Ha ha Labour

[SPORK]

fark me, 40k a year!

that's like, 10 times more than I currently earn!

[kro]

No disrespect to those whom have a specific political standpoint, and reasons for it, but isn't they existing governing party always under fire for something?.

At least I have some faith in the election system in NZ, I would not vote if I lived in the US, it would be a pointless task.

[Skyryder]

You are absolutely right. Elections in NZ are never won. They are lost.

I tend to agree that elections in New Zealand are lost, but in politics there are always exceptions.

Norm Kirk won the 1972 election for Labour.

The Labour Party under Norm Kirk inflicted a severe defeat on the National Party in the 1972 election. Their "Time for Change" campaign and Norm Kirk's television persona were too much for the more retiring Marshall. National was left with 32 seats out of 87. Among the new MPs elected that year was Jim Bolger.

And National won from Bill Rowling under Muldoon. Think that was about the last time.

Skyryder

[oldrider]

I tend to agree that elections in New Zealand are lost, but in politics there are always exceptions.

Norm Kirk won the 1972 election for Labour.

The Labour Party under Norm Kirk inflicted a severe defeat on the National Party in the 1972 election. Their "Time for Change" campaign and Norm Kirk's television persona were too much for the more retiring Marshall. National was left with 32 seats out of 87. Among the new MPs elected that year was Jim Bolger.

And National won from Bill Rowling under Muldoon. Think that was about the last time.

Skyryder

You must have been at a different ball game to me Skyryder, neither of those two elections were "won" by anyone, least of all the voting public of New Zealand!
Both National and Labour were pathetic (more so than usual) at that time.

Only the politically blind hopelessly attached supporters of each party would think otherwise.

That was proved in 1984 when the two parties swapped doctrines and their blind voters still followed and supported them without noticing the difference!!

Even Micky Savage's Labour only got in because the incumbents were voted "out!"

I have no party association or loyalty to cloud my view, I am only loyal to "New Zealand." John.

[Winston001]

Did you hear this morning, that there are approx 800 zimbabwean overstayers of which there are expected a fair few of those are HIV positive carriers.
The labour government announced that if they come forward, they will be accepted and permitted NZ residency and....... Treated for the HIV virus???

What the Fark?????

Yet, The Govt has refused to treat the NZ woman with Breast Cancer by simply supplying the herceptin drug. A drug that Australia & UK are supplying with a wee note attached, saying that their woman are worth more than NZ woman!

I'm sympathetic to your views but must disagree. I should also say that I have had 3 relatives die of breast cancer, and my wife is in the high risk zone.

Nevertheless, NZ spends about $27 million/pa on specialist cancer drugs. Herceptin would cost $25 million - it is frigging expensive. What do you say to the few thousand people whose drugs are taken away if Herceptin is funded instead?

The AIDS treatment for a few of the immigrants may cost $1.2 million.

[Winston001]

I'm also disgusted at this Labour Government. If there was one thing I used to grudgingly grant Helen Clark, it was her integrity. But she has lost it - keep in government no matter what the cost.

Paintergate was a media beat-up. There was a technical fraud, but all she did was sign a painting for a charity auction. No judge would convict anyone for that.

But the speeding fiasco and the cops being hung out to dry was the last straw. The PM should have publicly stated that she was running late and it was her wish to get to the destination - and thus she accepted responsibility for the high speed convoy. People would have accepted that.

But no - she remained silent. What a pitiable excuse for a leader.

As for Phillip Field? What a prat. He's history.

[Indoo]

But the speeding fiasco and the cops being hung out to dry was the last straw. The PM should have publicly stated that she was running late and it was her wish to get to the destination - and thus she accepted responsibility for the high speed convoy. People would have accepted that.

But no - she remained silent. What a pitiable excuse for a leader.

It just shows how corrupt she really is, given the governments stance against those evil speeders. An ordinary citizen doing 111kmh can expect a ticket regardless of what reason they have based on her governments orders. Yet however its acceptable for her to travel at 180kmh because she "might" be late and miss getting her face on T.V at an oh so important Rugby game.
It's a shame she didn't face aiding and abetting on dangerous driving charges.

The more sucessful you are, the more jobs you create and contribute to the economy, the more you are penalised and made to pay for that terrible mistake. It's a great condolence to know that for every extra hour you slave, a leeching beneficiary gets to buy an extra packet of smokes while they seek to have a sixth child (despite the fact they aren't competent to care for one) so they can earn even more money for breeding more failures.

National and Labour are essentially one and the same, if you want to make a difference, vote Qantas.

[oldrider]

I'm also disgusted at this Labour Government. If there was one thing I used to grudgingly grant Helen Clark, it was her integrity. But she has lost it - keep in government no matter what the cost.

Paintergate was a media beat-up. There was a technical fraud, but all she did was sign a painting for a charity auction. No judge would convict anyone for that.

But the speeding fiasco and the cops being hung out to dry was the last straw. The PM should have publicly stated that she was running late and it was her wish to get to the destination - and thus she accepted responsibility for the high speed convoy. People would have accepted that.

But no - she remained silent. What a pitiable excuse for a leader.

As for Phillip Field? What a prat. He's history.

Winston001, I concur regarding your disgust at this current labour government's performance and behaviour but Helen Clark and "integrity", no way!
I have met and worked with Helen Clark when she was still in opposition and formed my opinion then.
She has done nothing but fuel that opinion even deeper since she as been in office.
I am simply amazed at how long it is taking for the voting public to see through her thinly veiled disguise, of caring for anyone or anything, except to hold office and wield power!
Government at any cost (usually someone else's) is her motto, it is clearly there for all to see, unless possessed of "blind" loyalty!
We, (the voting public) get the government that we deserve, the electorate is so dumbed down to accepting the unacceptable and seem to lack the ability to think for themselves.
New Zealanders treat politics like some sports fixture and back their party like a sports club, thinking that they must support their chosen colours come what may, what brainless bullshit!
I am not affiliated to any political party and enjoy the freedom to choose from the motley offerings at election time and support those that will return the best within the time period given, (three years) while keeping an eye towards how it will effect the future of New Zealand overall.
I do not entirely blame the politicians, they simply dance to the tune that we the voters play for them.
Wake up new Zealand and change the tune before the freedoms we have enjoyed in the past are eroded beyond the point of return.
Phillip Field is just an expendable diversionary circus, hung out to dry to take the attention away from the fact that Labour stole taxpayers money to get themselves elected.
Another example of, Power at any cost, once again you and me, "the taxpayers" and now they will pass legislation making it legal!
How much evidence do you need New Zealand? John.

[Skyryder]

You must have been at a different ball game to me Skyryder, neither of those two elections were "won" by anyone, least of all the voting public of New Zealand!
Both National and Labour were pathetic (more so than usual) at that time.

Only the politically blind hopelessly attached supporters of each party would think otherwise.

That was proved in 1984 when the two parties swapped doctrines and their blind voters still followed and supported them without noticing the difference!!

Even Micky Savage's Labour only got in because the incumbents were voted "out!"

I have no party association or loyalty to cloud my view, I am only loyal to "New Zealand." John.

The Labour Party under Norm Kirk inflicted a severe defeat on the National Party in the 1972 election. Their "Time for Change" campaign and Norm Kirk's television persona were too much for the more retiring Marshall. National was left with 32 seats out of 87.

The above was taken from http://www.national.org.nz/About/history.aspx This is a National site.

Nope same ball game OR. ……………….’inflicted a severe defeat on the National Party is indicative that Labour won as against National lost. With National only winning 32 seats out of 87 further confirms my interpretation.

Norm Kirk was the dominating figure in NZ politics. He ‘won’ the vote for Labour on his personality. The same can be said for Muldoon when he defeated Bill Rowling on his personality alone. Without these two dominant figure in NZ politics I would tend to agree with you but strong personalities tend to gather much larger support than would be other wise be the case. This was demonstrated by Jim Anderton with the eventual rise of the Alliance. It’s fall is another matter of which is not the subject of this thread.

I do on occasions move in political circles and at times this subject of winning or losing election arises in the course of political conversations. Contrary to your assertions that (National was voted out in 72) this is not the case. I can assure you that this is indeed the concensus of opinion in political circles of various persuasions and of independent pundents also.

I will however concede that both yourself and Finn are correct in that in the majority of occasions governments are voted out as against ‘in.’ But in 72................ history says you are wrong. and kisses bro


Skyryder

[oldrider]

Skyryder, I am not attacking you, just expressing the game the way I saw it and many others outside of the political affiliates saw it as I did.
So many men, so many opinions, you might well say, well, I have shared mine with the forum, they will make up their own minds.
The Labour party was my father's party of choice and I grew up hearing about their greatness and caring policies for the working class.
That may well have been true in their first term of office with the introduction of the welfare state but that had a limited lifespan.
The welfare state was rendered ineffective by compounding debt, corruption and system abuse! Just as we have it today.
For me they (Labour) have been the singular most disappointing political realisation as I grew to understand the difference between what they say they stand for and what they actually do, when they get into power.
The second disappointment is the quality of the candidates that they seem to attract and offer to the public for them to blindly support into office, even after they have shown themselves to be clearly unworthy!
I am not a National party supporter, although I did give them both of my votes last election, something I am not totally comfortable with but they were the best choice offering of the two main evils at that time.
Once again I may be in disagreement with your views but I am simply expressing mine, it is how I see the game from where I am usually sitting. John.

[scumdog]

IThe more sucessful you are, the more jobs you create and contribute to the economy, the more you are penalised and made to pay for that terrible mistake. It's a great condolence to know that for every extra hour you slave, a leeching beneficiary gets to buy an extra packet of smokes while they seek to have a sixth child (despite the fact they aren't competent to care for one) so they can earn even more money for breeding more failures.

So, so true, NZ needs to treat a hell of a lot of its 'leeches' with a big dose of 'get-hard', - paying only those physically/mentally incapable of work the benefit (and there will STILL be frauds and leeches - but not as bad).

I would rather my taxes went to hospitals, schools etc than to pay some lazy-arsed sit-around whose biggest effort is to visit the tinny-house and who feels it's his/her 'right' to live like this.

Parasites are normally not wanted in any society - but we PAY them to exist in our society, WTF??

[dawnrazor]

I've always thought its was very progressive of the NZ people to elect a transgender head of state

[Motu]

That may well have been true in their first term of office with the introduction of the welfare state but that had a limited lifespan.
The welfare state was rendered ineffective by compounding debt, corruption and system abuse! John.

Poor Norm Kirk,one our best leaders,but he never had the time to prove himself.His legacy is ACC,and he would be a sad man today to see what has happened to his dream.It was supposed to be self funding,not a fund to plunder....and he never gave a thought to the fact that not everyone was as hard working and honest as himself.Utopia's burst apart,the only stable government is a dictatotorship - look how long Castro has been in power.

[Skyryder]

Skyryder, I am not attacking you, just expressing the game the way I saw it and many others outside of the political affiliates saw it as I did.
So many men, so many opinions, you might well say, well, I have shared mine with the forum, they will make up their own minds.
The Labour party was my father's party of choice and I grew up hearing about their greatness and caring policies for the working class.
That may well have been true in their first term of office with the introduction of the welfare state but that had a limited lifespan.
The welfare state was rendered ineffective by compounding debt, corruption and system abuse! Just as we have it today.
For me they (Labour) have been the singular most disappointing political realisation as I grew to understand the difference between what they say they stand for and what they actually do, when they get into power.
The second disappointment is the quality of the candidates that they seem to attract and offer to the public for them to blindly support into office, even after they have shown themselves to be clearly unworthy!
I am not a National party supporter, although I did give them both of my votes last election, something I am not totally comfortable with but they were the best choice offering of the two main evils at that time.
Once again I may be in disagreement with your views but I am simply expressing mine, it is how I see the game from where I am usually sitting. John.

Never saw your post as an attack on me. Shit Or I never take any post as an attack period. I'm just a ing guy. Peace and harmony to all............red blue pinko's greenies tree huggers etc. that too.

Skyryder