those c-c-c-razy mmp parties…
are at it again.
This time with a Code of Conduct.
Highlights of the joint press conference included both Peter Dunne and Rodney Hide being grilled on whether they could dare to diss name calling when they have both been prominent proponents of ‘playing the ball rather than the gender neutral sportsperson.’ Hide reckoned he was the bad boy on his best behaviour, and Dunne pointed out that he’s already committed not to make [such a lot of] sport of slagging off the Greens this time round.
A letter has gone out to every MP asking them to sign up to the Code - will be interesting to see the response from the big guys….
…
Actually, no, not interesting, entirely predictable.
Bookmark to:
June 12th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
Interesting, you have a crack at Hide for playing the man not the ball yet you are more than happy to call those who you disagree with names such as “the smirking chimp”
So if I have this right the Greens are interested in stamping out name calling as long as the rules do not apply to the Green party.
I guess you will still allow blatant lies as well?
June 12th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
I referred to Bush as the “smirking chimp” - I don’t recall Frog ever using it, nor any Green MPs. I’m not a spokesperson for the Green Party and I’m certainly not an MP, so the code doesn’t apply to me anyway.
It’s not so much that I disagree with Bush that prompted me to use that term to describe him - just that I think he is arrogant and unintelligent (and corrupt, for that matter, which has nothing to do with smirking chimps).
June 12th, 2007 at 8:27 pm
Gerry Brownlee said: “We’re not some sort of banana republic, we don’t come to blows or anything like that.”
Actually, remember this story about Gerry Brownlee being ordered by the Court to pay damages for giving Neil Abel (now an Auckland City Councillor) the bash at a National Party conference a few years ago. Hardly surprising he won’t sign up!
June 12th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
and furthermore BB, frog doesn’t actually have a crack at Hide in this post, you really do read with tinted glasses eh? Or is that write with tinted pen? ever on the lookout for an opportunity to advance your agenda.
frog merely reports that the highlight of the press conference was when Hide and Dunne were asked by reporters whether they were being hypocritical given their past record.
June 12th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
# toad Says:
June 12th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
> It’s not so much that I disagree with Bush that prompted me to use that term to describe him - just that I think he is arrogant and unintelligent
If the chimp reference was intended as a metaphor, it seems a strange one to choose. For ‘arrogant and unintelligent’ I think a rhino would be a better metaphor.
At first glance it also appears to be an unjustified insult to chimps, but in fact George W Bush is a chimp, as are we all. Genetically, humans are more closely related to ordinary chimps than ordinary chimps are to pygmy chimps. As pygmy chimps are unquestionably chimps (after all, pygmy humans are as human as the rest of us), it follows that humans must be a kind of chimp.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
Big Bro
I am the one who refers to him as “The Smirking Chimp” but it is not original with me… I am pleased to reference a majority of my compatriots (consider his current approval ratings, could he become the first president in single digits? stay tuned…)
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/
It is … somewhat… larger than either Toad or Myself, this contempt we feel for the incompetent boob who has misled America with a majority of -50000 votes and who has cost her 2 world trade centers, the US Economy, the city of New Orleans, over 20,000 casualties of our own in 2 unnecessary wars and one unreal war, losing all 3 (on current form), accomplishing every goal set for him by Osama Bin Forgotten and uniting most of the world by dividing America. No BB, we don’t have MUCH reason to respect him and I for one have all those reasons and several more to despise and hate him, and his fellow-travellers, with every breath I take. You would do well to simply avoid bringing this up, we can likely find all manner of common ground in other areas, but in this I am not particularly reasonable any more.
Interestingly Bush is comparatively immune from the peril of impeachment because of the resulting appearance of a power grab and the divisive effect THAT might have. Cheney however, can and should go.
Sorry
BJ
June 12th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
Dear BB,
Talk about spinning the proverbial. Are you aware that there is a difference between the words “insightful” and “inciteful”? Your tendency for the latter is sickening.
In any event, you would appear to have a huge political chip on your shoulder. Why is there sooo much Green hatred? Did a bully trap you in the compost bin at school ? Or did your puppy get run over by a recycling truck?
There must be some pyscho-emotional anti-Green trigger to explain the torrents of inciteful bile that spew forth from thy keyboard …
June 12th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
I also tend to refer to the VP of the USA as Darth Cheney, or Deadeye Dick or Dr Strangelove…. by comparison the NZ politicians get a much easier ride.
respectfully
BJ
June 13th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
some greens could be interested in this ‘green’ news..
http://whoar.co.nz/2007/the-greens-ask-the-maori-party-for-talksand-ha ve-you-seen-the-new-metiria-turei/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
June 13th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Would questioning Taito be seen as a personal attack, or addressing the issue?
I’d argue National and Labour may have had differing opinions about that, at the time…
June 13th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
phil u
It will be National. The only question is whether they need the Greens at all.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
no peter..
i’m sorry to have to be the one to break this news to you..
but the role for national adfter the next election will be as a (possible) bargaining chip…
pure and simple..
lab/grns/maori party will be the ‘winnin’ combination..
tough..!..(i know..!..)
(should i shed some crocodile tears for you..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
June 13th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
BJ said: I also tend to refer to the VP of the USA as … Deadeye Dick
Are you talking the Deadeye Dick of Kurt Vonnegut or the Deadeye Dick of Lyon Sprague de Camp and Fletcher Pratt, BJ? If the latter, then I would have thought the name was more appropriate for Clinton than Cheney, although don’t want to go too far down that path or we’ll get BB started again.
But if the latter, it does raise the question of who is Mexican Pete. Bush, perhaps?
June 13th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Neither really - just referring to his callous and careless use of firearms, both his and all those at his command… I personally prefer “Darth Cheney” cause he does the mind control thing real well, you can hardly ever see his lips move when Bush is speaking.
respectfully
BJ
June 13th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Or indeed the Dick Deadeye of HMS Pinafore?
June 13th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
I doubt it.
I think if that did happen, MMP would be finished. The swing is away from the left - and not before time, too.
Landslide to National….
June 13th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
A code of conduct is a start but it should extend to:
Critical thinking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking.
We need a whole new culture.
We need to do away with rhetoric [smacking = bashing], spin and control (as in this example from Kiwi blog):
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/06/helengrad_extends_to_australia.html
jh
June 13th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
phil u Says:
June 13th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
some greens could be interested in this ‘green’ news..
http://whoar.co.nz/2007/the-greens-ask-the-maori-party-for-talksand-ha ve-you-seen-the-new-metiria-turei/
=====
There will inevitably be discussion on the meaning/ implications of who is/ isn’t tangata whenua , (and why), and the implications of the ratification of the Maori version of the Treaty.
jh
June 13th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Phil
The only chance the Greens have of being in power is if they take the seat offered to them by Neville Key.
I actually have grave concerns about the party making the 5% threshold, I hope they do but any ideas of another left wing coalition govt should be well and truly forgotten, it ain’t gonna happen.
June 13th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Stu
Did you know that I once voted Green?, I believe in many Green issues but I have a strong dislike of the hard left wing stance the party takes on social issues and the levels the party will sink to in their drive to control our families, the entire section 59 debate showed us just how may lies the Greens were prepared to tell in an effort to pass that sickening piece of social engineering.
I am also not that impressed with the ridiculous level of political correctness but in reality there are far more important issues to worry about than that.
Having said all that (and as I have said before on this site) if the Greens actually introduced a bill designed to outlaw battery hen farming and Pigs in crates you would have both of my votes at the next election….what a pity the party is more interested in pushing the climate change con.
June 13th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
PeterExitsLeft,
I can understand your dislike for Labour and its policies, but what I can’t understand is your faith in National as some sort of cure-all for the problems that this country faces. At the end of the day I don’t think they will be able to do anything different than Labour has. They may tinker with a few things here and there just to pretend that they’re actually doing something, but I doubt they’ll be able to produce any results superior to what Labour has.
June 13th, 2007 at 10:06 pm
One aspect of the section 59 debate that motivates opponents came up in conversation today with my old Uncle. He returned to NZ after living many years in the UK.. We were discussing Japan.. and “why is it people in Japan can live in apartments while those in the UK trash them?”.. He said something like.. there are limits and controls on what people can do.. here you can get away with anything….
Understanding the threads behind peoples motivations is better that name calling.. painting opponents black> “Sado Masochists” SB,… They want to beat children…” HC, …JF…
jh
June 13th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
On honesty/ standards I wonder how many Greens would agree with the extention of the word “violence” to include the occasional light smack?
jh
June 13th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
I’d actually favour a more radical party than National - but National should be capable of pulling further to the right. Less government, focus on growth, business, lowering taxes….
June 13th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
On the next election… it’s more than 2 weeks away, an eternity in politics and hard to predict but as others have had their go, my guesstimate is this.
With regrets to my fellow Greens I suspect that the visitor’s team here has at least part of the answer. The shift is currently “away from Labour” and some of that will benefit National. It will also benefit the other small parties including Greens. I think that as a result we will survive but a price.. for the only question at present is whether National will find enough support to govern without a partner. I do not think that they will, but they will not be likely to need or include Greens and Maori to get to a majority. There are other minor parties that are willing to compromise and at far lower prices.
I suggest preparing for the negotiations and preparing too for at least one more election cycle out of government.
respectfully
BJ
June 14th, 2007 at 7:07 am
some greens may be interested in this news..
http://whoar.co.nz/2007/legalise-medical-marijuana/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
June 14th, 2007 at 11:42 am
JH: oh fer gawds sake, get over it! Move on!
BB: if you genuinely hope that the Green Party get over the 5% threshold, why do you keep attacking us in this forum in such a repetitive, nasty, underhand, name-calling manner? Is this more evidence of your split personality?
June 14th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Big Bro
As you may or may not be aware, the Greens (notably Sue Kedgley) have several times put in the member’s ballot bills to ban battery hen farming and sow crates. What comes out is a lottery not under anyone’s control.
But, in a nutshell, the Greens have used the only means available to them to try and do exactly what you ask. You are welcome to check the records to verify this…..
Does this mean the Greens can count on your vote next election
Che
JGG
June 14th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
BB
Sue Kedgley has a private members bill in the ballot which aims to abolish battery cages and sow crates. I have no particular sympathy for National in general, but if they agree to abolishing these inhumane practices (and fast growing broiler chickens), then I would support a coalition deal with them, and may even vote for them with at least one of my votes.
June 14th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
I don’t know any Neville Key and just how did he offer us a seat? ?? ????