:
    “I believe it is important to look at the sources of the science that we rely on. With all due respect, I believe that you have relied on people you have trusted who have given you bad information. I do not blame the investors who trusted Bernie Madoff, but he gave them bad information.”

    If it needs pointing out: 1) Gore has bad information from the NYT article. 2) Gore has not ‘looked at the sources of the science’ to check their reliability. (Neither did Revkin).

    Let’s put this into perspective. Rumour-mongering about special-interests paying to distort the debate began on the Internet as the site exxonsecrets.org – a petty rumour-mill operated by Greenpeace. This inconsequential muck-raking has been given20superficial journalistic and academic credibility by activists such as George Monbiot and academic activists such as Naomi Oreskes, and lastly by Andrew Revkin. Through a process that owes more to the party game ‘Chinese whispers’ than academic or scientific rigour, unfounded rumour and innuendo has been regurgitated onto the floor of perhaps the most influential democratic institution in the world.

    This is climate politics. It pretends to be about saving the planet. But in reality, it is crass, petty, and self-interested.
    Climate sceptics ought to take two messages from this.

    First, it is clear that environmentalists are clutching at straws to make their case.
    Second, that climate politics of this kind has achieved this level of prominence therefore cannot be blamed solely on climate activists. It cannot be argued that environmentalism has risen under its own steam. It’s momentum has been generated by a vacuum of ideas that all political parties suffer from. This is the issue that needs addressing.
    Posted by Editors at 1:19 am

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    “Anyone know if it was just Hels and Mickey C or did they have a few spin weasels and cabinet members in the mix as well?”

    shit – dont tell me there are going to be a few more UN and SOE appointments coming. Key thought it was just them

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Angus (536 comments) says:

    The M.O of the UK and NZ Labour govts drew striking parallels. The Blair govt was an obvious template for Klark.

    Read Theodore Dalrymple’s article titled Delusions of Honesty: http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_3_oh_to_be.html

    Excerpt “Tony Blair was the perfect politician for an age of short attention spans. What he said on one day had no necessary connection with what he said on the following day: and if someone pointed out the contradiction, he would use his favorite phrase, “It’s time to move on,” as if detecting contradictions in what he said were some kind of curious psychological symptom in the person detecting them.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    It would make interesting reading to know who was/were the real architects of the vicious Labour smear tactics for the past two elections.

    It sure would expat and as many already know, there is an extremely interesting beyond coincidental parallel between Liarbore’s tactics here and those of UK’s New Liabore.

    Alistair Campbell was the ring master in the UK and remember he curiously decided to take the job of managing the PR during the 05 Lions Tour here. Why?

    I don’t believe that Campbell was the ring master here, they needed someone on the ground close to the NZ media, but I do believe that person was in close perhaps daily touch with Campbell, who was the brains behind the events to which Basset refers. Too far fetched?

    Then consider the parallels. Read this article and this one and make up your own mind.

    One of the interesting aspects of that first article is a possible explanation as to why Liarbore behaved this way.

    Lies are close kin to cynicism. New Labour thinks that it is safe to lie because the voters will not notice. Over the past seven and three quarter years, the Blairites have formed the lowest possible opinion of the voters’ intelligence. The Government has dumbed down politics, in the confident expectation that it was dealing with a dumbed-down public. Ministers have often told lies on the assumption that as long as the rebuttal comes in small print several hours later, the lie will stick. That is how this government will continue, to the end.

    The taproot of cynicism and lies is hatred. Whatever the intellectual incoherence of New Labour, it must be remembered that most of its leading figures used to believe. They were once socialists. They began the 1980s assuming that the Thatcher government was an aberration and that normal socialist service would shortly be resumed. Then Thatcher turned into Thatcherism, and the terms of British political trade altered, irrevocably.

    That is why a lot of New Labourites still hate Margaret Thatcher. Charles Clarke, Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt; they may all seem contented members of a post-ideological government, but they once had their own ideology, and they will never forgive the Tories for trampling on it.

    Substitute Douglas for Thatcher and you’ve got a mirror image of Liarbore’s attitude displayed throughout their term.

    Lefties are scum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Read same for David Garrett, the left (including the Greens) are out to get Garrett for no other reason than he is popular and he supports legislation that the public want to see put in place.”

    Agreed.

    Paul Henry another example of someone the left are “out to get”.

    Don Brash. Ian Wishart. Garth George.

    Fox News. Rush Limbaugh. Sean Hannity. Bill O’Reilly.

    In fact anyone with any perceived connection to Conservative thought.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Angus- Thanks for the link to the “How Modern Liberals Think” video. If only that could be shown on mainstream TV here in NZ. It won’t be of course, the scum who run TV One or TV3 would shoot themselves before they would show it, but it provides an extremely accurate description of why the left think (and act) the way they do, including their obsession with smears.

    For those who haven’t watched the video, please take the time to watch it- “Evan Sayet, writer, comedian, lecturer and pundit and former died in the wool New York Jewish liberal Democrat, tells in his speech at the Heritage Foundation why he is no longer a liberal or a Democrat. He provides a view inside the liberal mindset and addresses what makes the views of modern liberals so dangerous and destructive for America”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c

    Evan Maloney’s film “Indoctrinate U” is also a good watch. It tells how liberals, unable to get their ideas accepted in the adult world of reason and reflection, introduce them to the young and impressionable by means of their perversion and take over of our education system, where they routinely slander and attack anyone who they perceive as an ideological enemy. Meaning most Conservatives.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. billyborker (1,102 comments) says:

    Ooooh,,,eeee, Sarah Palin –

    oooo eeee Don Brash

    Fuck, haven’t you forgotten another target of the left?

    Next thing you’ll be telling us Ben Stein knows more about biology than the biologists.

    It is not a conspiracy of the left that keeps the right in its place; its the stupidity of people like Palin, Stein, Linbaugh, et al that ordinary people see right through, without being needed to be told what to think.

    The Republicn Right in the US likes to campaign on morals and family values – Palin has well and truly shot them in the foot on that. Unmarried mother for a daughter, daughter now denying the father contact with the child when anyone, even dad4justice, knows how important fathering is.

    As a family role model Sarah Palin is right up there with Betty Windsor.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Bok (740 comments) says:

    And each of those you mention borker has achieved more wealth, higher impact, bigger recognition, more academically, higher intellect, more social impact, more for charity, more for helping any-one else than you. That put you down on the bottom as the little shitty mongrel yapping and jumping up trying to bite the real dog. jesus christ on a lolie stick, you have to be the single-most useless waste of space. Your relevence is up there with the president of the Ti-Toki womans knitting league, membership 1.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Ann Coulter

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Mark Steyn even suffered an attempted government prosecution in Canada.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Angus (536 comments) says:

    Borker, aka fugley, MyNameIsJack has a been around a while. His old stomping grounds were The Briefing Room and NZ Conservative where his main goal was to post negative comments about Christianity in order to get a rise out of the blog hosts.

    He was eventually banned by Lucyna for trolling, and filling threads with comments using a host of different handles, even including the name of a recently deceased Australian conservative talkshow host (yeah, he’s real class). He did the same at The Briefing Room one New Years eve and got soundly ticked off by Andrei. I see he’s backed off from those two sites because Andrei and ZenTiger have managed to work out who he actually is – so now he’s over here.

    His main theme revolves around a bizarre, all-consuming anti-Christianity obsession (yup, worse than Cresswell)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Bok (740 comments) says:

    I am not a fan of fundamentalists from any religion, but Borker’s type of persecution is a little bit like gay-bashers. You just know he so wants to be part off that club, and the only way he can hide it is persecution

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Angus (536 comments) says:

    Yeah, probably.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    Perhaps the poor fool doesn’t realise that most Christians don’t care what he thinks. After all, it’s his free will that gives him the choice. If he insists on deluding himself that a force so significant that it marks time itself can be dismissed so lightly (based on what he says about it) then he really shows himself up in the horsepower dept.

    Poor boy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    That’s interesting Angus.

    So they really do have the same father!! I thought they were just personality clones. Do you know what fucked him up?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Everybody, make sure you follow DPF’s link to the original Michael Bassett article, and read the whole thing.

    DPF is staying within “fair use” in quoting as little as he does. But this bit is important:

    “…..Those with memories might recall the parade of dirty tricks used by the beleaguered Labour Party prior to the last election to smear their opponents. First there was the hacking into Don Brash’s computer and the stealing of a selection of emails that found their way to the egregious Nicky Hager. He spun a tissue of fabrications worthy of the Holocaust denier, David Irving. Labour’s leaders had a very good idea about who was the culprit, but they sat back and smiled while calumny was heaped on the opposition leader, and Hager made money from the book he published based on stolen goods. For myself, I have always believed that someone inside the Beehive was responsible for stealing those emails in the first place. The Police’s investigation was scandalously conducted and found nothing…….”

    Yep, another leftwing government plus media lapdog beatup of historically infamous proportions. Watergate in reverse, in fact. Under half trustworthy constitutional regimes, the politicians who benefit from the theft of information get investigated and busted. Imagine Nixon getting away with Watergate, and his main political opponent of the day losing an election and getting rolled by his own party as a direct consequence – can you imagine it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    “Do you know what fucked him up?”

    Well if your Dad was a trade unionist then you’re starting with a handicap, reality-wise.

    Poor boy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    Don’t have to have to imagine it Phil. It happened … here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    reid

    don’t mention his father. he gets really pissed off.

    oh all right, mention his father.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. billyborker (1,102 comments) says:

    reid, you left off the usual moronic line of the xians – “The fool has said in his heart…” etc. And thus the believers use the bible to prove the bible, sort of circular logic until they disappear up their own arseholes.

    Thing is, this fool is no fool and knows there is no god so gets on with enjoying this all too brief life, unconstrained by the dumbarsed rules the god botherers live by.

    Angus – wow, you’ve unmasked me. Congratulations.

    Except I don’t know any lucyna or zen tiger, let alone NZ conservative blog(might pop over and take a look). Are you sure you’re not dad4justice under another handle? he often calls me fugley, when in fact I am quite handsome.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    Yeah and Phil, my thoughts on that police investigation have always been: what’s going to happen when the Nats get into power?

    Unfortunately Key decided to drop it, for political reasons. Let sleeping dogs lie and all that.

    Bad move, in my view.

    If the situations were reversed, would Liarbore have dropped it? Not on your nelly.

    C’mon John, you have to fight these poor pricks with the same tactics they used against you and beat them at their own game.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    “Thing is, this fool is no fool and knows there is no god so gets on with enjoying this all too brief life, unconstrained by the dumbarsed rules the god botherers live by.”

    I envy your faith, billy.

    “reid. don’t mention his father. he gets really pissed off.”

    I was hoping he would. Looks like it worked. Tee hee.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. billyborker (1,102 comments) says:

    Its not faith, reid; its knowledge.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    now, see how it starts!!

    folks, we’re getting off the thread here.

    if you’re going to assist bob-each-way borker/MNIJerk, with the process of personality modification, do it at general debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    There is some good news. A few of the left’s primary smear outlets will soon be broke or dead in the water.

    The odious and contemptible New York Times newspaper, probably the left’s most powerful propaganda outlet, is in a financial hole it can’t climb out of.

    So is television network MSNBC. Shareholders complain of unremitting leftist propaganda driving the value of their stock into the gutter.

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/04/22/ge-shareholders-meeting-crowd-was-very-upset-msnbc

    Larry King, whose show often has the lowest ratings in his time slot, has one foot in the grave and another on a well oiled roller skate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “if you’re going to assist bob-each-way borker/MNIJerk, with the process of personality modification, do it at general debate.”

    Exactly. Borker is primarily driven by his deep seated narcissism. The deranged coward only comes here for attention. Keep giving it to him and he’ll keep coming.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. dad4justice (8,051 comments) says:

    The best way to destroy billy borker is ignore the creep.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. radvad (744 comments) says:

    It’s obvious BB’s rules allow him to be as bitter and twisted and full of hate as he wants to be. My rules also give him that freedom.

    Back on topic. So the left are cowardly bully boys, unable to separate the personal from the political and use dirty tricks to destroy opponents. Who knew?

    The latest example is Perez Hilton’s all out attack on Miss California for giving the “wrong” answer to a question he asked. One sad dude.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. adamsmith1922 (890 comments) says:

    I liked a later section of Bassett’s post as well as extract quoted by David

    http://adamsmith.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/helens-mini-mes-urghh/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Camryn (553 comments) says:

    “Brown says that they should sign a contract acknowledging that if caught “disseminating inappropriate material they will automatically lose their jobs” – This is to get rid of anyone who lets the Opposition know what’s going on. Not to control smears.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Rex Widerstrom (5,345 comments) says:

    big bruv suggests:

    Read same for David Garrett, the left (including the Greens) are out to get Garrett for no other reason than he is popular and he supports legislation that the public want to see put in place.

    You may be right about the motives of the left, I don’t know. But there are some critics, such as myself and Kim Workman and the like, who work within the criminal justice system and who oppose Garrett’s ideas because we know them to be ineffective.

    I’ve canvassed my arguments in detail on other threads, but essentially he’s proposing a big steel ambulance surrounded by barbed wire at the bottom of the cliff. I want to see various measures to stop offenders offending before they ever reach the cliff. In short, we can do better than a law which allows three victims to be seriously harmed or killed (and a long list of those subject to “lesser” horrors) before we finally lock the person responsible away indefinitely.

    They (the left) cannot attack his argument as that would alienate them with mainstream NZ so they go after him personally.

    Again, I cannot speak for others but I admit I do attack him personally because I believe this is all about posturing (Act had one chance on law & order legislation and the SST forced them to use it on a measure that allows Garrett to talk tough while doing nothing to stop the escalation from petty criminal to violent thug) and because I have no regard for anyone who suggests being the victim of prison rape is an acceptable part of a sentence.

    Anyway, on the substantive topic, when you raised this in the General Debate a couple of days ago I made a comment which, with readers’ indulgence, I shall repeat here:

    In the mid-90s Gilbert Myles and I drafted a comprehensive Bill based in part on the UK’s establishment of Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. (The first UK appointee was a woman who’d brook no nonsense and investigated and commented without fear or favour. Of course she was quickly replaced and the legiuslation watered down). The Bill would have provided a mechanism for whistleblowers and the public to complain about, and have investigated, the actions of MPs. It would also have set more stringent rules round their behaviour and that of their staff, inside and outside the Parliament.

    Gilbert took it to the NZ First caucus who universally praised its intent and its drafting (Gilbert had personally paid for senior lawyers to write the Bill to give effect to our intent) but universally voted against allowing it to go forward into the Private Members Bill ballot (no surprises there, then).

    The point being, if any party truly wants to help bring an end to this kind of behaviour (and that includes, of course, National) then a Bill has already been drafted which would at least provide the basis for such a measure. I can’t speak for Gilbert but I know I’d be happy to have the draft given to any party which committed to trying to pass the measures it contains.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Ye gods How you lot have the audacity to comment on Labour smearing political opponents is beyond belief.
    This place is not called the sewer for nothing

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. burt (8,189 comments) says:

    billyborker

    As a family role model Sarah Palin is right up there with Betty Windsor.

    You opened the door, lets talk about Anderton’s suitability for involvement in drug and suicide policy? Lets talk about Helen Clark’s suitability for anything family related – she doesn’t even live with her husband.

    Get out of the gutter billy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    How cancerous and corrosive of you, Tuija.

    John Armstrong’s column on the H fee smear.

    Labour did trip itself up this week, the cynicism and arrogance of power coming back to bite it with a vengeance. That was most obvious in Labour’s latest attempt to dredge up something, anything, in John Key’s foreign exchange dealing past which might make voters question whether National’s leader has the integrity worthy of a prime minister.

    Labour believes it is perfectly within its rights to probe Key’s character. That may be so. But New Zealand voters have huge difficulty with investigations into MPs’ pasts and private lives. Some discretion is required on Labour’s part. Yet, it clumsily seems to think it can fool the public that it is performing a public service that gives it the latitude to parade the flimsiest material as proof of Key’s unfitness to govern.

    When it turns up nothing – and no less a figure than the party’s president is doing the digging for dirt – Labour looks as if it is driven by a fatal mix of arrogance and desperation. Hardly a good look in the penultimate week of an election campaign.

    Fran O’Sullivan’s column on the H Fee smear

    Labour Party president Mike Williams must have been tired and emotional or greatly deluded to believe he was finally on the track of a “neutron bomb” which would blast National leader John Key’s election campaign into smithereens.

    The upshot of Williams’ lunatic attempt to try and link Key with the notorious 1988 H-fee scam – when no such evidence has been uncovered – is that Labour is now (rightfully) scrambling to fight off accusations that it is more interested in launching smears against its opponents than fighting a fair election at a time of extreme international financial turbulence.

    The Prime Minister’s pathetic attempt to distance herself from Williams’ ham-fisted behaviour lasted a mere 24 hours before she was forced to confirm the Labour Party paid for what she initially described as his “private mission”.

    It would appear that lefties are so fucked that they can’t even get a good smear right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    is that why you’re here Tuija!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    I am here to try and understand right wing politics I must admit its confusing
    Your ideals taken to there logical conclusions would turn NZ into a South Pacific Somalia
    Still I am here to learn

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. big bruv (13,678 comments) says:

    Tuija’s comment’s are a classic play straight from the left’s coaching manual, when faced with anybody who does not agree with the liberal or leftist point of view you denigrate them.

    Under no circumstances will they engage in debate as that would legitimise their opponents argument, simply dismiss them as not worthy of comment, the usual line for achieving this is “we have moved on”, other classic ways of dealing with dissent is to label the opponents as racist, homophobic (even if sexuality is ot the issue at hand) or sexist.

    The public are so well trained these days that accusations of that kind is enough to make most run for the hills, it is all designed to shut down debate and move the topic of conversation from the topic at hand to one the pinko’s want to discuss or publicise.

    Have a look at what that fraud B Husein Obama is doing right now in the USA, just as his approval ratings are dropping through the floor because of the 2 trillion dollar bail out he (along with a fully compliant left wing media) dredges up some old memo’s to do with Guantanamo bay, the result of which is that the left wing media in the USA have all but dropped the story of massive public resistance to the bail out (tea parties all over the country) and gone back into full campaign mode for the mickey mouse eared idiot who currently occupies the white house.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. billyborker (1,102 comments) says:

    burt (2868) Vote: 1 1 Says:

    April 26th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
    billyborker

    As a family role model Sarah Palin is right up there with Betty Windsor.

    You opened the door, lets talk about Anderton’s suitability for involvement in drug and suicide policy? Lets talk about Helen Clark’s suitability for anything family related – she doesn’t even live with her husband.

    Talk about them by all means. But did Anderton campaign on his expertise in suicide, Clark on her expertise as a parent? Palin did campaign on her ability as a parent, thus fair game.

    Get out of the gutter billy.

    Well, I would, but then I couldn’t play here anymore.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. AG (1,823 comments) says:

    bb:

    “Tuija’s comment’s are a classic play straight from the left’s coaching manual, when faced with anybody who does not agree with the liberal or leftist point of view you denigrate them.”

    Surely you are not accusing redbaiter of having a liberal or leftist point of view? Surely not? I mean, he ARGUES as if he were a member of a small Trotskyist sect that must crush all who dare challenge him, but I think he believes is ideas are from the right … not the left.

    As for Obama’s approval ratings, this comparison with Reagan is interesting (although ultimately irrelevant, as history never repeats exactly).

    http://100days.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/guest-column-will-obama-ride-reagans-ratings-rollercoaster

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Tuija’s comment’s are a classic play straight from the left’s coaching manual,
    There is a coaching manual?

    Twas Interesting you used the term” Have a look at what that fraud B Husein Obama” why was that ?

    Your comments are always peppered with unhelpful with name calling as is a huge proportion of the contributors here
    Why is that ?

    I don’t like Tony Ryall for example but I would never continually refer to him as say “Spanky Ryall

    Only recently DPf used the term Stalinist for the WCC planning dept why ? Fuck DPF would be dead by now if the WCC was Stalinist

    As you were

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    … and just exactly what are ‘right wing politics’ Tuija?

    given the subject of the thread, are you supportive of what happened in the UK?

    Is left wing politics best represented by the standard of behaviour we have seen from Klerk and co over the last 9 years? Do you stand tall and proud of what they got up to without reservation?

    Do you support the pledge card/break the law so change the law/ Peters support/Glen fiasco/empty broom cupboard economics/H fee smear/hacked emails/Mallard yobbo behaviour … and so on parade without reservation or qualification?

    Certainly one can discern what might kindly be described as a lack of sympathy, perhaps more realistically bordering on pathological hatred for what Klerk and co got up to when reviewing these posts, but how is a hatred for dishonesty likely to turn us in to a South Pacific Somalia?

    I’ll just pop off and eat a baby while you gather your thoughts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Helen Clark made some major fuck ups she also had some major triumphs
    i don’t think the standard of behaviour from labour is any different from what we have seen of National in the past and what we are begginning to see now
    the problem is that you righties can’t see things from another point of view

    This guy says it better then i can
    Well I think you are empathetically challenged. And this disability is rooted in fear; fear of the unknown, fear of ambiguity, fear of displaying “soft” emotions, fear of opening yourselves to ridicule. But it could also be argued (as hinted at in the recent psychological study of the conservate mind, ironically funded under the Bush administration) that there are genuine issues of brain chemistry involved.
    I have had conversations with conservatives in which it is obvious that certain liberal axioms, like the social contract, simply “do not compute”. On the other hand, liberals are perfectly capable of comprehending the self-serving axioms of conservatism, but they know that to adopt them would be a step back, both morally and evolutionarily.
    Conservatism, whether in America, Israel, the Islamic world or anywhere else, is jeopardizing the future of the human race.
    It is ironic, though not necessarily surprising, that in a time when such a rapid and radical change in our thinking is required, there should be such an upsurge in conservatism.
    I would like to believe that this anti-evolutionary mental deficiency could to be embraced with the same unconditional compassion one would feel toward, say, a small child with Downs Syndrome…

    BUT TIME IS GETTING SHORT!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    I am here to try and understand right wing politics I must admit its confusing. Your ideals taken to there logical conclusions would turn NZ into a South Pacific Somalia. Still I am here to learn.

    Tuija, lefties don’t get “right wing politics” because conservatives and lefties appear to approach the same issue from two different directions. In general terms (there are exceptions) this is how it often seems to play out.

    On most issues conservatives firstly think about the pragmatic aspects: “how do we configure it in the best possible way,” is their usual question. Cost, time and quality of outcome are the things they spend most of their time thinking about.

    You inadvertently put your finger on how lefties approach things generally, when you said “Your ideals taken to there logical conclusions…” Lefties are frightfully idealistic. As conservatives are pragmatic, lefties are idealistic. Never having been a lefty in my entire life I don’t really know how you guys think but observing from the outside, you appear to view things from an idealistic perspective: i.e. you have the ideal in mind as the primary function and you don’t appear to care very much about how efficiently its achieved. If I’m right this explains why Liarbore was quite sanguine about the appalling productivity stats as the civil service grew 40% during its reign. To a pragmatic conservative of course that was and is anaethema.

    Unfortunately these differing approaches appears to give many lefties an unjustified sense of moral superiority, as if they’re better human beings than conservatives simply because they’re simple-minded enough to think that some sort of idealistic fantasy like ‘world peace’ is their idea alone and no-one else has ever ever thought about such a thing. The reality of course is that almost every conservative is a way better human being than even the best lefty because conservatives to a man lack the smug self-righteousness that exudes from the pores of every single lefty (that I’ve ever met, anyway).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Thanks I understand you a lot better now I think
    If you are asking your self questions like I dunno
    Like is our capitalist consumer society really working if a huge proportion of the planet live in abject poverty
    or what happens when the non renewable world resources that we have built from so much relative weallth in the West run out.
    what do we do then ?
    or how helpful to political discussion terms like Dear leader Liarbour of Klerk or Stalinist WCC are ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Glutaemus Maximus (2,207 comments) says:

    Boring Bork Bork is fast moving into the, “Take the maniac outside for a shoeing” area.

    Just here to take the piss.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. radvad (744 comments) says:

    BB
    Believing in “family values” (whatever that means, I hate the term) does not mean you have a perfect family. In fact far from it. There is no such thing anyway, I am sure you would agree.

    However, most families are there for family members when they get into a spot of bother and so they should be. As Palin said “there is room in our family for one more child” and so she should have.

    One of the things that gets up the nose of lefties is that she chose not to put down her Downs syndrome child. This despite lefties claiming to support a womans choice. There was hardly a more amusing theme during that whole saga than so called feminists attacking her because she had made choices they did not agree with. Their true colours were on full display and they hated how Palin blew their cover.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    Tuija

    There’s no doubt that we have seen some shoddy behaviour from National Governments in the past. Particularly under the command of one RD Muldoon.

    But to suggest that anything like what we’ve seen from Labour and co was also routine business for previous National governments is just nonsensical by any stretch of the imagination. To go further and suggest that we are seeing the same thing from the current government is just farcical. What ARE you on about? And what exactly were Klerk’s major fuckups? That she and her mates were just dishonest or that she got caught?

    Klerk & co got in on the back of a stupid porky by Shiply about the Sachi meal; and a promise to “clean up” governement. Yeah, right. The reality is that Shipley was pilloried for that porky. The voters hated it. Yet now, after nine years of your dodgy mates, the public expectations of politicans are at an all time low. Its fair to say also that I cannot ever remember the degree of passionate hatred and mistrust of a government, such as that arising in the last nine years. Bear in mind that at the outset, many people mightn’t have liked them much, but they still gave them a chance. That dislike turned bad. Muldoon was a great hate figure – easy to polarise opinions about him. The last Labour government made the choice pretty difficult.

    And people left the country in droves – and it wasn’t just the “rich pricks” who earned more than $70,000 or so; it was truck drivers, taxi drivers, factory workers nurses and teachers. Was that because they hated Key and were scared he would get in in 2008?

    The problem Tuija, is in fact that you lefties can’t see another point of view. You recite the same facile mantra as that bigoted pillock you quoted who is simply pandering to his own sense of self importance by writing a bunch of pseudo intellectual clap trap. That’s your justification for adopting some prejudice that anyone commenting on this blog doesn’t actually give a shit about anyone other than themselves (which I am assuming is where you are coming from)?

    Go check out the Standard, the McCarten drivel etc if you are actually serious about approaching the supposed left/right issue with an open mind. Abandon the dogma and the rhetoric and justify your point of view. But turn up with a chip on your shoulder or some dreamy notion suggesting the complete absence of any social consciences on this site and you’ll just have to join in the fun!!

    And by the way, the Somalia thing, how is that gonna happen or were you just being clever and witty??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    “how helpful to political discussion terms like Dear leader Liarbour of Klerk or Stalinist WCC are ?”

    Well, I don’t know about everyone else, but it makes me feel better of course. Good grief.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Cactus Kate (550 comments) says:

    In Labour’s defence, National used to do the same thing with Young Nats and their research unit. Difference of course is that the Young Nats didn’t jump straight in their 20’s and 30’s to the Backbenches, they moved on to bigger and better things, some have very successful small businesses, work in professions and are general achievers.

    Labour’s lot are University protectorate and public sector losers in comparison.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. kiwi in america (2,495 comments) says:

    Tuija
    As a former lefty liberal now conservative, I know precisely your mindset and belief patterns. My the examination of the real effects of socialist policy in the real world became part of my journey away from your world.

    Enlighten those on the right who you find so ignorant of socialist thought – name one socialist country where the implimentation of socialist policies has resulted in the rising of living standards for the most people faster than a comparable sized capitalist economy. Oh and you cant count Sweden – the tremendous wealth that enabled their welfare state (that is now being pared back due to its unaffordability) was build on the backs of a good old fashion capitalist economy that boomed during and immediately after WW2 due to Sweden essentially backing both sides in the war and avoiding any damage or major arms build up.

    The many poor countries in the world are poor due to corruption, socialist experiments, aid siphoned off to a corrupt elite and economies dominated by inefficient oligopolies/monopolies that stifle capitalist competition.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Nomestradamus (3,252 comments) says:

    Tuija:

    I don’t like Tony Ryall for example but I would never continually refer to him as say “Spanky Ryall

    Sorry, the nickname “Spanky” is already taken; David Benson-Pope took it a long time ago :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    I have never voted labour in my life I see them and National as two sides of the same coin
    Although not a labour supporter I can see that not sending Kiwi troops to Iraq for example was the right thing to do (few could argue that it was) But I can also see that Supporting WP was a fuck up
    I don’t like what the Government has signaled about the super city in Auckland But I do like how Chris Finlayson is going about his job
    i like the Greens stance on sect 59 but hate the stance on health products
    What i am trying to understand here is the bile
    Look at any post DPF dogs whistles about the Greens for example
    Its one thing to disagree but quite another to engage in the sort of bile that passes for debate here
    I also think that Mr key has made a good start trying to have a more cenrtist agenda if he can keep the right wing at bay he will do well
    That is was the majority of New Zealand obviously want a centrist agenda But my point is that if the ravings of the right are at all indicative of the National party in general then we are in deep shit

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. dad4justice (8,051 comments) says:

    “i like the Greens stance on sect 59″

    Smack that headcase!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    KIA I do not agree with socialism either But i find it a long stretch to say that “he many poor countries in the world are poor due to corruption, socialist experiments, aid siphoned off to a corrupt elite and economies dominated by inefficient oligopolies/monopolies that stifle capitalist competition.”
    that statement is simply untrue
    Capitalist competition which treats everybody as a “consumer” has us on the brink of the biggest depression we have ever seen
    it has the planet on the tipping point of unsustainablity and 90% of the worlds wealth concentrated with the top 10%
    Somewhere there is a different way

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Nomestradamus (3,252 comments) says:

    Tuija:

    But my point is that if the ravings of the right are at all indicative of the National party in general then we are in deep shit

    The problem with your 6:21 comment is that you’re cherry-picking individual issues, such as Iraq and Auckland super-city, without articulating your philosophy. Just what is it about right-wing philosophy that you find objectionable?

    And, since we’re on the subject of left- and right-wing perspectives, I’d like to hear your thoughts on this bizarre post at The Standard (it’s not particularly long, so with DPF’s indulgence, I’ll post it here in full):

    It seems that Zimbabwe is, after all, a world leader. Mugabe’s government which followed the IMF and World Bank’s neo liberal plan for their economy to the letter, has shown us all how these policies will finish up.

    The austerity medicine prescribed for Zimbabwe by the world Bank, Included oppressive and harsh debt repayment, and massive tax cuts for the rich, all funded by the privatisation of virtually every public service and national asset, and by slashing the ’social wage’.

    (doesn’t this all sound familiar?)

    The mantra was “Free Enterprise knows best” .

    Now the whole world is learning the harsh lesson that the people of Zimbabwe have seen played out in their country.

    As one commentator once said, “Free Enterprise – means free foxes in a free chicken run”.

    It seems that most governments including President Obama’s and ours, instead of getting their shotgun, like any sensible farmer would do, is instead feeding the fox more chickens in the forlorn hope that this will make him satisfied.

    The Zimbabwe example shows that this fox will never be satisfied until your economy is wrecked and your people are unemployed and starving.

    The anonymous writer of this “guest post” is seriously arguing that Zimbabwe is a case study showing that neo-liberal (leftist code for right-wing) politics inevitably leads an economy to the wrecker’s yard. No substantiation, of course, but that’s par for the course at The Standard.

    Does this measure up to your standards of (adapting your 6:21 comment) dog-whistling, the sort of bile that passes for debate, and the ravings of the left?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    i like the Greens stance on sect 59″

    Smack that headcase!

    It seemed to me at the time that you were not allowed to hit your pet dog
    but you were allowed to hit your child

    If thinking that makes me a head case then so be it

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. dad4justice (8,051 comments) says:

    “Look at any post DPF dogs whistles about the Greens for example”

    The Tuija dog is addicted to utopian green meat and has the Mexico Flu. Forget the head case job this animal is foaming at the mouth?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    yes I read that but they all seem to enter into an interesting debate without out all the attendant mudslinging and bile that would accompany a comparable post here.
    Zimbabwe is a post colonial fuck up the British fucked up the white Rhodesians fucked up World bank fucked up and Black Zimbabwenen leadership (?) fucked up And we have fucked by standing back and doing nothing

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Sorry I shouldn’t have replied to Mr D4J

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. dad4justice (8,051 comments) says:

    ” mudslinging and bile”

    Don’t China back Zimbabwe? It was once a proud Nation Tuijargit ! Remember Mr Smith etc… surely this is game over redback watermelon?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    “Capitalist competition which treats everybody as a “consumer” has us on the brink of the biggest depression we have ever seen”

    Fascism or Corporate welfare is not capitalism, i don’t see how the private ownership of wealth created this problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. big bruv (13,678 comments) says:

    Tuija

    “Zimbabwe is a post colonial fuck up the British fucked up the white Rhodesians fucked up World bank fucked up and Black Zimbabwenen leadership (?) fucked up And we have fucked by standing back and doing nothing”

    Interesting, given your feelings about Mugabe (you could not help but have a dig with the colonisation bullshit could you) and the lack of action I can only assume that you are all for the war in Iraq?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. dad4justice (8,051 comments) says:

    “Sorry I shouldn’t have replied to Mr D4J”

    You are forgiven greenfly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    interesting, given your feelings about Mugabe (you could not help but have a dig with the colonisation bullshit could you) and the lack of action I can only assume that you are all for the war in Iraq?
    I had a “dig” about colonisation because it was just one of the things that have helped create the sorry state the place is in today, that is an undeniable fact

    Iraq = Zimbabwe??? If you can’t see the difference then there is no point in replying to you

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Tuija, having been a colony of Britain is an advantage, not a disadvantage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Burt at 3.56, you missed out Sue Bradford’s parenting record.

    Sorry, must go and wash off now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Redbaiter (5914) 7 1 Says:
    April 26th, 2009 at 12:26 pm

    “There is some good news. A few of the left’s primary smear outlets will soon be broke or dead in the water.

    The odious and contemptible New York Times newspaper, probably the left’s most powerful propaganda outlet, is in a financial hole it can’t climb out of.

    So is television network MSNBC. Shareholders complain of unremitting leftist propaganda driving the value of their stock into the gutter…..”

    Redbaiter, what would you bet me that there will be taxpayers money propping up those institutions before the end of the Obama Administration………?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Fascism or Corporate welfare is not capitalism,
    Did I say that it was?
    If the capitalist’s didn’t create it who did ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Phil Best eh ? by name by nature ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    I had a “dig” about colonisation because it was just one of the things that have helped create the sorry state the place is in today, that is an undeniable fact

    Only in the warped view of history that lefties teach at school and then Uni, Tuija.

    Can’t you distinguish between a system like capitalism and socialism and the execution thereof within individual jurisdictions?

    Isn’t that the point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. radvad (744 comments) says:

    “And we have fucked by standing back and doing nothing”

    I have just given myself an uppercut because, apparently, I caused the Zimbabwe situation.

    Please explain again what exactly I should have done to prevent it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. big bruv (13,678 comments) says:

    Tuija

    You had a “dig” against colonisation because that seems to be compulsory for Green voters.

    Iraq had an evil dictator who murdered thousands of his own people.

    Zimbabwe has an evil dictator who has facilitated the murder of thousands of his own people.

    If you cannot see the similarities between the two then you are as hypercritical as the rest of the Greens, your answer shows that you have no rational response to my question, you claim that “we” should be doing something about tyranny yet when the brave countries of the word (which to our eternal shame we were not a part of) did something about the tyranny in Iraq you could not see past what your undoubted hatred of the USA.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. kiwi in america (2,495 comments) says:

    Tuija
    Capitalist competition didnt cause this recession. Government meddling in markets caused it. The meltdown in the stock markets followed the almost total collapse of credit markets. They almost collapsed because many large financial institutions acquired large portfolios of sub prime mortgage backed securities. The huge growth in these financial instruments came as a direct consequence of the actions of the largest purchasers of mortgage backed securities across all US markets – the government backed agencies known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Mortgages in NZ are issued mostly by trading banks from either 90 Day Bills or from term deposits. US residential mortgages are packaged into large bundles of mortgages with the same term and then on-sold to other lenders and into the wholesale bond markets where the large institutions package them for pension funds and other large institutional investors. In normal market conditions and with normal lending criteria, these securities are very very safe and very popular.

    Enter the Carter Administration with legislation to force banks to lend to minority borrowers. In effect the government is intervening in the private lending policies of capitalist companies and forcing them to modify their criteria for the benefit of a politically sensitive group of voters. Like all socialist interventions, the architects have pure intentions with little regard for the flow on market effects.

    The Clinton Administration gave this process real teeth by legislatively empowering Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy the higher risk mortgages. Thus when agencies with the implicit guarantee of the US Federal Government enter the mortgage markets and says they will buy the rubbishy high risk loans that most market investors dont want, guess what – it became a licence for many mortgage lenders (bank and non-bank) to loan money to almost anyone because Fannie and Freddie would always buy the loans that were written. When a whole new category of potential borrowers can now get mortgages that normally prudent lenders would decline (due to insufficient deposit and /or income,bad credit history or all three) you fuel a massive boom in house prices. The boom in house prices further emboldens lenders to out compete with each other to offer exotic mortgage products that can only be repaid on the backs of constantly rising real estate markets.

    When the bubble finally bursts, as all bubbles in free market economies eventually do, you get massive contraction of credit, tumbling share markets, shrinking corporate profits and job layoffs. Recessions clean out the dead wood and well run companies will survive the carnage and emerge stronger and when markets rebound (which they do if not meddled with too much), profitably returns and employment rises. New companies rise from the ashes of the old as their owners learn from the mistakes of others.

    This is the pretty standard ebb and flow of the capitalist economy. Just because inappropriate government interventions in the housing and mortgage markets in the US led to a raft of wrong signals that triggered the chain of events that has led to the current recession, it is not the inherent fault of the capitalist system as you so blithely and naively suggest.

    You pine for a “better way”, you decry capitalism – you say you dont like socialism – so what is your answer. Clark offered NZ the so called third way as does UK Labour – look where we ended up. A bloated bureaucracy that failed to deliver better services to taxpayers and more nanny state interventions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    Helped along the way by the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, KIA.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    This is just my opinion but i think you need to realise that you are a capitalist Tuija, you have private ownership of your own wealth and have the freedom to produce it.

    I would say we are the victims of those who seek to repress us, pitted against each other in a sick game of pin the tail on the ideology, our values are so similar yet so far apart at the same time, we both feel the injustice created by the pigs at the global trough, the “Too big to fails” and the Monopolistic corporations that destroy our identity, our resources and our markets.

    It is akin to a mass mind rape of society that we blame the very thing that can save us, the blame lands squarely on us, the individuals who wanted the government to intervene when the going got tough, who wanted to take none of the risk yet have all the reward.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Ross Miller (1,686 comments) says:

    Fascinating to see ‘their’ Michael tell it how it is.

    For Tuiga … sorry to burst your bubble. Helen Clark and Labour DID send throops to Iraq. They even awarded them medals.

    Tuiga … a ‘confused’ leftie. How sad, never mind, move on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. gladstone (38 comments) says:

    what?? did I..did someone… say this
    ‘this anti-evolutionary mental deficiency’
    and get away.. scott-free.. with it..?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Tuiga … a ‘confused’ leftie. How sad, never mind, move on.”

    With you this time Mr. Miller. Why the hell is everyone wasting so much time and effort on this sad little attention seeking commie dumbarse?? Fuck him. He can think what he wants.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. sonic (2,818 comments) says:

    I see redbaiter is getting baited by the reds again!

    Perhaps he has swine flu?

    KIA I see you mention the Carter and Clinton administrations in your rpecis of American economic collapse.

    Have you forgotten the Two Bushes?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. dad4justice (8,051 comments) says:

    Hey Piggy I think the sonic flu is fatal.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. thedavincimode (6,606 comments) says:

    radvad you bastard. follow up with the left hook. oops, make that a right cross

    At least you had the courage to fess up.

    speaking of courage, where’s bob-each-way borker?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. peterquixote (231 comments) says:

    I have read a lot of Bassett articles,
    he is a good New Zealander,
    Basset has a good intellect, he survived Helengrand dudes,
    our life is happy now
    our nation is free,
    NEW ZEALAND

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Ok Rhodesia the franchise for the first Legislative Council election in 1899 contained the following requirement:
    voters to be British subjects, male, 21 years of age and older, able to write their address and occupation, and then to fulfil the following financial requirements: (a) ownership of a registered mining claim in Southern Rhodesia, or (b) occupying immovable property worth £75, or (c) receiving wages or salary of £50 per annum in Southern Rhodesia. Six months’ continuous residence was also required for qualifications (b) and (c).

    Innocuous by the standards of the time, the requirement effectively excluded blacks from the electorate
    So excluding blacks from voting in there own land ?

    I would say that is one of the causes of the troubles now

    big bruv yet when the brave countries of the word (which to our eternal shame we were not a part of) did something about the tyranny in Iraq you could not see past what your undoubted hatred of the USA.

    Ross Miller For Tuiga … sorry to burst your bubble. Helen Clark and Labour DID send troops to Iraq. They even awarded them medals.

    get the story right people

    BB if you think the coalition of the stupid went to Iraq to get rid of an oppressive dictator you are guilty of rewriting history

    Capitalist competition didnt cause this recession. Government meddling in markets caused it.
    here you are partly right here is an interesting take

    Financial meldown
    OK sorry about the C & P

    five key moments

    No. 1: Firing the Chairman

    In 1987 the Reagan administration decided to remove Paul Volcker as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board and appoint Alan Greenspan in his place. Volcker had done what central bankers are supposed to do. On his watch, inflation had been brought down from more than 11 percent to under 4 percent. In the world of central banking, that should have earned him a grade of A+++ and assured his re-appointment. But Volcker also understood that financial markets need to be regulated. Reagan wanted someone who did not believe any such thing, and he found him in a devotee of the objectivist philosopher and free-market zealot Ayn Rand.

    No. 2: Tearing Down the Walls

    The deregulation philosophy would pay unwelcome dividends for years to come. In November 1999, Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act—the culmination of a $300 million lobbying effort by the banking and financial-services industries, and spearheaded in Congress by Senator Phil Gramm. Glass-Steagall had long separated commercial banks (which lend money) and investment banks

    No. 3: Applying the Leeches

    Then along came the Bush tax cuts, enacted first on June 7, 2001, with a follow-on installment two years later. The president and his advisers seemed to believe that tax cuts, especially for upper-income Americans and corporations, were a cure-all for any economic disease—the modern-day equivalent of leeches. The tax cuts played a pivotal role in shaping the background conditions of the current crisis. Because they did very little to stimulate the economy, real stimulation was left to the Fed, which took up the task with unprecedented low-interest rates and liquidity.

    No. 4: Faking the Numbers

    Meanwhile, on July 30, 2002, in the wake of a series of major scandals—notably the collapse of WorldCom and Enron—Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The scandals had involved every major American accounting firm, most of our banks, and some of our premier companies, and made it clear that we had serious problems with our accounting system

    No. 5: Letting It Bleed

    The final turning point came with the passage of a bailout package on October 3, 2008—that is, with the administration’s response to the crisis itself. We will be feeling the consequences for years to come. Both the administration and the Fed had long been driven by wishful thinking, hoping that the bad news was just a blip, and that a return to growth was just around the corner. As America’s banks faced collapse, the administration veered from one course of action to another.

    The system we have is deeply floored does nothing to adreess poverty in the third world try saying to some half starved African
    you have private ownership of your own wealth and have the freedom to produce it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. clintheine (1,570 comments) says:

    Tuiga – heres a way to help your education about the right and left in the world.

    Name 10 rich, successful and free Socialist countries.

    Now name 10 capitalist countries with the same as the above.

    Lesson completed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. reid (16,189 comments) says:

    You said it, clint.

    “The system we have is deeply floored”

    Crikey Tuija, how come Clinton allowed Greenspan to lower the interest rates to near zero thereby transferring the dot-bomb losses into what became the real-estate bubble? How come Clinton signed off on the repeal of Glass-Steagall?

    The system we have has been poorly executed, by corrupt pricks and incompetent morons spanning many Administrations, both left and right.

    It’s not Capitalism that’s at fault, it’s the administration of it. Why can’t you get that through your head?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    Tuiga – heres a way to help your education about the right and left in the world.

    Name 10 rich, successful and free Socialist countries.

    Now name 10 capitalist countries with the same as the above.

    Lesson completed.

    You of course have to define rich successful and free
    I would suggest that you can not have a least two of the above with more then half the planet living beneath the poverty line
    and the planet paying heavily the price for the supposed “richness” “success” and “freedom’
    Both systems by that measure are therefore failures

    However l now know that learning the lesson from some of the above posters there aren’t any purely capitalist countries
    they tend to be social democracies where capitalism is constrained by regulation some to a more or lessor extent

    It’s not Capitalism that’s at fault, it’s the administration of it. Why can’t you get that through your head?
    However i will play the “lesson” game
    Name me a successful capitalist country where the admin of capitalism has NOT been at fault so I can gain an insight into what this nirvana looks like ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. kiwi in america (2,495 comments) says:

    Tuiga
    There is no nirvana. There is no true free market capitalist economy – all are regulated to some extent and not all regulation is bad. As Winston Churchill once remarked about democracy – it is a flawed (not flooored) system of government but better than the alternatives. Those of he right say that capitalism with all its flaws delivers more wealth to more people than any other system. The benefits of capitalism have been blunted in many countries by inappropriate government interventions and the current recession is but one of many examples of that. The Great Depression in the US was prolonged by Roosevelt’s massive interventions contrary to popular myth and it was the military build up for WW2 that finally hauled America out of its Depression. Hoover before Roosevelt essentially turned a severe post stock market crash recession in the early 30’s into a full blown Depression by raising taxes and signing the Smooth Hawley tarrifs that sparked a global trade war – all government sponsored interventions that tried to help but ended up hindering.

    If you examine all the recessions in the US since and including the Great Depression and look at the three main policy proscriptions used by the then President to try and end them 1 – Debt funded government pump priming to stimulate economic activity (al la Keynes) 2 – Tax increases to reign in deficits to stimulate activity or 3 – Tax cuts to stimulate economic activity: No 3 wins hands down in terms of the speed of the recovery and the strength of the recovery so you can parrot the left’s attacks on tax cuts all you want, the history of economic statistics in this regard speak for themselves.

    You have concern for the poor in Africa. What do you propose to do about it? What will liberate these people from grinding poverty? The West has pumped billions in aid to Africa to almost no avail. That is because most African political institutions are corrupt kleptocracies where an elite few siphon off the aid money and use the institutions of the State to control the few resources available to enrich them and their cronies. Many experiment with disasterous socialist experiments fuelled by IMF loans and hopefully funded by the few mineral resources they have. Capitalism is never allowed to truly work – there are too many disincentives for adequate capital to invest in these countries because there is no respect for contracts, weak and corrupt court systems and poor ways to own property and assets and transfer them easily to others. Environmental lobby groups have so captured western governments that their attempts to reduce greenhouse gases will deny the third world the ability to transition from the griding task of the very poor in Africa (that of spending too much of their day finding wood to heat) to oil/coal fired power generation which is the way India and China have grown their economies.

    Restrictive trade practices are the antithesis of capitalism and when challenged and overturned by increasing free trade agreements between 1st and 3rd world nations and the agreed upon binding arbitration of the WTO, leads to freer trade that means the rising tide of international goods flowing can slowly rise all the boats in the harbour including the very poorest of nations.

    Prosperity of nations is built on a variety of foundations – they being workable democratic institutions, ready access to independent courts, freedom of speech (the press) and association (trade unions), enforceable contracts and intellectual property, freest possible trade – all these make the formation and investment of capital in plant and equipment that can more efficiently use the resources of a nation for the greatest benefit of the greatest number. Sadly these institutions are sadly lacking in Africa and even when introduced (such as in the once very prosperous Zimbabwe) they are dismantled by dictators with devastating impact on the poor in these nations.

    Sorry we have gotten a long way from the thread topic but these sacred cows of the left must always be challenged.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Sorry we have gotten a long way from the thread topic but these sacred cows of the left must always be challenged.”

    I can’t remember the name of the book, but a guy went to either Cambodia or Vietnam during the war to rescue his wife. He expected at some stage to come into contact with Communist soldiers, but was not especially worried as it was his belief that he would be able to explain to them he was not any kind of combatant but there on a humanitarian mission.

    When he did come into contact with the soldiers, he found them to be ignorant peasants and thugs, who spoke in guttural grunts and knew nothing but violence and brutality and killing. They had no interest in listening to anything. They were communist machines. He was beaten with rifle butts and imprisoned.

    Tuiga is the modern and local version of those thugs. Half educated, semi-literate, brainwashed, ignorant. You’re wasting your time trying to enlighten him. He has been programmed, and his mission is to promote totalitarian government, steal from the productive, enlsave the free world and slavishly comply with any edict his communist masters issue. There is no reasoning with such brain damaged thugs.

    They are a reminder of what dangers the left bring with them. We are in a cultural war. The left are winning and have been winning for some time. Like the thug communist soldiers in the book, Tuiga has no ability to reason and no interest in doing so anyway. You need to think of a more effective solution for dealing with Tuiga and his ilk than reasoning with them, or the war is lost. I suggest rather than awarding them the dignity of civilized discourse, they should be marginalised as the contemptible and dangerous communist vermin they really are.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Ross Miller (1,686 comments) says:

    Tuiga said “Ross Miller For Tuiga … sorry to burst your bubble. Helen Clark and Labour DID send troops to Iraq. They even awarded them medals. …… Get the story right people”.

    Pray tell me Tuiga what precisely in my post was wrong.

    Are you saying Helen Clark didn’t send troops to Iraq?. 167 young Kiwis would disagree.

    Are you saying ‘She’ didn”t award them medals? What the f**k then are the two medals each are wearing?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.