This entry was posted
on Thursday, January 20th, 2011 at 8:05 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
MMP is probably going to be voted to be kept in, so what are ways we could improve it?
My suggestions:
1. Reduce the number of MPs to 100. Would save the country money.
2. 60 seats should be electorate and 40 seats should be Party List. This is to help reduce the minority parties from holding the country to ransom so easily, but still gives the voters of those parties a chance to be represented.
If the number of MPs were kept at 120+ and Party Lists and Electoral lists were split 60-60, then raise the threshold to 7% before a party can get in on the Party List.
3. Electoral votes wouldn’t count towards party list votes and vice versa. This stops minor parties getting more seats just because they got one candidate elected to an electorate. Parties would still have to get 5% of votes on the Party List vote to get more MPs into parliament.
E.g. This would mean that National would probably need to attempt to seriously challenge for Rodney Hides electorate seat, because they can’t just rely on him getting elected to bringing in more MPs to help form a coalition when they get less that 5% of the Party vote.
4. An MP could only be on the Electorate list or the Party list, not both. This is to stop electorate MPs getting voted out or rejected, but then getting back into Parliament on the Party list.
5. Remove the Maori seats.
6. Have elections every four years to give governments more time to initiate changes before having to start thinking about election bribes. Less elections means the country could save a bit of money.
I’m sure you guys have ideas on how to improve MMP. I’m keen to hear them.
Comrade Zhumao and other Beijing apologists will disagree, but Harry Reid called it right when he said:
“I am going to go back to Washington and meet with the President of China. He is a dictator. He can do a lot of things through the form of government they have. Maybe I shouldn’t have said dictator, but they have a different type of government then we have, and that is an understatement.”
No matter what happens to MMP, no matter how things are structured, the best way to improve government is it get better quality MPs, so that is where the focus should be – how to get better people standing, and how they have a reasonable chance of getting elected. Which party the stand for is less important than their ability and their dedication to the country first. Strong independent MPs should be encouraged – and voted for.
Tweaking MMP make make a little difference. An attitudinal change amongst voters could make a much bigger difference.
Agree with AlphaKiwi and Pete George. In addition to getting better quality candidates we need much more political education. As I have posted for years (partly om jest) that voters should have to take bothe an IQ and a Political Knowledge Test before they are eligible to vote.
If you dont understand the issues you cant make an informed decision. Voting for a candidate because he/she is a ‘nice’ person is a nonsense.
We should start by having unbiased education in our schools( impossible at present with the numbers of Lefties in the education system) plus encourage adults to take more of an interest.
Otherwise we have what we have know Dumbies voting for dumbies or manipulative pricks like many in the current House.
Yes more independents. If fact I would support the banning of all political parties on the grounds they are no better than gangs In fact they have the regalia of gangs. Blue Red Green Yellow etc.
While idealistically all independent MPs – vote in the best for each electorate, then pick the best of them for cabinet – sounds good it’s highly unlikely that would happen. The exisitng parties would not make it easy for a start. And there can be advantages in having parties – as long as they put country before party interests (difficult to achieve I know).
More fragmentation of parties plus a few independents would be a good compromise – more chance of the best combination of parties/MPs combining in coalition.
Lastman said… Voting for a candidate because he/she is a ‘nice’ person is a nonsense.
Yep, look no further than National voters. They voted for Key, who has no political standing/philosophy of any sorts. Time to call National voters, useful idiots. Rodney Hide was correct when he was interviewed (TV1) just after the last election where he stated that Mr Key sits to the left of Helen Clark in the political spectrum.
Governor Pat “Four-County” Quinn — so called because he won only four counties out of 102 in the November election — wheeled and dealed, and then wheedled some more, and when all was said and done got barely enough Democrats to vote for a tax increase twice the size of the one that he promised he would work for during the campaign. The margin was razor thin — three votes in the House and one measly vote in the Senate.
…
The Honorable Mr. Four-County was last seen backslapping and shaking the hands of his departing Democrats on the Senate floor, actually congratulating the hacks who had just given Illinois businesses and citizens absolutely nothing to be happy about.
In a lame-duck session I would add, just minutes before new members were to be sworn in.
My friends and relatives in Chicago have now passed through hope, change, disappointment and anger to the fetal position. Read the whole thing, but remember this quote, which is going to sting:
The incongruity of the situation was best summed up by Governor Mitch Daniels of neighboring Indiana, who remarked, “It’s like living next door to ‘The Simpsons’ … you know the dysfunctional family down the block?”
While idealistically all independent MPs – vote in the best for each electorate, then pick the best of them for cabinet – sounds good it’s highly unlikely that would happen. The exisitng parties would not make it easy for a start. And there can be advantages in having parties – as long as they put country before party interests (difficult to achieve I know).
I completely agree with you Pete, and I think the way to acheive this is to ditch MMP and return to an electorate-only system. Party candidates should then be selected via open primaries, so that even if a seat is safe for a given party it isn’t for the MP and they will be far more likely to vote as their constituents want than as their party whips direct.
Pete Never say never. Remember the English Parliament was once comprised of only independents representing their local people and France have a mayor for every 300 citizens. The problem now is the disconnect between the pollies and the citizens which has lead to the apathy we have now. Only those with a cause or a specific compliant go to see their local MP. Most dont even know the name of their MP or the party they represent or what their policies are.
So how relevant is the Parliament to the majority of citizens. IMHO it isnt. And thats a worry as history has shown that a uninformed disinterested citizenery can lead to a Parliament that takes advantage to the detriment of the citizens.
And I dont want to see that happen. Feet to the fire and a blowtorch down their Y fronts is what I want to see.
A loyal supporter slams Labour-lite: Congratulations on your timely editorial about the treacherous dealings to which a once proud National Party has stooped in an endeavour to kowtow to a racist and militant Maori elite. For more than 40 years I’ve supported the party, both with my vote and generous financial contributions. to ensure victory.
Party candidates should then be selected via open primaries
I like the sound of that. Each electorate gets far more choice over what candidates stand and are elected, and the parties will ultimtaely be strengthened with more responsive, better quality members.
The upcoming referendum is a bit limited – what it should be aiming to achieve is selecting the two most preferred systems, eg FPP and MMP, then review both and determine the best may for each, then vote to choose the best variation of the best.
It will be very difficult to substantially change the current process that’s under way, but it’s worth looking at what can be achieved within the process.
Primaries can be another large expense, but I can see some merits. If it did lead to a better quality of MP, then I’d say we could reduce the number of MPs down to 50. That should more than cover the costs of Primaries.
We also need to change the rules around political parties, 500 members is not a political party it’s a pressure-group. The minimum membership should be raised to at least 2000 and there should be some financial-soundness requirements too.
After being one of the more sensible commentators last week, Jon Stewart has now jumped the shark and Colbert was worse.
Expecting Sarah Palin to brush off or ignore the accusations and of somehow media whoring by eventually responding to those who injected her into the issue is somewhat dumb. Tarring half the population is what the left media did by attacking the Tea Party.
Palin should not have made the comment ‘apolitical or even left wing’ though, that was dumb.
I do love the pomposity of those who cry “I will never vote for you again!”, “I am cancelling my subscription!” etc etc. Good for you if that’s how you feel but who else really cares.
I accept that my favourite publications, like my preferred party, will sometimes do things I don’t like. But, in the case of National, could a lifelong supporter really start voting Labour or the Greens or, gasp, Winnie? Seems a bit hysterical and self-important to me, Manolo.
Alpha – the cost of primaries is, IMO, a price worth paying. Not because there’s a good chance of getting better MPs, but because there’s a very high likelyhood of it resulting in a more engaged electorate
Radical darkies getting guerrilla training in the Ureweras ?
Fuck I have to laugh at this from yesterday, why should hories bother running guerrilla training camps when the NZ army will take and train any hori that looks competent.
After all you do not see right wing types rushing to join the army do you ?
Hmm, that must make some of you extreme right wing types sweat, all those hories getting training in the NZ army
I would have 80 electorate MPs and fill up the party vote list mps based on who collected the most votes from electorate MPs that missed out. This would encourage MPs to work on increasing their vote and campaigning hard in areas that their party doesn’t usually win. It would encourage better candidates into marginal seats and so therefore a higher quality of debate could be had in those seats, and it would encourage right vs right candidates or left v left candidates in very safe seats. Electorate voters would then be able to directly remove any individual from parliament because parties would not be able to protect them with a high list ranking.
Perhaps increase the threshold to two electorate seats before a party brings their party vote with them, although I think 5% is already reasonably high for the threshold.
Moving elections out to four years is also a very high priority and Maori seats should be removed as soon as politically feasible.
But, in the case of National, could a lifelong supporter really start voting Labour or the Greens or, gasp, Winnie? Seems a bit hysterical and self-important to me.
I take your point, BeaB. But this could be a case of the the drop that overflows the glass, a matter of how “flexible” this person’s principles are (I know Key’s stretch for miles).
I suspect there could be quite a few disenchanted National Party supporters, who see with dismay the secret deals stiched with the racist Maori Party on the foreshore and seabed issue.
Good on this gentleman for expressing his opinion in a letter to the editor.
Manolo that letter from John Harrison is a good one! Mr. Harrison has always been very forthright in his opinions and stood-up for what he believes in. He has also always put his money where his mouth is….
The system you’re all talking about can never, and will never happen in New Zealand. Elections are not decided on ideas. There is the Blue Team and the Red Team (and a smattering of other colours, but primarily red and blue). There are those who will always vote Red, those who will always vote Blue (regardless of the fact that there is no difference between the Red Team and the Blue Team). Elections are not decided by these people, but by the undecideds (that’s right, I just said the undecideds decide, which doesn’t seem at first blush to make much sense). In an ideal world the undecideds would be those who review the candidates and their policy statements and cast their vote accordingly. That doesn’t happen in New Zealand. In New Zealand, they tend to vote for the party that offers them the most in the lolly scramble. 2008 was a statistical blip because it had the Helen Factor; she was by then so despised by the electorate she should have stepped down before the election.
Time to call National voters, useful idiots. Very true. I’ve asked before, what is the point of having the Blue Team in government if all they’re doing is implementing the Red Team’s policies? I haven’t yet had an answer.
All those who take the time to vote are useful in a democracy. Bullshit Bullshit Bullshit, as usual. Those who “take the time to vote” in New Zealand will vote for the party giving them back the most of their own (or someone else’s) money. As I said above, elections are not a contest of ideas but a lolly scramble, with each of the two “main” parties offering different portions of peoples’ own money back to them (or, more frequently these days, a slice of money stolen from the fast-shrinking productive).
Alpha is right – there should be an aptitude test before entering the polling booth. But these also needs to be a pre-condition for even taking the test. That is, to participate in the democratic process you must contribute to your country. That means nett tax takers get no vote. “Civil servants” get no vote (military personnel, police, etc. do, of course). By limiting the voting pool to those who actually contribute, you don’t get the “turkeys won’t vote for early Christmas” problems so prevalent and evident today.
Beab, there comes a point where “I will never vote for you again!” is the only message the pollies will understand. The simple fact is, John Key is the single most disappointing Prime Minister in New Zealand’s history (and we’ve had some pretty bloody average PMs in the past). Not because he is untalented, nor because he hasn’t had opportunity, but because he lacks anything remotely resembling a set of balls. He was gifted the best opportunity in a century to start turning New Zealand away from the welfare-infested socialist shit-hole it has become, and what did he do? A fucking cycle-way. Weak, limp-wristed appeasement bullshit. The only message this prick will understand is a large-scal voter boycott, which will never happen in New Zealand.
Note none of these things are ever going to happen. The pollies have a nice little con going and they’re not going to do anything to upset it.
The left have really ballsed up their ‘right wingers lack empathy’, ‘right wingers cannot be trusted to understand metaphors’, ‘right wing ideas are not reasonable’ meme by going after criticism of government as dangerous. To any normal person it makes them look big brotherish to insist that calling out the lefts best possible move towards socialised medicine as such is dangerous.
‘Calling government officials and policies socialist is dangerous’ does not resonate anywhere outside Hollywood and Journalism.
There are those who will always vote Red, those who will always vote Blue (regardless of the fact that there is no difference between the Red Team and the Blue Team)
That’s the point of an *open* primary, the whole constituency votes on who the Red candidate should be and who the Blue candidate should be. It doesn’t matter if the constituency in question is a safe party seat if the MP knows damn well that pissing the electorate off would result in someone else wearing the appropriately-coloured rosette next time around.
You are right, Western democracies long ago passed the threshold for properly functioning democracy and voters have learnt that they can vote themselves money from the government coffers. I can think of two remedies, constitutional limits on the government and its budget, and lower voter turnouts. The message should not be respect democracy by voting regardless, it should respect democracy by getting informed before voting. The voting age should be lifted to 20 also.
I agree that elections have a lolly scramble aspect to them, sometimes enough to possibly swing an election (we can only guess) but there’s a lot more to elections than that. People vote for many different reasons.
I’ve asked before, what is the point of having the Blue Team in government if all they’re doing is implementing the Red Team’s policies?
Because the “x” team has been in too long and has become stale and ballsed too many things up, and the “y” team look like they will have a better fresher bunch of MPs.
You have wasted 3 golden years to change NZ for the good. Should have stayed with ACT as a partner and done some good quality slash & burn, but nah, we have ETS and Foreshore bills legislation instead helped and abetted by the native party.
While I acknowledge that MMP has it’s fair share of fishhooks it could be worth remembering why it was embraced so readily by the electorate in 1994.
FPP resulted in alternate periods of Nat/Lab Governments from 1930 onwards Few independents or minor parties could get a look in. Worst of all once elected a Government exercised absolute power for three years. Short of rioting in the streets there was no way of influencing a party that had no incentive to listen to the public.
The situation was made worse by the abolition of the Legislative Council in 1950.
The arrogance of the Governments of the 50′s to the mid 90′s was unbelievable. The only power shared by NZ citizens were the triennial elections & even then the party manifestos were chock full of lies & mistruths.
IMO, before MMP, democracy was essentially dead. If we are going to change the system then for once let’s use the lessons of history.
Many Russian immigrants in Staten Island in the U.S are now turning to the Republican party, because the current situation is too much like the socialism they fled from Russia in the 90s.
STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. — Many Russian immigrants to the “red borough” of Staten Island are flocking to the Republican Party, saying that the national Democrats’ “socialistic” policies remind them too much of the top-down oligarchy they fled in their native land.
[...]
The Big Brother approach reminds Fridman too much of what he left behind in the former Soviet Union.
“It’s the same rule like it was there,” said Fridman, who estimates there are around 55,000 Russian immigrants here.
Michael Petrov of the Digital Edge data management firm in Bloomfield, said that he objects to the “micro-managing of the economy” he’s seen from city as well as federal officials.
“Government is affecting small business more and more,” said Petrov, who came to the United States in 1994. “It’s the same as what’s happening in Russia.”
nasska “The arrogance of the Governments of the 50′s to the mid 90′s was unbelievable. The only power shared by NZ citizens were the triennial elections & even then the party manifestos were chock full of lies & mistruths’
Are you suggesting, even for a second, that the 1999-2008 government of the totalitarian lesbian wasn’t arrogant beyond belief? Or that the John Key government isn’t arrogant beyond belief? Seriously, what do you call ignoring 90% of your employers?
Yes, a Legislative Council/Senate would be a good idea, but it would need to be coupled with a halving of the size of Parliament. Too many of those pricks there.
I agree naska. I support the concept of proportional representation. I wonder if STV might have been a better approach than MMP, but we’re unlikely to change now.
As to AlphaKiwi’s suggestions, I don’t feel strongly about the number of MPs either way but I do think that List MPs should go if they resign or are removed from their party, no ifs or buts. Their mandate comes exclusively from their party and so it seems perverse that they can linger as “independents” once they resign from the party that selected them.
Now I’m becoming confused on the issue of Primaries.
Please help me understand:
1. Wouldn’t only party members be able to vote for who would represent their party for their electorate?
James Stephenson said above that it would be an “open primary” where the whole constituency votes on who represents each party.
Doesn’t that mean that a strongly rural and National Party supporting electorate would always vote for their best candidate to represent the National Party while voting for the other parties’ worst candidates?
Agreed….. arrogance is alive & doing well but I still think that MMP has suppressed some of the excesses. Any Government now has to face 4 or 5 opposition groups instead of one tightly whipped bunch of no hopers who know that if they shut up for long enough that they will walk straight back into power. I’d still prefer to see most of the lying bastards dangling from power poles but we cant have everything.
Re Council/Senate – about 30 in number plus 80 MP’s would be more than adequate.
The letter, obtained by Irish broadcasters RTE and provided to The Associated Press, documents the Vatican’s rejection of a 1996 Irish church initiative to begin helping police identify pedophile priests following Ireland’s first wave of publicly disclosed lawsuits.
Could a Party which has a huge majority manipulate the results by organizing some of their voters to vote for their strongest competition’s weakest candidate? Is there a way to prevent this kind of manipulation?
Ryan, you didn’t find that funny? I sure did… especially the electric car with the kid on the bike passing it
Vaguely. I mean, it’s supposed to be a hybrid car, and they do fine uphill. And those fluorescent lights turn on just fine in my experience. There must be some actual things to make fun of, rather than making things up.
I just think they could have done better. With the toilet, what about having the guy having to flush three times as much because his toilet’s weak? So he ends up using way more water.
Then again, maybe I just made that up.
Is there any right-wing equivalent of Jon Stewart out there? Obviously Stephen Colbert doesn’t count.
Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie suggested in an interview published today that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.
Abercrombie told the Honolulu Star Advertiser he was searching within the Hawaii Department of Health to find definitive vital records that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii, because the continuing eligibility controversy could hurt the president’s chances of re-election in 2012.
Alpha – a “closed” primary is one where registered “blue” voters get to vote for the blue party candidate – this is what happens in the US.
An “open” primary is one where the whole constituency votes and yes the scenario you suggest is possible in a safe seat. However it doesn’t really matter because the aim is that the MP in that safe seat feels beholden to the electorate not the party. There’ll be none of that Labour party nonsense which results in the likes of Shearer or Fa’afoi still owing their place at the trough to the leader’s office ramming them though or contests between differently-affiliated union stooges.
The key point is that in marginal seats both or all parties are likely to be fielding candidates who represent their constituents outlook more. I think Auckland Central is a glimpse of what would happen – Nikki Kaye knew she couldn’t upset her leftier constituents so had to come out against the government on the issue of mining Great Barrier.
Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali said there were women who “sway suggestively” and wore make-up and immodest dress … “and then you get a judge without mercy (rahma) and gives you 65 years”.
“But the problem, but the problem all began with who?” he asked.
Now we have Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, the head of the Orthodox Church’s department for relations between the church and society, complained that Russian women dressed like strippers and suggested a nationwide dress code should be introduced to ensure both sexes dress more conservatively.
“If she (a woman) is wearing a miniskirt, it is provocative,” he said. “If she is drunk at the same time then she is even more provocative, and if she herself is actively seeking contact with people and is then surprised when that contact ends in rape she is wrong.”
“If she (a woman) is wearing a miniskirt, it is provocative,” he said. “If she is drunk at the same time then she is even more provocative, and if she herself is actively seeking contact with people and is then surprised when that contact ends in rape she is wrong.”
If a man is provoked to rape by a woman in a miniskirt, he is a criminal. If she is drunk at the same time, then he is still a criminal. If she herself is actively seeking contact with people, he is still a criminal.
Fucking incredible how people can place blame on victims like that.
Cha, that’s potentially quite damning but merely evidence rather than a surprise that the Vatican sees itself as above the law, and has instructed their Irish bishops to ignore the law of the land.
It raises further questions about how saintly Pope John Paul II should be viewed.
And it looks like the stain continues:
In his 2010 pastoral letter to Ireland’s Catholics condemning pedophiles in the ranks, Pope Benedict XVI faulted bishops for failing to follow canon law and offered no explicit endorsement of Irish child-protection efforts by the Irish church or state.
Should each religion in each country be able to give precedence to their own laws over the law of of the country?
If men feel the urge to rape women who dress with a lot of skin showing (usually in the hot weather), then it those men shouldn’t be allowed out of their houses and when they do have to go out, it must be with their mother or sister. Those men would also have to wear chastity belts to keep their dick in their pants.
Baby Doc., ya gotta laugh. Walks back into Port Au Prince to ‘take the throne’ and gets arrested by diligent officials and will be processed thru courts for corruption and stealing, let alone human rights abuses to come. I love it when these monsters finally get held accountable for their appalling lives. Idi Amin got of scott free. Go that Haitian judge!
Some rapists deliberately target drunk females because they will more likely succeed in violating and get away with it, so raping a drunk female is at least as bad as raping a sober one. Like pedophiles they attack victims least able to defend themselves, and least likely to complain or testify against them.
Most men won’t even consider attacking a woman, whether winter or summer, pub or beach. What women wear is irrelevant, and shouldn’t be a valid excuse or defence.
Should each religion in each country be able to give precedence to their own laws over the law of of the country?
Definitely no but Britain with it’s partial adoption of Shariah law is showing the way down that path. The only difference is that the Catholics are trying to cover up the buggering of small boys where as the followers of Islam are making second class citizens of women a phenomenon which has escaped the notice of the normally vigilant Sisterhood.
Yummy. The greenies in the EU think it’s better if we eat bugs instead of cattle and poultry. Less greenhouse gas that way, you see?
Future Of Food For 9 Billion? Edible Insects Proposed To Replace Meat; EU Investigates Bug Farming for Protein
Do you prefer the grasshopper to the ants? What kind of grubs do you have? How about some fried lice? The future of chatter over the dinner table?
Insects produce much smaller quantities of greenhouse gases per kilogram of meat than cattle and pigs. This is the conclusion of scientists at Wageningen University who have joined forces with government and industry to investigate whether the rearing of insects could contribute to more sustainable protein production. Insect meat could therefore form an alternative to more conventional types of meat.
Cattle farming worldwide is a major producer of greenhouse gases. For the assessment of the sustainability of insect meat, the researchers at Wageningen University quantified the production of greenhouse gases of several edible insect species. The results of the study were published in the renowned online journal PLoS ONE on 29 December.
The research team has for the first time quantified the greenhouse gases produced per kilogram of insect product. The gases concerned were methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). The results demonstrate that insects produce much smaller quantities of greenhouse gases than conventional livestock such as cattle and pigs. For example, a pig produces between ten and a hundred times as much greenhouse gases per kilogram compared with mealworms.
Emissions of ammonia (which causes the acidification and eutrophication of groundwater) also appear to be significantly lower. A pig produces between eight and twelve times as much ammonia per kilogram of growth compared to crickets, and up to fifty times more than locusts. An additional advantage of insects over mammals is that they convert their food into meat quicker.
Pete, nasska, no one is saying the “buggering of little boys” is right; in fact, the Catholic religion condemns it. That is the difference between Christianity and Islam. Islam – the religion – says it’s OK to kill people for speaking blasphemy against Mohammed or Islam, and it’s OK for stone women for various reasons et al.
As usual, you’re taking the leftist Alinksy approach in finding something wrong that someone religious may have done and use that as a weapon to attack or smear a whole organisation or ideology that you dislike. Here’s a clue – it’s not working anymore. Even the New York Times (those expert papal smearers) don’t seem to have picked up on the recent story.
Maybe they have learned to let the actual facts come out this time before setting pen to paper – maybe….
There seems to be significant disquiet and anger in Ireland over this. The Vatican has not addressed it well, for a long time now.
the leftist Alinksy approach in finding something wrong that someone religious may have done and use that as a weapon to attack or smear a whole organisation or ideology that you dislike.
That’s exactly what you do with Muslims/Islam, frequently.
here’s a man with a great turn of phrase, skewering the 50 Most loathsome Americans
41) Christine O’Donnell
Charges: Doesn’t understand that separation of church and state is in the Constitution; doesn’t understand that you can’t pay rent with campaign contributions; doesn’t understand that lying to Nazis would’ve been moral; doesn’t understand that you can’t run for Senate and repeatedly lie about your education without being found out; doesn’t understand that being pro-life in cases of rape and incest makes one a monster; doesn’t understand climate change; doesn’t understand evolution; doesn’t understand that you can’t breed genetically altered mice with fully functional human brains; doesn’t understand that being a single, “chaste” thirty-something who obsessively evangelizes against masturbation and gay sex gives anyone with even a vague appreciation of human nature the likely correct impression that you’ve had your finger in more dykes than the Little Dutch Boy. Just doesn’t understand.
Aggravating factor: “I’m not a witch; I’m you.”
Sentence: Burned at the stake.
34) Stefani Germanotta (Lady Gaga)
Charges: A Madonna doppelganger with scoliosis and a knack for trite, overproduced and formulaic drivel. Not nearly as controversial as she imagines. She pissed off Jerry Seinfeld? Meh. My heart’s not really in this one. She makes shitty music. Who fucking cares. Probably you. You sicken me. But I’m getting ahead of myself.
Aggravating factor: Excessive consonant repetition.
Sentence: Tracheotomy.
19) Jenny McCarthy
Charges: OK. Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s been revealed as a fraud and conman, and his study linking autism to the MMR vaccine was fully retracted by The Lancet. The “debate” is done, but this former Playboy Bunny is not. She initially believed her son Evan was an “Indigo child” (a creepy, Aryan wunderkind with telepathic powers), but after that didn’t pan out, she needed another equally plausible explanation for his condition and desperately latched onto the vaccine conspiracy. By convincing easily-duped moms that vaccines aren’t safe, she’s endangered their kids, compromised herd immunity and killed more Americans than terrorists have in the last nine years. And that’s not hyperbole.
Aggravating factor: “I did a lot of digging on my own, the ‘University of Google.’”
Sentence: Measles, mumps, rubella.
14) Barack Obama
Charges: Outside of his promise to never end the pointless war in Afghanistan, his word has the integrity of Halliburton cement. Whether it was a “robust” public option, real net neutrality, importing prescription drugs, barring lobbyists from serving in the White House, meaningful Wall Street reform or ending the Bush tax cuts for the disgustingly wealthy, our President caved like the Metrodome under the weight of a bloated oligarchy. Most irksome, he seemed dignified doing it.
Aggravating factor: Authorized the assassination of Americans accused of terrorism.
Sentence: Primary challenge from the Rent is 2 Damn High guy.
9) Tea Partiers
Charges: Openly racist and lying about it, uber-religious, hyper-hypocritical, usually-tetched old codgers who wheel around in their Medicare-provided Hoverounds® and rage against fiscally irresponsible social programs, like Medicare, because they’re too dumb to realize that they’re co-opted, Machiavellian mouthpieces of greedy billionaires.
Aggravating factor: They elected some 40 candidates to Congress.
Sentence: The consequences of their actions.
6) Sarah Palin
Charges: An ideologically abhorrent dunce whose answer to everything—caribou, wolves, Julian Assange, feminism, science, decency, accountability, the English language, Democratic incumbents—is to shoot it dead. From conspiring to advance her ham-legged, clopping daughter on “Dancing with the Stars” to successfully endorsing a slew of faux-revolutionary Tea Party imbeciles, she’s a persistent, violent rash on the entire body politic.
Aggravating factor: “But obviously, we’ve got to stand with our North Korean allies.”
Sentence: Shot in the head by a bear.
Excerpt from (the sometimes tongue-in-cheek) Rules For Radical Conservatives about the tactics the Left use –
In any case, we already have our Apostle Saul, and this is perhaps his most important commandment. Learn it, live it, love it:
Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
Thus spake the Great Alinsky in Rule No. 4 in the “Tactics” section of Rules for Radicals. At first glance, it doesn’t seem to mean much, other than a broad exhortation to try and hold your opponent’s feet to the flames of his own best ideals. But, with true insidious genius, it’s so much more than that.
Remember: we think like lawyers. Deep down inside, we all wish we were lawyers. We use lawyers the way a soldier uses his weapon, both offensively and defensively. When you think of a lawyer, what do you think of? Somebody like the old Perry Mason, a truth-seeking defense attorney whose job was to serve Justice. Or DA Ben Stone on Law and Order, a truth-seeking prosecutor whose job was to serve Justice. However fictionalized, it was men like these who originally defined the concept in the public’s mind—not the shifty weasels who actually populate the profession and certainly not the kinds of lawyers we have on our side. Our lawyers are not there to defend anybody, except in dire necessity. No, our lawyers are there to take you down.
[...]
I like to call what we’re doing “the Elevation of the Singular to the Universal.” As is our wont, we have turned normal logical thought processes upside down, opting for the counterintuitive and then trying to sell it to you as normative. A weird sort of perversion of Christian theology, it goes like this:
To avoid the tyranny of the majority—even though “majority rule” is the bedrock of the political process—we must have instead the tyranny of the minority. The existence of one exception to the norm invalidates the norm. The exception, in other words, not only proves the rule, it becomes the rule.
Consider something noncontroversial … oh, let’s say abortion. By positing the merest existence of wire coat hangers and back alley scrapers at any time in our past, we have automatically arrived at one of the arguments for legalized abortion, since even one death at the hands of these social outlaws is unconscionable, and in our fertile imaginations there is not merely one such “provider” lurking in the shadows, but an army of them, ready to emerge at the stroke of a pen, to wreak their depredations upon the legions of women who are the daily victims of rape and incest.
And how Leftists use the Civil Rights movement as an example to try and do whatever they want –
Or, if abortion is not controversial enough for you, let’s try race, always one of our favorites. You’re not going to like what I’m about to say here, and in fact I think it may be a tad politically incorrect myself, but since this—as Barbara Bush said to Katie, or Barbwah, or Oprah, or somebody—is just between friends, let’s talk about race.
The civil rights movement was, for the men and women of “Che’s” generation, the be-all and end-all of their existence, their alpha and their omega. It was the case they committed their young lives to, as lawyers, journalists, poll workers, you name it. It was a great moral moment whose time had come, and so what if the bad guys in the South were, can you believe it, Southern Democrats (not to mention recalcitrant Democrats in certain precincts up north, in Boston and elsewhere, but they’d have to wait their turn). You might have thought that, since we’re Democrats ourselves, that might have been an obstacle to our seizing the moral high ground on this issue, but we had gone to school on the HUAC hearings and the Hollywood blacklist, and we realized that it was but a simple matter, a mere judo flip, to pin the tail not on the donkey but on the elephant.
So we turned Bull Connor and his gang into premature Republicans (along the lines of my grandfather’s generation’s premature anti-fascists), rewrote the history books as needed, and went on our merry way. We had to go to the mat on the civil rights issue, which meant we had to eliminate anybody or anything that got in our way, because we saw, as others didn’t, how important it was. Not because it was the right and moral thing to do. Not because it forced Amerikkka to live up to her highest ideals—hell, we all agreed on that.
Because it was the wedge that would allow us to destroy every other institution in the country. I know this is going to be hard for you to accept, even those of you on my side, but bear with me.
You see, in their own revanchist, racist way, those demonized Southern Democrats, senators like Robert KKK Byrd and Albert Arnold Gore, Sr.—father of Albert Arnold Gore, Jr., and grandfather of Albert Arnold Gore III, the Hillbilly Dynasty!—and “Sleepin’ ” Sam Ervin—actually had a point about “states’ rights,” otherwise known as that pesky Tenth Amendment. Although they were wrong on the particulars, they were right on the general principles, which was that once you start undermining the bedrock foundations of the country—once you undermine only one—then there’s no stopping you; excuse me, I mean “us.” From that moment on, everything is on the table, and any opposition, no matter how principled, can be dismissed by comparing it to opposition to the civil rights movement. A movement that had begun to rectify the specific Original Sin of the Constitution—the three-fifths compromise (without which there never would have been a Constitution) and all that flowed from it, from the Missouri Compromise to the Dred Scott decision to the Civil War itself—could be co-opted and transformed into a weapon against the nation itself:
Gay marriage? Just like the civil rights movement.
Universal health care? Just like the civil rights movement.
Cap and trade? Just like the civil rights movement.
Illegal immigration? Just like the civil rights movement.
Women in combat? Just like the civil rights movement.
The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills? Just like the civil rights movement.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:46 am
Pete, nasska, no one is saying the “buggering of little boys” is right;
Agreed.
in fact, the Catholic religion condemns it. in public, while in private it continues to hinder law enforcement, to protect the paedophile priests, to sweep it under the carpet, and even, as we saw recently, with Pope Nazi’s approval, blame the victims.
Just what IS it with catholics and blood? As if drinking the blood of Jesus isn’t enough for them, now
WARSAW: A vial containing blood drawn from Pope John Paul II shortly before he died will be installed as a relic in a Polish church soon after his beatification this year.
the leftist Alinksy approach in finding something wrong that someone religious may have done and use that as a weapon to attack or smear a whole organisation or ideology that you dislike.
That’s exactly what you do with Muslims/Islam, frequently.
I don’t think I do. Let’s look at the situation.
You criticize Christians who abuse children etc (and rightly so – as do I), but they are not following the precepts/teachings of the Church or of the Bible and Jesus. If you asked most of these abusers, I am sure they would not dare to say that their actions are done in Jesus’ name. Nor would any other Christians, if asked, condone their actions.
I criticize Muslims who commit acts of violence against women, and even of murder, who kill in the name of Islam. Their actions are in accord with what the Koran teaches, with what Sharia teaches. A man in Pakistan was killed the other day for daring to support an action for getting rid of anti-blasphemy laws. His killer was showered by the populace with roses, and it is doubtful a lawyer will be able to be found to prosecute him. In other words, many Muslims support his actions at home and, I am sure, abroad.
Can you not see the difference?
I am not condemning all Muslims – I am sure there are many moderates. But it is difficult for them because what they think goes against what the Koran and Islam teach.
A problem with Catholicism is that the Pope and church have more authority than the Bible in practice. The Pope is viewed as infallible. Yet, the Pope has been blamed for covering up the child abuse and not doing enough. His lower ranking Bishops have no choice but to follow because that is their religion’s teachings.
in fact, the Catholic religion condemns it. in public, while in private it continues to hinder law enforcement, to protect the paedophile priests, to sweep it under the carpet, and even, as we saw recently, with Pope Nazi’s approval, blame the victims.
Who said anyone is blaming the victims? Pope Benedict has done more than other other to clean up what he called “filth” in the church. If there was any “covering up” then it was wrong, and a purely human defensive reaction. What do you think went on in other organisations in the past, like schools, the boy scouts, etc when abuse was found to have taken place? Was it, “well gee we better go straight to the police and get ourselves in the newspapers so we can be held up to scrutiny, humiliated and embarassed”, or was it more a case of, “we better keep this quiet, move the perpetrator somewhere else out of harms way and get him help”. Which is the more human response?
I am not saying it was the right thing to do. I read an interview recently with Monica Applewhite, “one of the foremost experts on screening, monitoring and policy development for the prevention of sexual abuse and risk management for those with histories of sexual offending, who has spent the past 16 years conducting research and root-cause analysis in the area of sexual abuse in organizations in order to assist organizations in developing best practice standards”.
She says at one point –
I have seen newspaper articles criticizing officials for not reporting acts of abuse to the civil authorities during years when there were no child protective services and the particular behaviors involved were not criminalized yet. It is fair for criticism of decisions made in the ’60s and ’70s to focus on interpretation of moral behavior, weakness in the resolve of leaders or even the disregard of procedures set out in canon law. By the same token, it is essential to separate this from expectations that are based on the laws and standards of today.
We began studying sexual abuse in the 1970s, discovered it caused real harm in 1978, and realized perpetrators were difficult to rehabilitate in the 1990s. During the ’70s when we were sending offenders to treatment, the criminal justice system was doing the very same thing with convicted offenders — sending them to treatment instead of prison.
At the time, it was believed they could be cured with relative ease. This is a very young body of knowledge, and as we sort through both valid and questionable criticisms, we must consider the historical context of any given episode.
So, it’s easy to look at these crimes through the lens of today, but back when a lot of offending took place, there wasn’t even such a thing as child protective services, and the Church was often taking the same actions as secular society – sending offenders away to treatment instead of jail.
I’m sorry, but I see your postings as not so much a concern for any victims concerned, but more as ammunition to find anything/everything you can to attack an organisation you do not like.
So, it’s easy to look at these crimes through the lens of today, but back when a lot of offending took place, there wasn’t even such a thing as child protective services
Except the article that Cha linked to suggests that the Vatican was ordering Irish catholics to ignore and override their own initiatives to try and manage the abuse problem better.
In January 1996, Irish bishops published a groundbreaking policy document spelling out their newfound determination to report all suspected abuse cases to police.
But in his January 1997 letter seen Tuesday by the AP, Storero told the bishops that a senior church panel in Rome, the Congregation for the Clergy, had decided that the Irish church’s policy of “mandatory” reporting of abuse claims conflicted with canon law.
People within the church were trying to deal with serious abuse problems within their country’s laws and it appears the Vatican may have directed them not to.
Alphakiwi, I am afraid you misunderstand what infallible means. It does not mean that the Pope himself, Ratzinger, can never do anything wrong, or, that everything he does is automatically right. it does not mean he is sinless.
The Pope and the Church are considered “infallible” on issues of Faith and Morals – statements that are issued ‘Ex Cathedra” or ‘from the chair’. And although the Pope issues these statements and has the final say, any issue will have been put to many Bishops for their consideration before any statement like this is put out, eg, concerning the Pill.
There have been some Popes who were real stinkers – not very good as human beings – but never has the Church faulted in it’s teaching on Faith and Morals.
As far as the Church and the Bible – the Church put the Bible together – chose what books would be included. The Catholic church does not just depend on the Bible as do Protestants, but also on the teachings of the Church, through which Jesus gave authority to Peter (the first Pope) when he said to him, “Upon this Rock I will build my Church. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven”
Thus the Church’s authority is based on both Scripture and Tradition.
Pete, well we will have to wait and see. If they did, they were wrong, but that is not my experience. Back in the late 90s when all this abuse stuff broke out, I went to a number of masses at the Cathedral in Auckland where Bishop Patrick Dunn was presiding, and who urged anyone who had been abused or knew of any abuse to report it to the authorities.
Can you not see the difference?
I am not condemning all Muslims – I am sure there are many moderates. But it is difficult for them because what they think goes against what the Koran and Islam teach.
Again, that’s not dissimilar from what anti-Christians say about Christians. “Oh, some of them are moderates, but they’re the ones ignoring the Bible.” Anti-Christians make an ungenerous interpretation of the Bible and claim any Christians who act otherwise are ignoring the Bible in the name of decency.
So – while kiwiblog focuses on celebs committing petty crime the Nation continues to go down the toilet under a National government. Yes loyal kiwiblogers, just look the other way…
Fletch, the cover ups in Ireland and elsewhere have required literally hundreds of supposedly good people to behave as if they had no moral compass whatsoever, that’s what disgusts me.
The letter just expresses that canon law must be followed when dealing with Pedophile priests so that the guilty have no recourse to overturn the penalties – eg being defrocked.
The concern here is the sanctity of the Confessional which is inviolate and so it should be.
January 20th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
The concern here is the sanctity of the Confessional which is inviolate and so it should be.
No, just more special pleading from the religious that they should get exemptions from the law that applies to the rest of us.
andrei, apart from helping cover up crime, what possible valid reason can there be for permitting “the sanctity of the Confessional”?
Why are confessions to a priest different to confessions to a workmate? Why should a religious person gain a protection not available to the non- religious?
Religion has been given too many free passes; time to put an end to them.
Tony Blair has a few things to clarify when he apears before the Chilcott inquiry. This week the inquiry has found out:
Mr Blair’s private secretary at No 10, Matthew Rycroft, routinely deleted any mention of his correspondence with Mr Bush from the Government minutes.
Mr Rycroft said Mr Blair had always been clear that Britain would support US military action.
Sir John Scarlett, the former chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, asked whether he urged ministers to give the Iraq weapons inspectors more time, he replied: “We were being bulldozed… by the military timetable which pointed very strongly to early or mid-March.”
John Williams, the former head of news at the Foreign Office, said that, in retrospect, his department had been marginalised. He was under the “illusion that the Foreign Office was playing a more important role in Iraq policy than I now believe to be the case” and viewed efforts to reach a diplomatic solution through the United Nations as “peripheral”.
Mr Williams said he opposed publication of the September 2002 dossier, which claimed Saddam could launch a weapons strike within 45 minutes, but Mr Blair went ahead anyway.
And he “strongly argued” at a meeting chaired by Alastair Campbell, against what became known as the “dodgy dossier” of February 2003. He said: “I believed I had won the argument, only to hear the decision had been reversed.”
I agree with magic bullet. We need to tighten up eligibility for welfare benefits and significantly reduce their attractiveness as an option to supporting oneself and get the numbers down.
I also think it’s ridiculous that superannuation isn’t included with the general welfare reporting.
Palin, it will be interesting if that killer starts talking and states he got his ideas from reading Palin’s facebook page, funny how Palin is ranting that they will not shut her up.
So she will go on with her rants about don’t retreat , reload, putting other politicians inside of gunsights, damn, conservatives are fucking dumb.
The politician who was shot, her political opponent who is a fucking idiot was ranting to people ,come along a fire a fully auto M16 type rifle, I wonder what the target was, a photo of the politician who was shot ?
Ranting about second amendment alternatives, yet when a nine year old girl is killed, the conservative states she meant nothing to happen.
Oh come on guys. Don’t you want Grumpy to continue to represent the left here, along with people like MNIJ? They’re the best possible advertisements for not being a left-winger.
I have to admit that their trollldom does become a bore after a while, but there’s always RIP.
“The Europeans are there [in Waziristan]. The most dedicated people there are from Europe. They will do anything for Islam. They are not there because their fathers are Muslim, but by choice,” he said.
Opposition to the Messiah’s health care plan is gaining momentum: Six more states joined a lawsuit in Florida against President Obama’s health care overhaul on Tuesday, meaning more than half of the country is challenging the law.
Amerika, where no lunatic can get mental health care, but any idiot can get a gun.
MNIJ, your distate for that great country, the United States, is obvious.
Just remember you and your ilk would be speaking Japanese had not been for the intervention of the Americans in WWII.
As the obedient socialist you are, it’s your duty to hate a country which is capitalist to the core.
Greg – that has been tried in the US and has failed (if there are no fish to catch it doesn’t matter how hard you try, you won’t catch one). More likely you’ll just get more people selling drugs and thieving to support themselves.
A climate change study that projected a 2.4 degree Celsius increase in temperature and massive worldwide food shortages in the next decade was seriously flawed, scientists said Wednesday.
The study was posted on the website of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and was written about by numerous international news agencies, including AFP.
But AAAS later retracted the study as experts cited numerous errors in its approach.
New York-based bureaucrats lecturing us: The United Nations has expressed concern over shortfalls in the rights of New Zealand children, including “staggering” infant and child mortality rates and a lack representation for children in legislation.
It has questioned why New Zealand does not have a department or ministry responsible for children’s issues.
Another committee underlined that many developments had been seen regarding the right to life and survival, yet child and infant mortality rates remained “staggering” and had not changed over the past ten years.
The member noted that 20 percent of children in New Zealand lived in income poverty.
Manolo, if John Key had any stones he’d tell the UN to FRO and stop meddling in NZ’s internal affairs.
If Aunty Tari had any integrity she would say “this is a Maori problem and Maori will fix it.” Without, of course, dipping into the taxpayer pocket any more than she already does.
Manolo – The USA was a great country and hopefully will be again one day. Currently it is an oligarchy run by Wall Street.
(Apologies if I don’t get involved in lengthy debate. broke my wrist on Sunday and typing one handed is no fun!)
I’m currently 2/3 through “13 Bankers”. An astonishing insight into the GFC and how Wall Street took control of Washington over the last 30 years.
Essential reading for anyone who wants to understand what comes next for the world economy. Dangerous and reckless elements of our financial sector have become too powerful and must be reined in. If this problem is not addressed, there is serious trouble in all our futures.
Nouriel Roubini, Professor of Economics, New York University
Right, off for a lie down…..
I can read that two ways. “upon this rock” could mean this statement as in that Jesus is the Christ. Isn’t that what the church should be building on?
Wouldn’t Jesus Christ, if perfect, made it clearer if he meant, Peter by saying, “upon YOU I shall build my church.”?
AlphaKiwi, actually the word “Peter” literally means “rock”. No one had ever been called that historically before Jesus referred to Peter that way. The full text reads –
Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
He is talking to Peter, to whom he gives the keys (an office). Even Martin Luther believed in the Primacy of Peter.
Why are you searching heavenward in search of my keys? Do you not understand, Jesus said, ‘I gave them to Peter. They are indeed the keys of heaven, but they are not found in heaven for I left them on earth. Peter’s mouth is my mouth, his tongue is my key case, his keys are my keys. They are an office. They are a power, a command given by God through Christ to all of Christendom for the retaining and remitting of the sins of men. (Martin Luther 1530 – after he left the Church)
You hate ‘Amerika’ so much perhaps you would care to enlighten us with your opinion of a superior
democracy.
or
If you would prefer a socialist/communist system i would be interested to hear of what you consider
a better system
Let me guess Titos Albania would have appealed to your type , right ?
I particularly liked Bob’s comment #5 in the article. They are showing themselves to be cheerleading enablers to non-western oligarchies, and chardonnay socialists to liberal democratic nations.
bereal fuck an old hori should not be telling you this, the USA is not a democracy they are a republic.
They do not one man, one vote of equal value in their Senate
I know in the Bible Jesus is referred to as a rock as well.
The “rock” in prophecy in Daniel 2 is generally accepted to be referring to Jesus.
Dan 2:34 While you were watching, a rock was cut out, but not by human hands.
This “rock cut out not by human hands,” is of supernatural origin, i.e. is Christ (Mat 7:24-25; 16:18; Rom 9:33; 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 2:8).
It struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and smashed them.
Christ at His second coming will destroy the last kingdom (Ps 2:9; 1 Cor 15:25; 2 Thess 2:8; Rev 2:26-27; 11:15; 14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2) and therefore all of them. See below my comments on Daniel’s interpretation in 2:44-45.
Anyway, I think the Bible can be interpreted in different ways by people, hence the variety of doctrines and denominations.
I’m not a Christian, but don’t mind discussing religion. However, in general I think KiwiBlog isn’t the best place as it’s mainly a political blog.
In future if I start a blog, I would have a section for discussing religion as well politics, philosophy, etc. I’ll let you know if and when that happens. I’d welcome you to share your views from time to time. I’m open to learning how other people see the world differently from me.
Further to Pete’s post re: the Chilcot enquiry into Blair’s Iraq adventure, the real current day Sir Humphrey refuses to release notes sent by Blair to Bush.
Chilcot, who, with his four-member panel, has privately seen Blair’s notes, said the documents “illuminate prime minister Blair’s positions at critical points”.
O’Donnell replied to Chilcot that releasing Blair’s notes would damage Britain’s relations with the US. and would not be in the public interest. “We have attached particular importance to protecting the privacy of the channel between the prime minister and president,” he told Chilcot.
The Cabinet Office said the refusal to allow Blair’s notes to be disclosed conformed to the inquiry’s protocols. Chilcot said recently the protocols were “put in place to protect national security, international relations and the personal security of individuals. They are not there to prevent embarrassment.”
Looks like Paul Henry was right about little Mrs Dipshit all the time.
Aussies owed millions from Delhi Commonwealth Games
Sydney Olympics maestro Ric Birch has this week commissioned Slater & Gordon to launch a likely multi-million dollar class action against Delhi Commonwealth Games organisers for substantial unpaid bills. Mr Birch said he was “seriously pissed off” with Games organisers.
ACGA CEO Perry Crosswhite said his body was one of “30 or 40″ similar Games bodies around the world owed money by Delhi organisers.
Mr Birch was creative director for the Delhi ceremonies, Howard & Sons provided all of their fireworks, and Norwest provided all the sound. Both ceremonies were hailed as shining successes amid the Games general chaos. But Mr Birch said he was told by Delhi Games organisers secretary-general Lalit Bhanot: “We’re not going to pay you because your services were not up to the mark.”
DenseOldFuckwit and JackOff in fucking idiot shocker. Someone change the channel please, I’m sick of their whining that doesn’t even change direction regardless of the facts that have emerged. Nice to see DOF cling to his conspiracy theory though. He’s as bad (and as stupid) as the birthers.
Cha: you mean the far-left and radical Islam converging in order to meet their own goals (anti-Western, anti-capitalist, anti-consumption). It’s funny how your type are little better than Anwar al-Aulaki.
Virgin soars as Air NZ buys stake
January 20, 2011 – 5:09PM
Air New Zealand has bought a substantial stake in budget carrier Virgin Blue and plans to raise that stake to between 10 per cent and 14.99 per cent.
Air NZ said today it had no intention of making a full takeover offer and had received Australian Foreign Investment Review Board approval for the transaction.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
George Bernard Shaw
I think it’s far too simplistic. A person who is too reasonable/adaptable won’t change much, but neither will someone who is too unreasonable, they will demand too much and usually achieve little. As with many things there has to be a reasonable balance.
Jackoff.
You remain staunchly typical to your type.
Correct the spelling, heap the abuse, do anything, ANYTHING.
Except addres the question.
Put it this way, for one more try.
What do you consider to be a superior political system to the Amerika you hate so much ?
Wreckers and haters like you usually have no reply.
All you have is what you hate, what do you admire ? i’ll answer for you, effing nothing.
Prove me wrong. Addres the question. Try, just once in your life. You know you would feel better if you could.
But you can’t, it’s impossible for you isn’t it ? Just admit it.
Grumptyhori, nice hair splitting mate. One up to you.
# Pete George (8,785) Says:
January 20th, 2011 at 9:34 pm
I just saw this quote…
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
George Bernard Shaw
I think it’s far too simplistic. A person who is too reasonable/adaptable won’t change much, but neither will someone who is too unreasonable, they will demand too much and usually achieve little. As with many things there has to be a reasonable balance.
Do you even think about what you post or do you just apply a wishy washy algorythm?
Our lives would not bear any resemblance to what they are today without unreasonable people.
AlphaKiwi, yes, Christ is also the Rock, as is his Church. Father Corapi explains this very well below –
All through the Old Testament, “Rock” with an uppercase”R” refers to God himself. Then in the Gospel of Matthew referred to above, we see Jesus, the “Rock,” because he is a divine subject of action, renaming Simon “Rock.” Jesus, the real “Rock,” is also referred to as the “bridegroom” or “groom” as well in Scripture. The Church is his “bride” (#796). We know, also from the Word, that in marriage, whether natural or supernatural, the “two become one flesh.” Jesus and his church are one; bridegroom and bride are one. Hence, Christ is naming Peter “Rock”, one with himself. There is no other “Rock” other than Christ absolutely speaking. However, the Rock, in a mystical marriage, unites his beloved bride, the Church, to himself. Simon is named “Rock”, and whoever hears the Rock Peter is hearing the Rock who is Christ; whoever rejects the Rock who is Peter, rejects the Rock Christ and the One who sent him, the Father.
You cannot separate the Lord Jesus from his beloved body and bride, the Church. To reject the teaching of Peter and his successors the Roman pontiffs, together with the bishops who are united with the Holy Father in teaching the one faith which has been handed down faithfully from the apostles, is to reject the teaching of Jesus Christ, and the One who sent him, the Father (cf. Luke 10:16).
[...]
Head and body are one; bridegroom and bride are one. Those who attack the Church attack Christ. When Saul of Tarsus was persecuting the newborn church on his way to Damascus, he was knocked off his horse by the light who is Christ. “He fell to the ground and at the same time heard a voice saying, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?’ ‘Who are you, sir?’ he asked. The voice answered, ‘I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting.’” Saul was “breathing murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples,” against the Church. Christ told him clearly that he was persecuting him, Jesus, the Lord. Christ and his church are one. To love Jesus truly, we must love his church.
Thus, yes; Christ is the Rock, but so is the Church because Christ is the Bridegroom, the Church is the Bride and the Bride and the Bridegroom are one. Fr Corapi makes the point that to attack the Bride (the Church) is also to attack Jesus, the Bridegroom (again, because both are one). I don’t expect you to get this straight away, as it’s not a concept the Protestants really follow.
You should observe what happens to reasonable conservative candidates in the US Pete, they flop. The unreasonable candidates like Goldwater and Reagan infuse the movement.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:16 am
MMP is probably going to be voted to be kept in, so what are ways we could improve it?
My suggestions:
1. Reduce the number of MPs to 100. Would save the country money.
2. 60 seats should be electorate and 40 seats should be Party List. This is to help reduce the minority parties from holding the country to ransom so easily, but still gives the voters of those parties a chance to be represented.
If the number of MPs were kept at 120+ and Party Lists and Electoral lists were split 60-60, then raise the threshold to 7% before a party can get in on the Party List.
3. Electoral votes wouldn’t count towards party list votes and vice versa. This stops minor parties getting more seats just because they got one candidate elected to an electorate. Parties would still have to get 5% of votes on the Party List vote to get more MPs into parliament.
E.g. This would mean that National would probably need to attempt to seriously challenge for Rodney Hides electorate seat, because they can’t just rely on him getting elected to bringing in more MPs to help form a coalition when they get less that 5% of the Party vote.
4. An MP could only be on the Electorate list or the Party list, not both. This is to stop electorate MPs getting voted out or rejected, but then getting back into Parliament on the Party list.
5. Remove the Maori seats.
6. Have elections every four years to give governments more time to initiate changes before having to start thinking about election bribes. Less elections means the country could save a bit of money.
I’m sure you guys have ideas on how to improve MMP. I’m keen to hear them.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:28 am
Satan’s work exposed
http://nzconservative.blogspot.com/2011/01/philadelphias-house-of-horrors.html
January 20th, 2011 at 8:28 am
Comrade Zhumao and other Beijing apologists will disagree, but Harry Reid called it right when he said:
“I am going to go back to Washington and meet with the President of China. He is a dictator. He can do a lot of things through the form of government they have. Maybe I shouldn’t have said dictator, but they have a different type of government then we have, and that is an understatement.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47810.html
January 20th, 2011 at 8:31 am
No matter what happens to MMP, no matter how things are structured, the best way to improve government is it get better quality MPs, so that is where the focus should be – how to get better people standing, and how they have a reasonable chance of getting elected. Which party the stand for is less important than their ability and their dedication to the country first. Strong independent MPs should be encouraged – and voted for.
Tweaking MMP make make a little difference. An attitudinal change amongst voters could make a much bigger difference.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:35 am
Jon Stewart on the Hannity “interview” with Sarah Plain.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-18-2011/petty-woman?xrs=eml_tds
January 20th, 2011 at 8:37 am
Rules are rules. She’s better off coming back …..not!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/4559315/Flood-hit-Kiwi-family-ineligible-for-cash-relief
January 20th, 2011 at 8:40 am
Agree with AlphaKiwi and Pete George. In addition to getting better quality candidates we need much more political education. As I have posted for years (partly om jest) that voters should have to take bothe an IQ and a Political Knowledge Test before they are eligible to vote.
If you dont understand the issues you cant make an informed decision. Voting for a candidate because he/she is a ‘nice’ person is a nonsense.
We should start by having unbiased education in our schools( impossible at present with the numbers of Lefties in the education system) plus encourage adults to take more of an interest.
Otherwise we have what we have know Dumbies voting for dumbies or manipulative pricks like many in the current House.
Yes more independents. If fact I would support the banning of all political parties on the grounds they are no better than gangs In fact they have the regalia of gangs. Blue Red Green Yellow etc.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:47 am
While idealistically all independent MPs – vote in the best for each electorate, then pick the best of them for cabinet – sounds good it’s highly unlikely that would happen. The exisitng parties would not make it easy for a start. And there can be advantages in having parties – as long as they put country before party interests (difficult to achieve I know).
More fragmentation of parties plus a few independents would be a good compromise – more chance of the best combination of parties/MPs combining in coalition.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:47 am
Lastman said…
Voting for a candidate because he/she is a ‘nice’ person is a nonsense.
Yep, look no further than National voters. They voted for Key, who has no political standing/philosophy of any sorts. Time to call National voters, useful idiots. Rodney Hide was correct when he was interviewed (TV1) just after the last election where he stated that Mr Key sits to the left of Helen Clark in the political spectrum.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:55 am
Be thankful our politicians are not like those in Illinois – High Drama, Low Comedy in Illinois
In a lame-duck session I would add, just minutes before new members were to be sworn in.
My friends and relatives in Chicago have now passed through hope, change, disappointment and anger to the fetal position. Read the whole thing, but remember this quote, which is going to sting:
January 20th, 2011 at 8:56 am
Time to call National voters, useful idiots.
All those who take the time to vote are useful in a democracy.
Calling those that vote different to one’s own preference idiots sounds like idiotic name calling.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:06 am
I completely agree with you Pete, and I think the way to acheive this is to ditch MMP and return to an electorate-only system. Party candidates should then be selected via open primaries, so that even if a seat is safe for a given party it isn’t for the MP and they will be far more likely to vote as their constituents want than as their party whips direct.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:08 am
Pete Never say never. Remember the English Parliament was once comprised of only independents representing their local people and France have a mayor for every 300 citizens. The problem now is the disconnect between the pollies and the citizens which has lead to the apathy we have now. Only those with a cause or a specific compliant go to see their local MP. Most dont even know the name of their MP or the party they represent or what their policies are.
So how relevant is the Parliament to the majority of citizens. IMHO it isnt. And thats a worry as history has shown that a uninformed disinterested citizenery can lead to a Parliament that takes advantage to the detriment of the citizens.
And I dont want to see that happen. Feet to the fire and a blowtorch down their Y fronts is what I want to see.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:13 am
A loyal supporter slams Labour-lite:
Congratulations on your timely editorial about the treacherous dealings to which a once proud National Party has stooped in an endeavour to kowtow to a racist and militant Maori elite. For more than 40 years I’ve supported the party, both with my vote and generous financial contributions. to ensure victory.
This is now at an end.
Read the whole letter at: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/4556556/Letter-Robert-Mugabe-would-be-proud-of-the-coastal-area-bill
January 20th, 2011 at 9:15 am
We can thank M. Thompson for all this: http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/overstayers-given-break-after-being-unfairly-treated-4002506
January 20th, 2011 at 9:16 am
Party candidates should then be selected via open primaries
I like the sound of that. Each electorate gets far more choice over what candidates stand and are elected, and the parties will ultimtaely be strengthened with more responsive, better quality members.
The upcoming referendum is a bit limited – what it should be aiming to achieve is selecting the two most preferred systems, eg FPP and MMP, then review both and determine the best may for each, then vote to choose the best variation of the best.
It will be very difficult to substantially change the current process that’s under way, but it’s worth looking at what can be achieved within the process.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:20 am
Primaries can be another large expense, but I can see some merits. If it did lead to a better quality of MP, then I’d say we could reduce the number of MPs down to 50. That should more than cover the costs of Primaries.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:22 am
We also need to change the rules around political parties, 500 members is not a political party it’s a pressure-group. The minimum membership should be raised to at least 2000 and there should be some financial-soundness requirements too.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:23 am
After being one of the more sensible commentators last week, Jon Stewart has now jumped the shark and Colbert was worse.
Expecting Sarah Palin to brush off or ignore the accusations and of somehow media whoring by eventually responding to those who injected her into the issue is somewhat dumb. Tarring half the population is what the left media did by attacking the Tea Party.
Palin should not have made the comment ‘apolitical or even left wing’ though, that was dumb.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:27 am
I do love the pomposity of those who cry “I will never vote for you again!”, “I am cancelling my subscription!” etc etc. Good for you if that’s how you feel but who else really cares.
I accept that my favourite publications, like my preferred party, will sometimes do things I don’t like. But, in the case of National, could a lifelong supporter really start voting Labour or the Greens or, gasp, Winnie? Seems a bit hysterical and self-important to me, Manolo.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:31 am
Alpha – the cost of primaries is, IMO, a price worth paying. Not because there’s a good chance of getting better MPs, but because there’s a very high likelyhood of it resulting in a more engaged electorate
January 20th, 2011 at 9:38 am
Radical darkies getting guerrilla training in the Ureweras ?
Fuck I have to laugh at this from yesterday, why should hories bother running guerrilla training camps when the NZ army will take and train any hori that looks competent.
After all you do not see right wing types rushing to join the army do you ?
Hmm, that must make some of you extreme right wing types sweat, all those hories getting training in the NZ army
January 20th, 2011 at 9:39 am
Alphakiwi,
I would have 80 electorate MPs and fill up the party vote list mps based on who collected the most votes from electorate MPs that missed out. This would encourage MPs to work on increasing their vote and campaigning hard in areas that their party doesn’t usually win. It would encourage better candidates into marginal seats and so therefore a higher quality of debate could be had in those seats, and it would encourage right vs right candidates or left v left candidates in very safe seats. Electorate voters would then be able to directly remove any individual from parliament because parties would not be able to protect them with a high list ranking.
Perhaps increase the threshold to two electorate seats before a party brings their party vote with them, although I think 5% is already reasonably high for the threshold.
Moving elections out to four years is also a very high priority and Maori seats should be removed as soon as politically feasible.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:43 am
I take your point, BeaB. But this could be a case of the the drop that overflows the glass, a matter of how “flexible” this person’s principles are (I know Key’s stretch for miles).
I suspect there could be quite a few disenchanted National Party supporters, who see with dismay the secret deals stiched with the racist Maori Party on the foreshore and seabed issue.
Good on this gentleman for expressing his opinion in a letter to the editor.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:45 am
The ones in the ureweras were probably better equipped and putting them in the NZ Army is a good way to cull them via rolling Unimogs…
January 20th, 2011 at 9:45 am
Manolo that letter from John Harrison is a good one! Mr. Harrison has always been very forthright in his opinions and stood-up for what he believes in. He has also always put his money where his mouth is….
January 20th, 2011 at 9:46 am
The system you’re all talking about can never, and will never happen in New Zealand. Elections are not decided on ideas. There is the Blue Team and the Red Team (and a smattering of other colours, but primarily red and blue). There are those who will always vote Red, those who will always vote Blue (regardless of the fact that there is no difference between the Red Team and the Blue Team). Elections are not decided by these people, but by the undecideds (that’s right, I just said the undecideds decide, which doesn’t seem at first blush to make much sense). In an ideal world the undecideds would be those who review the candidates and their policy statements and cast their vote accordingly. That doesn’t happen in New Zealand. In New Zealand, they tend to vote for the party that offers them the most in the lolly scramble. 2008 was a statistical blip because it had the Helen Factor; she was by then so despised by the electorate she should have stepped down before the election.
Time to call National voters, useful idiots. Very true. I’ve asked before, what is the point of having the Blue Team in government if all they’re doing is implementing the Red Team’s policies? I haven’t yet had an answer.
All those who take the time to vote are useful in a democracy. Bullshit Bullshit Bullshit, as usual. Those who “take the time to vote” in New Zealand will vote for the party giving them back the most of their own (or someone else’s) money. As I said above, elections are not a contest of ideas but a lolly scramble, with each of the two “main” parties offering different portions of peoples’ own money back to them (or, more frequently these days, a slice of money stolen from the fast-shrinking productive).
Alpha is right – there should be an aptitude test before entering the polling booth. But these also needs to be a pre-condition for even taking the test. That is, to participate in the democratic process you must contribute to your country. That means nett tax takers get no vote. “Civil servants” get no vote (military personnel, police, etc. do, of course). By limiting the voting pool to those who actually contribute, you don’t get the “turkeys won’t vote for early Christmas” problems so prevalent and evident today.
Beab, there comes a point where “I will never vote for you again!” is the only message the pollies will understand. The simple fact is, John Key is the single most disappointing Prime Minister in New Zealand’s history (and we’ve had some pretty bloody average PMs in the past). Not because he is untalented, nor because he hasn’t had opportunity, but because he lacks anything remotely resembling a set of balls. He was gifted the best opportunity in a century to start turning New Zealand away from the welfare-infested socialist shit-hole it has become, and what did he do? A fucking cycle-way. Weak, limp-wristed appeasement bullshit. The only message this prick will understand is a large-scal voter boycott, which will never happen in New Zealand.
Note none of these things are ever going to happen. The pollies have a nice little con going and they’re not going to do anything to upset it.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:46 am
Are I.T guys like the labour party?
No appreciation for the value of money and no idea where money comes from… and dont care what shit costs..
January 20th, 2011 at 9:47 am
Seems a bit hysterical and self-important to me
lot of that going around.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:48 am
Grumpy – youre just obsessed with race aint ya
January 20th, 2011 at 9:50 am
The left have really ballsed up their ‘right wingers lack empathy’, ‘right wingers cannot be trusted to understand metaphors’, ‘right wing ideas are not reasonable’ meme by going after criticism of government as dangerous. To any normal person it makes them look big brotherish to insist that calling out the lefts best possible move towards socialised medicine as such is dangerous.
‘Calling government officials and policies socialist is dangerous’ does not resonate anywhere outside Hollywood and Journalism.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:56 am
That’s the point of an *open* primary, the whole constituency votes on who the Red candidate should be and who the Blue candidate should be. It doesn’t matter if the constituency in question is a safe party seat if the MP knows damn well that pissing the electorate off would result in someone else wearing the appropriately-coloured rosette next time around.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:57 am
Offshor_Kiwi,
You are right, Western democracies long ago passed the threshold for properly functioning democracy and voters have learnt that they can vote themselves money from the government coffers. I can think of two remedies, constitutional limits on the government and its budget, and lower voter turnouts. The message should not be respect democracy by voting regardless, it should respect democracy by getting informed before voting. The voting age should be lifted to 20 also.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:04 am
I agree that elections have a lolly scramble aspect to them, sometimes enough to possibly swing an election (we can only guess) but there’s a lot more to elections than that. People vote for many different reasons.
I’ve asked before, what is the point of having the Blue Team in government if all they’re doing is implementing the Red Team’s policies?
Because the “x” team has been in too long and has become stale and ballsed too many things up, and the “y” team look like they will have a better fresher bunch of MPs.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:06 am
When are National going to get serious about the economy? They own it now and cannot blame Labour. See benni numbers have increased and what are we debating, laws to appease the natives.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10700778
Come on John, it’s about the economy stupid.
You have wasted 3 golden years to change NZ for the good. Should have stayed with ACT as a partner and done some good quality slash & burn, but nah, we have ETS and Foreshore bills legislation instead helped and abetted by the native party.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:11 am
While I acknowledge that MMP has it’s fair share of fishhooks it could be worth remembering why it was embraced so readily by the electorate in 1994.
FPP resulted in alternate periods of Nat/Lab Governments from 1930 onwards Few independents or minor parties could get a look in. Worst of all once elected a Government exercised absolute power for three years. Short of rioting in the streets there was no way of influencing a party that had no incentive to listen to the public.
The situation was made worse by the abolition of the Legislative Council in 1950.
The arrogance of the Governments of the 50′s to the mid 90′s was unbelievable. The only power shared by NZ citizens were the triennial elections & even then the party manifestos were chock full of lies & mistruths.
IMO, before MMP, democracy was essentially dead. If we are going to change the system then for once let’s use the lessons of history.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:17 am
Many Russian immigrants in Staten Island in the U.S are now turning to the Republican party, because the current situation is too much like the socialism they fled from Russia in the 90s.
LINK
January 20th, 2011 at 10:17 am
nasska “The arrogance of the Governments of the 50′s to the mid 90′s was unbelievable. The only power shared by NZ citizens were the triennial elections & even then the party manifestos were chock full of lies & mistruths’
Are you suggesting, even for a second, that the 1999-2008 government of the totalitarian lesbian wasn’t arrogant beyond belief? Or that the John Key government isn’t arrogant beyond belief? Seriously, what do you call ignoring 90% of your employers?
Yes, a Legislative Council/Senate would be a good idea, but it would need to be coupled with a halving of the size of Parliament. Too many of those pricks there.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:20 am
I agree naska. I support the concept of proportional representation. I wonder if STV might have been a better approach than MMP, but we’re unlikely to change now.
As to AlphaKiwi’s suggestions, I don’t feel strongly about the number of MPs either way but I do think that List MPs should go if they resign or are removed from their party, no ifs or buts. Their mandate comes exclusively from their party and so it seems perverse that they can linger as “independents” once they resign from the party that selected them.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:24 am
Now I’m becoming confused on the issue of Primaries.
Please help me understand:
1. Wouldn’t only party members be able to vote for who would represent their party for their electorate?
James Stephenson said above that it would be an “open primary” where the whole constituency votes on who represents each party.
Doesn’t that mean that a strongly rural and National Party supporting electorate would always vote for their best candidate to represent the National Party while voting for the other parties’ worst candidates?
Please help this confused AlphaKiwi understand.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:25 am
The Brisbane floods before and after. Part two at the bottom of the page.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:25 am
LOL, great moments in Liberal history….
http://vimeo.com/18917974
January 20th, 2011 at 10:30 am
God, it must frustrate the hell out of the American Right that they haven’t had anyone funny since PJ O’Rourke.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:32 am
Offshore Kiwi @ 10.17am
Agreed….. arrogance is alive & doing well but I still think that MMP has suppressed some of the excesses. Any Government now has to face 4 or 5 opposition groups instead of one tightly whipped bunch of no hopers who know that if they shut up for long enough that they will walk straight back into power. I’d still prefer to see most of the lying bastards dangling from power poles but we cant have everything.
Re Council/Senate – about 30 in number plus 80 MP’s would be more than adequate.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:32 am
Vatican to Irish bishops, don’t report abuse.
The letter, obtained by Irish broadcasters RTE and provided to The Associated Press, documents the Vatican’s rejection of a 1996 Irish church initiative to begin helping police identify pedophile priests following Ireland’s first wave of publicly disclosed lawsuits.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:33 am
Ryan, you didn’t find that funny? I sure did… especially the electric car with the kid on the bike passing it
January 20th, 2011 at 10:35 am
You can only vote in an open primary for one party ie you choose to vote in the Labour party primary or the National party primary – not both.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:39 am
andrei
Thanks. That clears things up a bit.
Could a Party which has a huge majority manipulate the results by organizing some of their voters to vote for their strongest competition’s weakest candidate? Is there a way to prevent this kind of manipulation?
January 20th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Vaguely. I mean, it’s supposed to be a hybrid car, and they do fine uphill. And those fluorescent lights turn on just fine in my experience. There must be some actual things to make fun of, rather than making things up.
I just think they could have done better. With the toilet, what about having the guy having to flush three times as much because his toilet’s weak? So he ends up using way more water.
Then again, maybe I just made that up.
Is there any right-wing equivalent of Jon Stewart out there? Obviously Stephen Colbert doesn’t count.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Adding pettrol to the fire? http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=252833
Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie suggested in an interview published today that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.
Abercrombie told the Honolulu Star Advertiser he was searching within the Hawaii Department of Health to find definitive vital records that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii, because the continuing eligibility controversy could hurt the president’s chances of re-election in 2012.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Alpha – a “closed” primary is one where registered “blue” voters get to vote for the blue party candidate – this is what happens in the US.
An “open” primary is one where the whole constituency votes and yes the scenario you suggest is possible in a safe seat. However it doesn’t really matter because the aim is that the MP in that safe seat feels beholden to the electorate not the party. There’ll be none of that Labour party nonsense which results in the likes of Shearer or Fa’afoi still owing their place at the trough to the leader’s office ramming them though or contests between differently-affiliated union stooges.
The key point is that in marginal seats both or all parties are likely to be fielding candidates who represent their constituents outlook more. I think Auckland Central is a glimpse of what would happen – Nikki Kaye knew she couldn’t upset her leftier constituents so had to come out against the government on the issue of mining Great Barrier.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:47 am
First there was
Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali said there were women who “sway suggestively” and wore make-up and immodest dress … “and then you get a judge without mercy (rahma) and gives you 65 years”.
“But the problem, but the problem all began with who?” he asked.
Now we have Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, the head of the Orthodox Church’s department for relations between the church and society, complained that Russian women dressed like strippers and suggested a nationwide dress code should be introduced to ensure both sexes dress more conservatively.
“If she (a woman) is wearing a miniskirt, it is provocative,” he said. “If she is drunk at the same time then she is even more provocative, and if she herself is actively seeking contact with people and is then surprised when that contact ends in rape she is wrong.”
Is there no end to the mysoginy of religion?
January 20th, 2011 at 10:51 am
If a man is provoked to rape by a woman in a miniskirt, he is a criminal. If she is drunk at the same time, then he is still a criminal. If she herself is actively seeking contact with people, he is still a criminal.
Fucking incredible how people can place blame on victims like that.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:52 am
Cha, that’s potentially quite damning but merely evidence rather than a surprise that the Vatican sees itself as above the law, and has instructed their Irish bishops to ignore the law of the land.
It raises further questions about how saintly Pope John Paul II should be viewed.
And it looks like the stain continues:
Should each religion in each country be able to give precedence to their own laws over the law of of the country?
January 20th, 2011 at 10:54 am
If men feel the urge to rape women who dress with a lot of skin showing (usually in the hot weather), then it those men shouldn’t be allowed out of their houses and when they do have to go out, it must be with their mother or sister. Those men would also have to wear chastity belts to keep their dick in their pants.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:01 am
Baby Doc., ya gotta laugh. Walks back into Port Au Prince to ‘take the throne’ and gets arrested by diligent officials and will be processed thru courts for corruption and stealing, let alone human rights abuses to come. I love it when these monsters finally get held accountable for their appalling lives. Idi Amin got of scott free. Go that Haitian judge!
January 20th, 2011 at 11:11 am
Some rapists deliberately target drunk females because they will more likely succeed in violating and get away with it, so raping a drunk female is at least as bad as raping a sober one. Like pedophiles they attack victims least able to defend themselves, and least likely to complain or testify against them.
Most men won’t even consider attacking a woman, whether winter or summer, pub or beach. What women wear is irrelevant, and shouldn’t be a valid excuse or defence.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:15 am
Peter George @ 10.52am
Should each religion in each country be able to give precedence to their own laws over the law of of the country?
Definitely no but Britain with it’s partial adoption of Shariah law is showing the way down that path. The only difference is that the Catholics are trying to cover up the buggering of small boys where as the followers of Islam are making second class citizens of women a phenomenon which has escaped the notice of the normally vigilant Sisterhood.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:15 am
Christchurch 5am and 11am today so far (20/1): We’re getting really big earthquakes today, violent and scarey. Over 5 on richter. So over them…
January 20th, 2011 at 11:16 am
@ Pete George
I agree with you 100%.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:39 am
Yummy. The greenies in the EU think it’s better if we eat bugs instead of cattle and poultry. Less greenhouse gas that way, you see?
more
January 20th, 2011 at 11:46 am
Pete, nasska, no one is saying the “buggering of little boys” is right; in fact, the Catholic religion condemns it. That is the difference between Christianity and Islam. Islam – the religion – says it’s OK to kill people for speaking blasphemy against Mohammed or Islam, and it’s OK for stone women for various reasons et al.
As usual, you’re taking the leftist Alinksy approach in finding something wrong that someone religious may have done and use that as a weapon to attack or smear a whole organisation or ideology that you dislike. Here’s a clue – it’s not working anymore. Even the New York Times (those expert papal smearers) don’t seem to have picked up on the recent story.
Maybe they have learned to let the actual facts come out this time before setting pen to paper – maybe….
January 20th, 2011 at 11:52 am
Could always just eat vegetables.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:59 am
Fletch, try a Google News search with: vatican rte abuse
You will find Vatican Letter Warned Bishops on Abuse Policy amongst many other media reports.
There seems to be significant disquiet and anger in Ireland over this. The Vatican has not addressed it well, for a long time now.
the leftist Alinksy approach in finding something wrong that someone religious may have done and use that as a weapon to attack or smear a whole organisation or ideology that you dislike.
That’s exactly what you do with Muslims/Islam, frequently.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:06 pm
here’s a man with a great turn of phrase, skewering the 50 Most loathsome Americans
41) Christine O’Donnell
Charges: Doesn’t understand that separation of church and state is in the Constitution; doesn’t understand that you can’t pay rent with campaign contributions; doesn’t understand that lying to Nazis would’ve been moral; doesn’t understand that you can’t run for Senate and repeatedly lie about your education without being found out; doesn’t understand that being pro-life in cases of rape and incest makes one a monster; doesn’t understand climate change; doesn’t understand evolution; doesn’t understand that you can’t breed genetically altered mice with fully functional human brains; doesn’t understand that being a single, “chaste” thirty-something who obsessively evangelizes against masturbation and gay sex gives anyone with even a vague appreciation of human nature the likely correct impression that you’ve had your finger in more dykes than the Little Dutch Boy. Just doesn’t understand.
Aggravating factor: “I’m not a witch; I’m you.”
Sentence: Burned at the stake.
34) Stefani Germanotta (Lady Gaga)
Charges: A Madonna doppelganger with scoliosis and a knack for trite, overproduced and formulaic drivel. Not nearly as controversial as she imagines. She pissed off Jerry Seinfeld? Meh. My heart’s not really in this one. She makes shitty music. Who fucking cares. Probably you. You sicken me. But I’m getting ahead of myself.
Aggravating factor: Excessive consonant repetition.
Sentence: Tracheotomy.
19) Jenny McCarthy
Charges: OK. Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s been revealed as a fraud and conman, and his study linking autism to the MMR vaccine was fully retracted by The Lancet. The “debate” is done, but this former Playboy Bunny is not. She initially believed her son Evan was an “Indigo child” (a creepy, Aryan wunderkind with telepathic powers), but after that didn’t pan out, she needed another equally plausible explanation for his condition and desperately latched onto the vaccine conspiracy. By convincing easily-duped moms that vaccines aren’t safe, she’s endangered their kids, compromised herd immunity and killed more Americans than terrorists have in the last nine years. And that’s not hyperbole.
Aggravating factor: “I did a lot of digging on my own, the ‘University of Google.’”
Sentence: Measles, mumps, rubella.
14) Barack Obama
Charges: Outside of his promise to never end the pointless war in Afghanistan, his word has the integrity of Halliburton cement. Whether it was a “robust” public option, real net neutrality, importing prescription drugs, barring lobbyists from serving in the White House, meaningful Wall Street reform or ending the Bush tax cuts for the disgustingly wealthy, our President caved like the Metrodome under the weight of a bloated oligarchy. Most irksome, he seemed dignified doing it.
Aggravating factor: Authorized the assassination of Americans accused of terrorism.
Sentence: Primary challenge from the Rent is 2 Damn High guy.
9) Tea Partiers
Charges: Openly racist and lying about it, uber-religious, hyper-hypocritical, usually-tetched old codgers who wheel around in their Medicare-provided Hoverounds® and rage against fiscally irresponsible social programs, like Medicare, because they’re too dumb to realize that they’re co-opted, Machiavellian mouthpieces of greedy billionaires.
Aggravating factor: They elected some 40 candidates to Congress.
Sentence: The consequences of their actions.
6) Sarah Palin
Charges: An ideologically abhorrent dunce whose answer to everything—caribou, wolves, Julian Assange, feminism, science, decency, accountability, the English language, Democratic incumbents—is to shoot it dead. From conspiring to advance her ham-legged, clopping daughter on “Dancing with the Stars” to successfully endorsing a slew of faux-revolutionary Tea Party imbeciles, she’s a persistent, violent rash on the entire body politic.
Aggravating factor: “But obviously, we’ve got to stand with our North Korean allies.”
Sentence: Shot in the head by a bear.
http://www.buffalobeast.com/?p=4182
January 20th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
Excerpt from (the sometimes tongue-in-cheek) Rules For Radical Conservatives about the tactics the Left use –
And how Leftists use the Civil Rights movement as an example to try and do whatever they want –
January 20th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Fletch (1,782) Says:
January 20th, 2011 at 11:46 am
Pete, nasska, no one is saying the “buggering of little boys” is right;
Agreed.
in fact, the Catholic religion condemns it. in public, while in private it continues to hinder law enforcement, to protect the paedophile priests, to sweep it under the carpet, and even, as we saw recently, with Pope Nazi’s approval, blame the victims.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Here I am driving down the road eating my 5 plus a day and a fucking great cheeseburger swerves across the road and kills me.
Its getting dangerous out there.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
The mopane worm is a valuable source of protein for millions in southern Africa.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:19 pm
Just what IS it with catholics and blood? As if drinking the blood of Jesus isn’t enough for them, now
WARSAW: A vial containing blood drawn from Pope John Paul II shortly before he died will be installed as a relic in a Polish church soon after his beatification this year.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/popes-blood-to-be-built-into-altar-20110118-19vcn.html
its not a religion, its a Vampire Cult.
For Christ’s sake, how can anyone swallow this bullshit? Unless its with a glass of blood.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:20 pm
I don’t think I do. Let’s look at the situation.
You criticize Christians who abuse children etc (and rightly so – as do I), but they are not following the precepts/teachings of the Church or of the Bible and Jesus. If you asked most of these abusers, I am sure they would not dare to say that their actions are done in Jesus’ name. Nor would any other Christians, if asked, condone their actions.
I criticize Muslims who commit acts of violence against women, and even of murder, who kill in the name of Islam. Their actions are in accord with what the Koran teaches, with what Sharia teaches. A man in Pakistan was killed the other day for daring to support an action for getting rid of anti-blasphemy laws. His killer was showered by the populace with roses, and it is doubtful a lawyer will be able to be found to prosecute him. In other words, many Muslims support his actions at home and, I am sure, abroad.
Can you not see the difference?
I am not condemning all Muslims – I am sure there are many moderates. But it is difficult for them because what they think goes against what the Koran and Islam teach.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:26 pm
A problem with Catholicism is that the Pope and church have more authority than the Bible in practice. The Pope is viewed as infallible. Yet, the Pope has been blamed for covering up the child abuse and not doing enough. His lower ranking Bishops have no choice but to follow because that is their religion’s teachings.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Fletch (1,783) Says:
January 20th, 2011 at 12:20 pm
I am not condemning all Muslims – I am sure there are many moderates.
Nope, just like in all religions, there are fundamentalists and enablers. Just how can anyone be “moderate” about something as dogmatic as religion?
January 20th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
Who said anyone is blaming the victims? Pope Benedict has done more than other other to clean up what he called “filth” in the church. If there was any “covering up” then it was wrong, and a purely human defensive reaction. What do you think went on in other organisations in the past, like schools, the boy scouts, etc when abuse was found to have taken place? Was it, “well gee we better go straight to the police and get ourselves in the newspapers so we can be held up to scrutiny, humiliated and embarassed”, or was it more a case of, “we better keep this quiet, move the perpetrator somewhere else out of harms way and get him help”. Which is the more human response?
I am not saying it was the right thing to do. I read an interview recently with Monica Applewhite, “one of the foremost experts on screening, monitoring and policy development for the prevention of sexual abuse and risk management for those with histories of sexual offending, who has spent the past 16 years conducting research and root-cause analysis in the area of sexual abuse in organizations in order to assist organizations in developing best practice standards”.
She says at one point –
So, it’s easy to look at these crimes through the lens of today, but back when a lot of offending took place, there wasn’t even such a thing as child protective services, and the Church was often taking the same actions as secular society – sending offenders away to treatment instead of jail.
I’m sorry, but I see your postings as not so much a concern for any victims concerned, but more as ammunition to find anything/everything you can to attack an organisation you do not like.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
The far right and radical Islam converge.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
So, it’s easy to look at these crimes through the lens of today, but back when a lot of offending took place, there wasn’t even such a thing as child protective services
Except the article that Cha linked to suggests that the Vatican was ordering Irish catholics to ignore and override their own initiatives to try and manage the abuse problem better.
People within the church were trying to deal with serious abuse problems within their country’s laws and it appears the Vatican may have directed them not to.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:44 pm
Venezuela and North Korea are run by the far-right, by people who think like George Galloway?
January 20th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
Alphakiwi, I am afraid you misunderstand what infallible means. It does not mean that the Pope himself, Ratzinger, can never do anything wrong, or, that everything he does is automatically right. it does not mean he is sinless.
The Pope and the Church are considered “infallible” on issues of Faith and Morals – statements that are issued ‘Ex Cathedra” or ‘from the chair’. And although the Pope issues these statements and has the final say, any issue will have been put to many Bishops for their consideration before any statement like this is put out, eg, concerning the Pill.
There have been some Popes who were real stinkers – not very good as human beings – but never has the Church faulted in it’s teaching on Faith and Morals.
As far as the Church and the Bible – the Church put the Bible together – chose what books would be included. The Catholic church does not just depend on the Bible as do Protestants, but also on the teachings of the Church, through which Jesus gave authority to Peter (the first Pope) when he said to him, “Upon this Rock I will build my Church. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven”
Thus the Church’s authority is based on both Scripture and Tradition.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:49 pm
Pete, well we will have to wait and see. If they did, they were wrong, but that is not my experience. Back in the late 90s when all this abuse stuff broke out, I went to a number of masses at the Cathedral in Auckland where Bishop Patrick Dunn was presiding, and who urged anyone who had been abused or knew of any abuse to report it to the authorities.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
Again, that’s not dissimilar from what anti-Christians say about Christians. “Oh, some of them are moderates, but they’re the ones ignoring the Bible.” Anti-Christians make an ungenerous interpretation of the Bible and claim any Christians who act otherwise are ignoring the Bible in the name of decency.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
@ Fletch
I can read that two ways. “upon this rock” could mean this statement as in that Jesus is the Christ. Isn’t that what the church should be building on?
Wouldn’t Jesus Christ, if perfect, made it clearer if he meant, Peter by saying, “upon YOU I shall build my church.”?
Also, I can’t see where Jesus says that Peter’s position as “the rock”, if that is in fact what he meant, was transferable after Peter’s death.
January 20th, 2011 at 1:02 pm
So – while kiwiblog focuses on celebs committing petty crime the Nation continues to go down the toilet under a National government. Yes loyal kiwiblogers, just look the other way…
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1101/S00051/benefit-figures-remain-high.htm
January 20th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
Fletch, the cover ups in Ireland and elsewhere have required literally hundreds of supposedly good people to behave as if they had no moral compass whatsoever, that’s what disgusts me.
January 20th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
It’s not a “cover up” Cha.
The letter just expresses that canon law must be followed when dealing with Pedophile priests so that the guilty have no recourse to overturn the penalties – eg being defrocked.
The concern here is the sanctity of the Confessional which is inviolate and so it should be.
January 20th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
andrei (810) Says:
January 20th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
The concern here is the sanctity of the Confessional which is inviolate and so it should be.
No, just more special pleading from the religious that they should get exemptions from the law that applies to the rest of us.
andrei, apart from helping cover up crime, what possible valid reason can there be for permitting “the sanctity of the Confessional”?
Why are confessions to a priest different to confessions to a workmate? Why should a religious person gain a protection not available to the non- religious?
Religion has been given too many free passes; time to put an end to them.
January 20th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Tony Blair has a few things to clarify when he apears before the Chilcott inquiry. This week the inquiry has found out:
Blair can try and explain against implications he acted like a “dodgy tosser” on Friday.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
I agree with magic bullet. We need to tighten up eligibility for welfare benefits and significantly reduce their attractiveness as an option to supporting oneself and get the numbers down.
I also think it’s ridiculous that superannuation isn’t included with the general welfare reporting.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
Palin, it will be interesting if that killer starts talking and states he got his ideas from reading Palin’s facebook page, funny how Palin is ranting that they will not shut her up.
So she will go on with her rants about don’t retreat , reload, putting other politicians inside of gunsights, damn, conservatives are fucking dumb.
The politician who was shot, her political opponent who is a fucking idiot was ranting to people ,come along a fire a fully auto M16 type rifle, I wonder what the target was, a photo of the politician who was shot ?
Ranting about second amendment alternatives, yet when a nine year old girl is killed, the conservative states she meant nothing to happen.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:24 pm
DPF you should demerit grumpyold hori’s near libel above.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:29 pm
Grumpy, your rant and accusations are despicable. Get off the booze before opening your mouth.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
Is Jared Loughner even on facebook?
If he’s not on facebook, how could he see the page? everytime I’ve followed a facebook link, I get asked to join to gain access.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Oh come on guys. Don’t you want Grumpy to continue to represent the left here, along with people like MNIJ? They’re the best possible advertisements for not being a left-winger.
I have to admit that their trollldom does become a bore after a while, but there’s always RIP.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:50 pm
European Jihadis captured:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/6226935/Pakistan-discovers-village-of-white-German-al-Qaeda-insurgents.html
Think they can skip the next Bundeswehr parade.
January 20th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Opposition to the Messiah’s health care plan is gaining momentum:
Six more states joined a lawsuit in Florida against President Obama’s health care overhaul on Tuesday, meaning more than half of the country is challenging the law.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/18/states-join-obama-health-care-lawsuit-fla/
January 20th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
Manolo (2,826) Says:
January 20th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Opposition to the Messiah’s health care plan is gaining momentum:
Ah yes, Amerika, the land that is clsoe enough to canada for sarah palin to utilise its superior and cheaper health care.
Amerika, where no lunatic can get mental health care, but any idiot can get a gun.
January 20th, 2011 at 3:19 pm
MNIJ, your distate for that great country, the United States, is obvious.
Just remember you and your ilk would be speaking Japanese had not been for the intervention of the Americans in WWII.
As the obedient socialist you are, it’s your duty to hate a country which is capitalist to the core.
January 20th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Greg – that has been tried in the US and has failed (if there are no fish to catch it doesn’t matter how hard you try, you won’t catch one). More likely you’ll just get more people selling drugs and thieving to support themselves.
Is that really what you want?
January 20th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
A climate change study that projected a 2.4 degree Celsius increase in temperature and massive worldwide food shortages in the next decade was seriously flawed, scientists said Wednesday.
The study was posted on the website of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and was written about by numerous international news agencies, including AFP.
But AAAS later retracted the study as experts cited numerous errors in its approach.
The warmists continue to lie with impunity: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110119/ts_afp/climatewarmingfood_20110119163335
January 20th, 2011 at 3:44 pm
manholelow continues to back the oil companies over the scientific community. Strange your lack of belief in the profit motive.
January 20th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
MB,
Perhaps it is you who is the lemming.
And your ideas on economic management destroy any credibilty you may have claimed.
January 20th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
New York-based bureaucrats lecturing us:
The United Nations has expressed concern over shortfalls in the rights of New Zealand children, including “staggering” infant and child mortality rates and a lack representation for children in legislation.
It has questioned why New Zealand does not have a department or ministry responsible for children’s issues.
Another committee underlined that many developments had been seen regarding the right to life and survival, yet child and infant mortality rates remained “staggering” and had not changed over the past ten years.
The member noted that 20 percent of children in New Zealand lived in income poverty.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4562042/UN-concern-over-Kiwi-kids-rights
I expect a robust response from this “valiant and brave” government.
January 20th, 2011 at 4:39 pm
Manolo, if John Key had any stones he’d tell the UN to FRO and stop meddling in NZ’s internal affairs.
If Aunty Tari had any integrity she would say “this is a Maori problem and Maori will fix it.” Without, of course, dipping into the taxpayer pocket any more than she already does.
January 20th, 2011 at 5:50 pm
Manolo – The USA was a great country and hopefully will be again one day. Currently it is an oligarchy run by Wall Street.
(Apologies if I don’t get involved in lengthy debate. broke my wrist on Sunday and typing one handed is no fun!)
I’m currently 2/3 through “13 Bankers”. An astonishing insight into the GFC and how Wall Street took control of Washington over the last 30 years.
Essential reading for anyone who wants to understand what comes next for the world economy. Dangerous and reckless elements of our financial sector have become too powerful and must be reined in. If this problem is not addressed, there is serious trouble in all our futures.
Nouriel Roubini, Professor of Economics, New York University
Right, off for a lie down…..
January 20th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
AlphaKiwi, actually the word “Peter” literally means “rock”. No one had ever been called that historically before Jesus referred to Peter that way. The full text reads –
He is talking to Peter, to whom he gives the keys (an office). Even Martin Luther believed in the Primacy of Peter.
January 20th, 2011 at 7:21 pm
My name is jackoff
Check up on some statistics before you keep sprouting your dreamland belief that US citizens go to Canada
for health care.
Check the 5 year suvival rate for the top 10 cancer killers between the 2 countries for eg
Check the waiting lists for elective surgery in Canada.
Check how long the waiting list is to see a specialist in Canada.
Why does King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia go to Johns Hopkins for treatment ?
Have a look at how much Canadian citizens spend on health treatment in the USA
You have no idea mate. Blinded by dogmatic ideology.
Where did you come up with your view that US citizens go to Canada ?
Unless it was in your dreams.
January 20th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Also. Jackoff,
You hate ‘Amerika’ so much perhaps you would care to enlighten us with your opinion of a superior
democracy.
or
If you would prefer a socialist/communist system i would be interested to hear of what you consider
a better system
Let me guess Titos Albania would have appealed to your type , right ?
January 20th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
Why is it that every year, I like the UN less?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4562042/UN-concern-over-Kiwi-kids-rights
I particularly liked Bob’s comment #5 in the article. They are showing themselves to be cheerleading enablers to non-western oligarchies, and chardonnay socialists to liberal democratic nations.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:13 pm
bereal fuck an old hori should not be telling you this, the USA is not a democracy they are a republic.
They do not one man, one vote of equal value in their Senate
January 20th, 2011 at 8:24 pm
bereal (283) Says:
January 20th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Let me guess Titos Albania would have appealed to your type , right ?
Guess you got your education in Amerika.
Tito was the Yugoslav patriot and dictator. Albania was run by Hoxha.
Guess I did OK, got my education from a socialist history teacher in Oz.
As for the rest of your horsehit, well, let’s just leave it to fertilise the roses,eh?
January 20th, 2011 at 8:45 pm
@ Fletch
I think you and I’ll never agree.
I know in the Bible Jesus is referred to as a rock as well.
The “rock” in prophecy in Daniel 2 is generally accepted to be referring to Jesus.
Dan 2:34 While you were watching, a rock was cut out, but not by human hands.
This “rock cut out not by human hands,” is of supernatural origin, i.e. is Christ (Mat 7:24-25; 16:18; Rom 9:33; 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 2:8).
It struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and smashed them.
Christ at His second coming will destroy the last kingdom (Ps 2:9; 1 Cor 15:25; 2 Thess 2:8; Rev 2:26-27; 11:15; 14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2) and therefore all of them. See below my comments on Daniel’s interpretation in 2:44-45.
Anyway, I think the Bible can be interpreted in different ways by people, hence the variety of doctrines and denominations.
I’m not a Christian, but don’t mind discussing religion. However, in general I think KiwiBlog isn’t the best place as it’s mainly a political blog.
In future if I start a blog, I would have a section for discussing religion as well politics, philosophy, etc. I’ll let you know if and when that happens. I’d welcome you to share your views from time to time. I’m open to learning how other people see the world differently from me.
Thanks, Fletch.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
Further to Pete’s post re: the Chilcot enquiry into Blair’s Iraq adventure, the real current day Sir Humphrey refuses to release notes sent by Blair to Bush.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
Looks like Paul Henry was right about little Mrs Dipshit all the time.
Aussies owed millions from Delhi Commonwealth Games
Sydney Olympics maestro Ric Birch has this week commissioned Slater & Gordon to launch a likely multi-million dollar class action against Delhi Commonwealth Games organisers for substantial unpaid bills. Mr Birch said he was “seriously pissed off” with Games organisers.
ACGA CEO Perry Crosswhite said his body was one of “30 or 40″ similar Games bodies around the world owed money by Delhi organisers.
Mr Birch was creative director for the Delhi ceremonies, Howard & Sons provided all of their fireworks, and Norwest provided all the sound. Both ceremonies were hailed as shining successes amid the Games general chaos. But Mr Birch said he was told by Delhi Games organisers secretary-general Lalit Bhanot: “We’re not going to pay you because your services were not up to the mark.”
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/commonwealth-games/aussies-owed-millions-from-delhi-commonwealth-games/story-fn65mzk7-1225991377970
January 20th, 2011 at 9:13 pm
DenseOldFuckwit and JackOff in fucking idiot shocker. Someone change the channel please, I’m sick of their whining that doesn’t even change direction regardless of the facts that have emerged. Nice to see DOF cling to his conspiracy theory though. He’s as bad (and as stupid) as the birthers.
Cha: you mean the far-left and radical Islam converging in order to meet their own goals (anti-Western, anti-capitalist, anti-consumption). It’s funny how your type are little better than Anwar al-Aulaki.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:16 pm
Virgin soars as Air NZ buys stake
January 20, 2011 – 5:09PM
Air New Zealand has bought a substantial stake in budget carrier Virgin Blue and plans to raise that stake to between 10 per cent and 14.99 per cent.
Air NZ said today it had no intention of making a full takeover offer and had received Australian Foreign Investment Review Board approval for the transaction.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/virgin-soars-as-air-nz-buys-stake-20110120-19xs8.html
Virgin Blue shares jumped 4 cents, or 10 per cent, in late trade to close at 44 cents.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:34 pm
I just saw this quote…
I think it’s far too simplistic. A person who is too reasonable/adaptable won’t change much, but neither will someone who is too unreasonable, they will demand too much and usually achieve little. As with many things there has to be a reasonable balance.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:02 pm
Jackoff.
You remain staunchly typical to your type.
Correct the spelling, heap the abuse, do anything, ANYTHING.
Except addres the question.
Put it this way, for one more try.
What do you consider to be a superior political system to the Amerika you hate so much ?
Wreckers and haters like you usually have no reply.
All you have is what you hate, what do you admire ? i’ll answer for you, effing nothing.
Prove me wrong. Addres the question. Try, just once in your life. You know you would feel better if you could.
But you can’t, it’s impossible for you isn’t it ? Just admit it.
Grumptyhori, nice hair splitting mate. One up to you.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:08 pm
Also, i’d rather not fuck an old hori. LOL
There are 300 odd million Americans who would laugh at you.
January 20th, 2011 at 11:22 pm
Do you even think about what you post or do you just apply a wishy washy algorythm?
Our lives would not bear any resemblance to what they are today without unreasonable people.
January 21st, 2011 at 12:54 am
AlphaKiwi, yes, Christ is also the Rock, as is his Church. Father Corapi explains this very well below –
Thus, yes; Christ is the Rock, but so is the Church because Christ is the Bridegroom, the Church is the Bride and the Bride and the Bridegroom are one. Fr Corapi makes the point that to attack the Bride (the Church) is also to attack Jesus, the Bridegroom (again, because both are one). I don’t expect you to get this straight away, as it’s not a concept the Protestants really follow.
January 21st, 2011 at 6:58 am
Our lives would not bear any resemblance to what they are today without unreasonable people.
Nor without reasonableness.
Unreasonable and reasonable are never absolutes anyway, everyone is some mixture – that’s not wishy-washy, it’s how things work in practice.
January 21st, 2011 at 8:23 am
You are a dolt Pete.
Shaw’s comment was not absolute. Comparatively, but not absolutely, unreasonable people make things happen.
January 21st, 2011 at 8:40 am
I was just suggesting something to discuss Herman. I don’t think I’ve been called a dolt before so at least you are adding something new.
I guess blogs “would not bear any resemblance to what they are today without unreasonable people”.
January 21st, 2011 at 8:48 am
You should observe what happens to reasonable conservative candidates in the US Pete, they flop. The unreasonable candidates like Goldwater and Reagan infuse the movement.
January 21st, 2011 at 6:19 pm
grumptyhori
correct me if i’m wrong but did i see Obama on the box today referring to the USA as a democracy ?
You should give him a call and put him right .
What a mug he must be to be dumber than an old hori.
LOL