Heroes of the Day--the drafters of the Declaration of Indepedence

Drafters of one of the greatest pieces of (hemp) paper ever written. Such a pity that the current inhabitants of Congress and the White House seem intent on pissing on everything it stands for.


Words mean things, and the words these brave, insightful men wrote on this day 233 years ago changed the world forever.

Brave? You bet. They knew that what they were saying would bring all the might of the British military upon them, could get them killed and would probably start a war that they could lose; but they did it anyway.

Today's Random Impertinent Questions

What’s the difference between Michael Jackson and Farah Fawcett? Well, for years teenage boys pinned Farah Fawcett to their walls...

Gisbourne has a CBD?

So the defence is: the girlfriend was ‘psycho’, and that’s justification to stab her a couple hundred times in her own bedroom? That’s a defence? Have you ever had a girlfriend who wasn’t psycho at times?

So how many times has the home invasion legislation been used?

Who the hell handed out those fucking plastic horns to the South African crowds?

How many cars do you think will actually be crushed?

Did they really have to publish this photo? What happened to modesty?

Hero of the Day--1 July James Randi

what if...

Hero of the Day--30 June 2009--Johannes Kepler

Johannes Kepler, December 27, 1571 – November 15, 1630

Greatest Comment EVER!!!

A few years back I got my hands on a "how-to" manual put out by the some neo-nazi skin heads and made a post out of it.

I called it: " skinheads for dummies, by dummies" or some other stupid condescending title like that. I'm yet to meet a skinhead who had two brain-cells to rub together, to a man (and they're all spotty boys) they are thick, inarticulate, unemployable, but mostly harmless knuckle draggers.

The weird thing is that my post must have been picked up on a search engine, because there isn't a week goes by that I don't get an angry email from one of these slobberers. A lot of them I delete for crimes against grammar, or because they are death threats and/or anti-semitic rants.

But here is the magnum opus of dumb stupid emails from these guys, written by some turd who managed to stop screwing his cousin long enough to get onto a library computer and use the beneficiaries' discount. Enjoy. It's nice of him to include his mental age at the very end.

"

Frankie 88 has left a new comment on your post "Skinheads for Dummies":

Most of you people wouldnt no the first thing about what being a
SKINHEAD is! To blind to see,to dumb to ask & to quick to
judge,skinheads & those who are like minded are fighting for a white NZ
before the maoris have there way,so maybe you should do abit more home
work on things before you judge!!As with KYLE CHAPMEN,hes done great
things for this country & is a good mate of mine there for you should
be kissing his ass in stead of bagging him for being proud to make a
stand!!! 14

Ends

Posted by Frankie 88 to Gman inc. at 9:36 AM, June 21, 2009 

Time for the Gnats to Sound Off like they've got a Pair...

You spend 9 long, cold years in opposition watching the most left-win government in history systematically over-turn 15 years of progress. You're all for tax cuts. You're all for liberty, and personal responsibility. The propaganda of your own party claims that your party "(was) founded on principles of individual responsibility, private enterprise, and reward for individual effort."

So when you get into power you're going to hit the ground running right? You're going to find places where liberty is being encroached upon and breath some freedom into it. You're going to realise that New Zealand has very few natural advantages and that high tax and regulation are even more dangerous to us than anywhere else in the world, right?

...or you could just pretty much hold water and pretty much do what the last lot did.

That's the story of the National Party of New Zealand. Such bright promises, such dismal results. National in the 1950s were going to roll back the massive expansion of the state of the 1st Labour government, but they never quite got round to it. Then they were going to reverse the 'war-on-poverty' inspired state expansion. The result: massive tax increases, enourmous state controls and protectionism in the 1970s and early 1980s. Then when they finally got a finane minister who believed the rhetoric they couldn't get rid of her fast enough.

ahh Bill Birch. Remember him? go read the 1995 budget he delivered. The gist of it is thus:
-we are doing really well
-things are going well with the economy,
-we are going to run a massive surplus
-because of this we are cancelling tax cuts because now is not the right time.

Compare that to this year's version:
-we are doing really bad
-things are going crappy with the economy,
-we are going to run a massive deficit
-because of this we are cancelling tax cuts because now is not the right time

One really has to question the rhetoric of New Zealand's free enterprise party's mettle when they'll cancel tax cuts no matter what the climate.

You see, National are not a free eneterprise party, they are a Keynesian Party. Their cheerleaders will hold up the fine print about the tax cuts, but the fact is that they made a decision that government spending is better at stimulating the economy than households and free enterprises. That is implicit in everything they have done on the economy since taking office.

Let's look at a case in point from today's paper, under the heading: "558 Ministry of Social Development jobs go". At last I thought, the private sector is having to lay off jobs, now at last we're seeing some belt tightening from the bureaucracy.

But No!! Wait a minute!! read the next few lines:
" All up, 558 jobs would be disestablished but a further 335 new roles had been created. As well, the ministry already had some vacancies it hoped affected staff would fill."

So in fact, of those 558 getting axed, 335 aren't get axed at all, they'll get a new job title, and the rest of them will be rehired anyway. The only thing that will leave MSD is going to be the old business cards, which will need to be reprinted.

This is a "win-win" in management bullshit-speak. The government gets to claim that it is trimming fat and the fat gets to stay.

"We are focusing on moving our people into roles in the ministry that will achieve our overall goal of boosting the frontline and streamlining our operations," Mr Hughes said (out of his arse) today. Translation: we are going to send this lot on a team building exercise, where they'll draw up a bunch of charts and then get pissed.

So much for "taking the hard decisions" John Key promised before the election. When the private sector cuts jobs, they don't rehire them the same day, they are gone.

OK, so let's take a look at a matter of principle, a subject in which the Nats can use their "freedom-mind set" to reason from first principle, with very little political consequences. Why should students be forced to fund students' associations, and compulsorily join them?

Where is the outrage? where is the action? What are they afraid of? upsetting a few larvae-wannabesomeday left wing politicians? the silence is deafening.

Like a lot of things, National are MIA on this issue.

Plus ca change...

Gman is back...

This is to let you know that the Gman is back. I've got 2 weeks off and I've decided that I'm going to be making a comeback.

That's right, the nastiest, most venal bastard in the NZ Blogosphere is back.

I'm not beholden to any political party--I'll call it as I see it. Green, Blue (choke) Red, Yellow you'll all get it. I'm not interested in cutting and pasting press releases and newspapers. I'm not interested in towing any party line. I'm interested in insight and analysis.

The goal is for 2 posts a day--one being a serious analysis.

So sound the alarm. Blow the shofar and let's get down to it.

The Great Bushfire Swindle

Don't know if you can read this facebook thread but it's a few comments between co-blogger Liz and a couple of her mates and my reply.

What do you think of a caretaker who is so bad at their job that their property doesn't just break down, it actually goes unattended to the point that it catches on fire and kills people?

What do you call someone so ignorant of their echosystem that they act with surprise and shock during an annual bushfire season that has been striking every season for as many million years as gum trees have existed? Just like they did last year, and just as they will do next year.

While Rudd and Brumby and the corrupt rackets they represent go unblamed for doing this millions of dollars are flying around. Firemen are funded to do work that should not exist, charities and funds are offered by well meaning ignorants who subsidise this status quo. The media feed off the human damage like vultures, never looking at the big picture.

Same thing as in California, so their fire pilots head our way for the season to cash-in. Then they'll fly north for the winter and wait until the American summer when the 'tragedy of commons' Schwarzenegger fires start again just as they also always do.

Don't be a sucker and buy into this. Lighting bushfires at a time like that is like shaking a tree during an earthquake but blaming scapgoat arsonists is the only explaination possible to those afflicted with statism who therefore cannot see what's really going on with the great global bushfires swindle.

Eight for '08

Calendrical rituals are just about as silly as any other but I do have a few I've made my own, such as putting 2008 to bed and getting into a new year's mindset.

I've done a fair bit of that on Silent Running just now, here's the rest of it as I check over the results of my eight goals in the Eight for '08 meme from Janurary...


1. Let Canterbury University be as awesome

Yes, it's much the same as ever it was. Doesn't seem so impressive and lofty as it did before I left. But I have grown up a bit. Most importantly, the good lecturers I remembered and wanted were still there and still have what I want.


2. Don’t lets go over-the-top over the demise of Sir Edmund Hillary.

Gladly, that didn't happen. The media-generated interest in deifying an old socialist mountain climber blew itself out.


3. I will meet Ruth Richardson this year and have a good talk to her.

Managed that earlier in the year and expected to do it again too. Should have known she wouldn't be idle, nor an imposing presence. Keeping very busy as a corporate advisor and, of course, has a friendly face as well as, I'm sure, a sharp and demanding one for those who work for and with her. Nolonger I do look to Ruth Richardson, nor Sir Roger Douglas, to be examples of freedom's revolution. I don't want to see another one of them and don't respect them in the same way as I did at the start of the year.


4. I will put RickHQ back together

Managed that early in the year. I've got a great place in central Christchurch, close to everything. Only problem is my girlfriend lives miles away so I'm not here all that much right now.


5. Lets have an early election

Nope, that one didn't hurry along. Wondered a couple of times if it were some mad plan to keep university students under examination from being involved. But these days I don't mind so much because I don't think politics and their results are nearly as important.


6. Like Cr Aaron, let me conduct practical inquiries into the eventualities of meiosis.

Aaron has recently blogged about relaxing at the beach with his kids. I don't have any children of my own on the way but practical inquiries are exactly the state I aspired to, and then some.


7. Let me produce an animated film and a political podcast for this, the election year.


That's the only one I didn't manage to do. Never got any animation done, and only very nearly missed out on starting an ACT podcast project at university that we put off until next year.

8. Let me get well stuck in to Total Freedom, which the author has kindly sent to me.


Hah. I've been working on its content but still not finished the book. I can achive this goal by doing it today, getting stuck in to finding out just how deep the rabbit hole of Objectivism goes into informing the choices I can make about my life. Already blown my mind, especially in the latter half of the year. And I've blogged little but not kept it to myself, as Liz knows.

The Seven Things Meme

I can't be bothered entertaining your brains with my thoughts, so I've decided to be a skive and finally respond to the seven memes thing.

1) I play a mean cello and bass guitar at the moment I'm playing a Gibson EB-3, semi customised with anchored bridge, better active electronics and extended neck. I love the sound that Gibsons make-- I believe there is a "Gibson sound". While I don't gig anymore I do jam and I do find that practising helps me relax and exercise my right brain.

2) When I was 4 I nearly died from an illness. My parents were told that I was going to die. Shows what doctors know.

3) I have seen the Rolling Stones live on 18 different occasions--they got worse everytime. I have never seen Bob Dylan live, nor the Who.

4) Even though my parents insisted on sending me to religious schools I have been an atheist since I was 7. I remember the exact moment that I became one. I had watched a documentary on the Jonestown massacre the night before and as part of my instruction we were required to do a fun fill-in-the-blanks with th names of people from the bible. I put two and two together and said to myself: "you know what, this is just brainwashing, I don't believe any of this, this is all lies." That moment is seared into my memory.

5) I avoid watching TV--I can't remember the last time I bothered to watch network TV. I don't think I'm any worse off for not wasting my time guffing like a moron at the boob-tube.

6) I have written speeches professionally. I don't do it now though. I have actually written opposing speeches for both sides of the House--on the same debate.

7) I normally support England, in all things except Rugby and League. I cannot stand English rugby, English Rugby players.

Could Watch, Couldn't Listen

I tuned into the LA Galaxy - Oceania game on the weekend, AKA the Beckham game. Had to change station. I actually didn't mind the editing policy of cutting to the has-been-never-was Beckham between cutting to shots of his (mostly females) fans. Beckham has done a great service to men's hairdressing over the years.

What really got me was the inane commentary. Here's a snippet of what you were expected to put up with for 90 minutes (plus stoppage):

" ...and the ball goes near David Beckham...Beckham dosn't touch it...the ball is with someone who isn't Beckham...passes it to another player, and again another player passes it, the crowd are loving this, they're in beckham heaven so to speak...now one of the goalies has it...Beckham is miraculously near halfway, how did he get there? Such brilliance.

Expert commentator: Well that just shows the guy's class--how did he know that when the goal keeper kicks it it might come down near halfway? amazing, staggering class and skills there by Beckham, world class class there from such a classy act.

...Well the goalie hasn't kicked it, he's played it short toa defender, who isn't David Beckham...to another player, passes, passes again, another player who had it before has it, Beckham is on the circle now...pass again, another pass...passes it to DAVID BECKHAM!!! BECKHAM HAS TO BALL!!!! WHAT'S HE GOING TO DO? HE DRIBBLES! he gets tackled and the ball is out!!!! BECKHAM LOST THE BALL CAN YOU BELIEVE IT????

Expert Commentator: amazing class, no-one else in the world could lose a ball in such a classy manner, such class, I bet Posh is so proud...."

On and on and on it went like that. As I said I could only watch for 5 minutes before feeling nauseated, it was like listening to National Radio at a Labour Party conference.

Way too much information...

I've heard childbirth being described as "magical" and "spiritual" and also "like pooing a basketball", but one of my facebook friends just gae me way too much info.

Mnemonic Puzzle for You

Here's a neat trick--get someone to tell you their phone number and then just remember it without having to write it down.


Without looking looking at the answer, see if you can guess my phone number, using this little story:

I open a box with a key on the top. In side the box is a do nut, I pick it up using a glove and sit on a stool, in my other hand is the Beatles' Rubber Soul album. Suddenly I notice a cat run past very quickly, it is running away from a giant spider.



update: Ok a whole bunch of people have got it now, so here's another one.

THIS IS NOT A REAL NUMBER--I generated it using a random number generator.

I’m walking down wall street , I cross the crossing, when I get to the other side, I pull out a gun shoot Ronald Reagan, he falls into a bag of jellybabies.

any ideas? This one is much harder. hint: I'm a big fan of the Beatles and a bit of a Presidential boffin. Notice I use jelly babies and not jelly beans.

Answer number two 029 6964016





answer 1: 021 0536598

Labour Used Creative Accounting to Cook the PREFU

I'm finding this ACC blowout episode astounding. I would go so far as to say that if a company did this to their books before a share float (which is what an election essentially is), they would be in serious trouble and possibly facing charges.

Labour have effectively taken a page out of the Enron playbook--don't disclose any bad liabilities until after the bonuses have been paid.

If we take the best definition of 'creative accounting' that I know as Kamal Naser's :
"Creative accounting is the transformation of financial accounting figures from what they
actually are to what preparers desire by taking advantage of the existing rules and/or
ignoring some or all of them. " (Naser, K. (1993) Creative Financial Accounting: Its Nature and Use, Hemel Hempstead:Prentice Hall.)

Labour's best defence seems to be that while they knew about the blow-out, and then while they knew about the figures involved, a wording of the semantics in the regulations prevented them from releasing it through the proper channels.

They have clearly used the rules to present a flawed picture of the true nature of the accounts.

To me there are 4 questions which need to be answered:

--Did the outgoing government deliberately present a picture which did not represent a "true and accurate" picture of the accounts? Did they attempt to deliberately leave out pertinent information which could have led to an untrue estimation of the financial position of ACC and the government's financial position.

--Do the PREFU accounts violate the form-over-substance principle?

--Do the accounts themselves violate the technical requirements of the Public Finance Act, most notably section 26, by not listing a known liability, which has previously been listed in past Crown financial statements?

--Did Labour ministers deliberately hold back information from Treasury, and deliberately not take decisions in an effort to not have the liability reported in the PREFU?

My conclusion having read the available information, the statements and cross checked them with previous budget statements and the PFA is: yes, yes, maybe and yes.

Labour had a strong motivation to present a good face on things. What's more it seems that they choose to conceal a major liability, making the PREFU untrue and inaccurate. They did not disclose a liability and for that they have presented a false picture of the accounts.

Not declaring a likely shortfall of a liability is not in accordance with GAAP it is also not in keeping with the requirements of 26K of the PFA.

The documents released yesterday show that Labour ministers were aware of the shortfall at least in May; the amount of the shortfall and the required time for a pay-out on 30 June in an estimation by PWC. They then choose not to release it either to the public or the reporting agencies or act on it until after the cut-off from PREFU. The 30 June date is the key figure.

Labour's defense is odd: "Mr Parker said officials told ministers at the time it would be improper for the extra money to be authorised during the election campaign." ( from stuff ). This is not the point--the PFA requires that the PREFU show not just new spending but also a change in fiscal conditions:
"The fiscal forecasts contained in the economic and fiscal update prepared under section 26O must, for each of the 3 financial years to which they relate, include forecast financial statements...(and)(B) any other contingent liabilities (including any guarantees or indemnities given under any Act).." (PFA 26Q) .

Surely at the point that PWC had costed the shortfall on 30 June ( 3 1/2 months before the PREFU went to print) it had become a contingent liability, if not a liability proper. The threshold of PWC costings had been used before as a threshold to declare shortfalls, so why not in this case? Labour claim that they "had no obligation" to disclose the blow-out? Au contraire.

Even if we give Labour the benefit of the doubt on this and take them at their word that they had no obligation, surely to present a budget missing a $1billion liability does not reflect the substance of the budgetary condition.

David Parker's press release from Parker yesterday throws up a dirty great red herring: "...the then ACC Minister acted appropriately and in accordance with the constitutional procedures described."

Hmmm, what convention? the brush it under the carpet convention? Saying there is a convention doesn't make it so.

Labour's claim that they did not have to account for the shortfall because Cabinet ministers had not yet signed off a method of funding it yet simply do not hold water. The contention that they should not have disclosed it because it was close to an election seems odd--Labour are making this out to be some sort of established convention--it simply is not anything of the sort, if there is a contingent liability of 1 billion dollars then there is an urgent need to address it.

The fact that they didn't want headlines such as: "ACC budget $1billion blow-out" in the months leading up to the election is more likely motivation than the niceties of convention.

Labour then get REALLY desparate: (also from Stuff):

"There's some really alarmist language being used around this ... it's 6 percent of the ACC budget, it's been blown out of all proportion."

This is why more people with business experience need to be in Parliament. Imagine the uproar if a CFO declared a loss at a shareholder's meeting (previously undisclosed) of a quarter of a billion dollars this year, a billion over the next few years and then added: aww schucks it's only 6% of our budget!!

Amazingly, the first scandal after the election is a Labour one.

What I would do if I was...

I've been taking drugs today. I'm serious, I've had a killer migraine for the past three days and it looks like I might have some virus as well.

With that in mind, you'll understand my ability to cast aside any of my own normative political opinions and put on a Machiavellian hat to tell you what I'd do if I were each of the parties in Parliament right now.

Here's what I'd do if I were....

National
First things first: I'd make damn sure that I did what I said I was going to do before Christmas--change the parole laws and deliver tax cuts under extreme urgency. I would place all my effort onto this alone--screw having discussions and being cute. there can be no excuses whatsoever for not delivering on these things with no if or buts or maybes. This means done and dusted alpha to omega--no unfinished bits. The GG should have signed the laws before Christmas.

Thankfully it looks like they are going to do this. It is imperative that they not water down the proposals and don't let Labour bog things down. National must show that they will deliver and that they are in control. Any signs of weakness or self doubt now will be very bad.

They should make 2009 business year: no pointless inquiries, no stupid feel-good campaigns. This year they should write a heavy legislative schedule and stick to it religiously no matter what. The Opposition will never be so disorganised or ineffective as they will be for the next 12 months. When I say opposition I include the Press Gallery and the public service. The Nats should have at least 75-80% of their legislative programme for this term completed by the end of 2009. They should take a leaf out of the fourth Labour government's playbook from their first 18 months: it was the political equivalent of blitzkrieg: they had multiple legislation going as fast as possible. The GG should have sore wrists from signing by next Christmas.

Next, take your time hiring staff. It's better to have good staff later than crappy staff quickly. There are capable temps in the pool.

If in doubt, breath through your nose. I was listening to Paula Bennett the other day on Morning Report--it was obvious that now that she's a minister she felt obligated to say something, anything rather than nothing. This is a mistake for a new minister. Don't put out a press release, don't do anything of note unless it's actually on message and is part of the agenda. You don't have to say anything just because a journo wants some copy.

Sack the Labour flunkies in the bureaucracy management. Think of this as a wholly new administration . I've said this before: unless the Nats can take control over the bureaucracy then they will lose the next election.

Ignore the Greens completely and don't engage Labour unless absolutely necessary. This is hard to do--if a sand fly bites you, you'll feel the need to swat it and scrath. Don't fall for the trap. No Nat MP should respond in any way whatsoever to anything that the Greens say or do.

The same goes, to a lesser extent, for Labour. Don't feel obliged to respond to anything Labour does. the only way that Labour can gain traction in the first 12 months is if the Nats give it to them by engaging them. This applies at all levels--don't respond to their campaigns and in Question Time give the shortest answer possible. This was Winston's downfall--towards the end there he felt obliged to swing at anything and everything instead of watching it through to the keeper.

On the electoral front: The nats main job over the next three years will be keeping those marginal voters who switched from Labour. This group is mainly male and urban, but it is the geography which the nats should concentrate on. They should take a page from Nixon's "southern strategy" by actively engaging voters in Labour-leaning electorates outside of election time. the Nats should hit them early and often and not wait. The Nats now have a funding advantage and they should exploit that.

Labour
First things first: get rid of Mike Williams, asap. I find it amazing that he's still there.

Second: get rid of Cullen and Clark. I don't buy this rubbish about needing experience--they will serve no purpose.

Third push aside the following deadwood:
Mahuta, Horomia, Hodgson, Hawkins, Robertson, Laban, Dyson and Dalziel

Horomia to me exemplifies everything that is wrong with the old Labour: disgustingly fat, inarticulate, thick but placated because of his skin colour and union links. I've met him a couple of times: talking to him is like talking to a four year old, you have to dumb down everything you say and put things into little words. I said before the election that National should just get a videoclip of Horomia during QT and use it as one of their own ads.

The names above will not contribute anything whatsoever now that they are in opposition.

Labour should concentrate on rebuilding their base and their caucus, rather than worrying about National over the next 12 months.

ACT

ACT have the hardest job in Parliament. Look at the history of minor political parties in New Zealand under MMP--NZ First in 1996 and 2005, The Alliance and United Future have all been taken to the cleaners.

ACT should therefore set themselves up as the oppoisition inside government--they should seek opportunities to assert their independence as often as possible and use every chance to act as the Nats' conscience.

Their backbenchers should not sit quietly by, they should pick their fights and go for it.

Maori
This is a tough one. The Maori Party needs to justify going with the Nats, otherwise they'll get a nasty shock in 3 years' time from a constituency which overwhelmingly voted Labour with their list vote. Maybe my best advice is to follow the advice I just gave ACT.

The main thing they need to remember is not to scatter their message--they should also ignore the Greens (who are going after the same voter block) but should choose their fights now and single mindedly go after them, ignoring sideshows and the urge to be all things to all Maori.

Only 55% of Maori bothered voting in the election. I find this interesting and so should the Maori party--you have to actively choose to go on the Maori roll, meaning that it must mean something to you, but then you don't bother voting? There's votes there if the Maori Party can get them out.

United
Peter Dunne should use the limos as much as possible, get flown around the country and live it up. I think he's gone in 2011, even if he schoozes Uhariu.

Greens
The Greens are by far the most smug party in Parliament. They cannot be happy with what they got on election night. My advice to them would be to go after the Maori party, not to try to have a finger in each pie and just push the same messages.

They also want to attack Labour--otherwise they risk getting cleaned up in the next election.

Jim Anderton
Jim should buy a rocking chair, a blanket and reminisce the old days.

Just Two Questions for Today

Today I'm at home in bed, feeling really rotten--head swells, vomiting the the whole 9 effing yards...so I've just got two questions....

1. Does Matthew Ridge still think that the Kiwis should get rid of Wayne Bennett, or should he fuck off back to his coke-head, girlfriend beating mates?

2. Is Paula Bennett the first minister to be captured? memo to Paula: you were put there to sort out a blooted bureaucracy, not to "start a national debate" on when mothers should return to work.

updating the blog

I'm gunna b updating the blog this week--any new links you reckon i shd be adding leave a comment

Just One Question.......

Today I've only got 1 random impertinent question for you:


--Remember the moans that came out of National when Labour's ministerial count passed 20 for the first time? Why are those same guys now happy that there are now 28 (twenty fucking eight!!!) ministers???????

Good result all around tonight

Congratulations to Act for getting 5 MPs in parliament and running a great campaign.
Congratulations to John Key for being voted in as Prime Minister of the country.
Congratulations to Peter Dunne for winning back his seat.

But the best news of all, Helen Clark's concession speech in which she announced that she would be stepping down as leader of the Labour Party.

I can't wait for the headlines in the morning, but most importantly I can't wait for a change in policy and am so glad that Act will be part of the new Government.

Nats Win in a Canter

Nats win

ACT does better than many thought, Roger Douglas scares the horses

Pacific party, Kiwi Party, Family Party non-existant

Maori Party's best candidate doesn't get in

Peter Dunne loses his colleagues, arsehole still happy

You won't have Winston to kick around anymore

Greens talk themselves up and once again fail to get the vote out on election day

New Zealand has peaceful transfer of power, no shots fired

Don't Vote

Right about now's when you get all the do-gooders telling you how important it is to vote, how it's important to exercise your right, that you can't complain if you don't vote blah blah blah.

Not me.

If you haven't worked out whose name to put your tick next to yet then obviously you are a retard and will be doing us a favour by not voting.

The following people should not be voting:
-women
-people who don't own property
-homosexuals
-gypsies
-Jews

If you can't work out that people suffered and lost blood so that you could vote then you shouldn't be trusted to decide who should make the tea, let alone who should run the government. Why don't you just go back to bed and we'll tell you who won on Monday.

Closing Addresses

I just finished watching the closing addresses on TV, a whole series of commercials paid for by you and me, broadcast on the TV station that we pay for, featuring people we pay telling us why they are best qualified to spend our money.

They are important because the last ads are the means that literally thousands of people use to make up their mind--in a campaign you ignore them at your peril.

I'm going to suppress my rage for a few minutes and sum up the sum ups.

National
Quite well produced, no negative messages, was a quite effective and simple summary and plea for your vote. Didn't mention Labour much (that I can remember). Well crafted, almost convinced me that it wasn't phony. It reminded me of the type of commercial you would see in an American campaign actually. They were able to articulate their policies quite well.

Acid test: would an undecided voter be more or less likely to vote National? probably more--it addressed any residual questions that a voter might have about putting a guy who's been in Parliament 10 minutes into Government House.

Interestingly, did not feature or even mention any other National MPs 8/10

Labour
Labour's ad was a microcosm of their campaign--bitter, negative and insincere. Helen Clark badly reading a teleprompter and lecturing me about trust and honour? piss off.

I don't quite understand Labour's strategy this campaign. Very early in the campaign they decided that Clark herself was their biggest asset, so they pushed her face into our skulls at every opportunity. I don't know if that was the right tactic.

Their thinking seems to be: -we're unpopular, people see us as arrogant and tired? the solution? get Helen to earnestly talk to them and try to make John Key out to be the bogeyman. The polls haven't opened, but I don't think it has worked.

Acid test: Would an undecided voter be more or less likely to vote Labour? No. I would have responded to a more positive message, and an admiussion that they've made mistakes but young growth is coming through. The scare tactics and the "don't change horse in mid-stream" line just doesn't have the impact it might have. An ok, but surprsingly amateur, ad that did the bare minimum it needed. Labour needed more than that, so this ad earned a fail mark. 4/10.

Maori Party
I liked this ad--it had a nice tone. it did what it was required to do--firm up the base, don't scare the horses and possibly extend into the non-Maori vote. I don't think they'll ever do that, but it was a good ad.

Best moment: the white guy saying: "you don't have to be a Maori to vote for the Maori Party!" in a thick pakeha accent. 7/10.

Acid test: maybe.

New Zealand First
Winston seemed to be giving a press conference to smart-alec journalists. Why relitigate?

Hmmm I never know what to make of those ads. His aim was to firm up his traditional voters, and I think he actually suceeded. I give it a 6/10.

Acid test: would someone who had voted for Winston in the past vote for him now? a few, but the damage is done I'm afraid.

Greens
If there's one thing I'm most looking for to is that after today I'll never have to look at that malnourished fucking kid standing in front of Mt Rangitoto again. Enough already! Extreme slow motion shots of kids gawking at the camera with pathetic, miserable looks on their dials? Enough!!!

Boring ad which did what it need to do to solidify their base, and repeated their key messages, which they have hammered over and over during the campaign. An ad which just passes. 5/10.

Acid test: I don't think anyone who was considering votng Green would have said to themselves: "that's it!! they get my vote".

JimAndertonisgreat Party
Hasn't Jim put on a lot of weight?
Isn't he a pompous arrogant cunt?
Isn't his hair-piece terrible?
What the fuck is wrong with the people of Wigram? Why do they return him to Parliament?

Highpoint: the cued up shot of two miserable oldies shivering under a blanket.
Acid test--why bother?

United

As bad as Jim's hairpiece may be these days it doesn't win the prize for worst hair-cut. Peter Dunne these days looks like he snuck into the Dracula museum and stole Bella Lagosi's wig.

This ad was a talking head piece of Peter Dunne spouting out cliched shit that someone has obviously cut and pasted from the internet.

What I said about the people of Wigram applies double to the Ohariu-Belmont.

Acid test: when will Dunne fall into a tankard of acid?

ACT

This was, by far, the weirdest ad. I think it must have been made by the same people who make children's television programmes. It was like watching the Stu show from the 1970s: Rodney shouts at the camera, non-linear editing, Rodney walks around shaking hands, unconventional camera shots show Rodney fucking around with terrified members of the public, Rodney drives past in the Rodney-mobile really fast shouting, Rodney tells jokes and Rodney laughs. Rodney dances with some guy with look hair inexplicably shouting: "You ARE a Labour supporter...You ARE a Labour supporter!!" (perhaps you had to be there). I was waiting for Rodney to give the thumbs up and shout "Giz a go!!!". Whatever Rodney's on I want some.

Towards the end of the Rodney-show some policy was mentioned as an after-thought.

Underneath all of this was a serious message: "National are going to win, since they are going to win you should give ACT your vote and we'll make sure there's real change and now more of the same, We'll keep the Nats honest"

I typed that in about 9-10 seconds. Rodney wasted 5 minutes and sort of got around to saying it. 5/10.

Acid Test: Hmmm this is tough to answer, tactical Natinal voters are pretty smart and would have already worked it out for themselves.

Guy Fawkes--Christmas for Morons

Just like Lotto is idiot tax, Guy Fawkes night is now christmas for morons.

I think it's no coincidence that the typical Guy Fawkes buffoon who would pay over their hard earned cash to get some primordal yuck yucks out of a 1 second pathetic bang is also:

--unemployed or minimum wage
--listens to to hip-hop "music"
--votes Labour

Simple minds, simple pleasures. I drove past Petone foreshore last night, someone had cloned Beavis and Butthead a few thousand times, and got the 1000 first stupid Hutt girls together in one place and got them drunk and given them low powered explosives for amusment, in the hope that some of them might be eliminated from the genepool.

The vacant looks on the faces with open jaws makes me think that some of them had just discovered fire. Watch out! they're going to discover their opposable thumb soon and then we're all in trouble.

And this stuff isn't cheap either apparently. There's all sorts of taxes and tariffs and Warehouse profit margins, and apparently they are getting less and less explosive every year, but still they buy them for a split second of fun.

A bizzarre yearly ritual, which has no meaning whatsoever to New Zealand, the neanderthals love it. What sort of utility function would choose to stand out on a cold, windy night, throwing pathetic bangers in the air just to hear the loud noise--and be willing to PAY a small fortune for the privledge?

Not me.

Race Relations - RE: President Obama

Yesterday was the greatest day in American history because the people of America voted for true racial equality between the African Americans and the white Americans.

Congratulations to Obama.

Three questions:
1- Do you think Obama would have gone on to be so successful had he grown up in NZ or do you think he would have ended up on drugs?
2 - How many Maori families out there do you think said to their children last night, "that could be you one day"?
3 - Do you think Maori and Pakeha will unite in NZ to the point that we will have a Maori Prime Minister one day?

I think the Americans should be very proud that despite all their history they managed to put it behind them, and vote for a change for the better. Palestine/Israel and us, here in NZ could learn a thing or two from America.

Martin Luther King would be very proud that his "...dream..." came true today. We all should be regardless of our political affiliations.