chatterbox: Even if she was upset by this, she needed to just say CONVINCINGLY ONCE, that she didn't like it and give him a look that conveys this.

Life's too short, she should be out finding a partner, hanging with friends and making life goals.

[Shayne] Currie said the “media/social storm … boils down to the initial approach to the restaurant owners [Jackie Grant and Scott Brown of the Hip Group, who Bailey claims put her in contact with Glucina] and their discussions with the writer [Glucina]”.

Currie acknowledged an initial misunderstanding between Glucina and Grant and Brown as to her intention with the interview, but said that “by late afternoon there was no doubt it was for the Herald”.

He said he was contacted by a public relations firm acting for Grant and Brown, who had concerns about Glucina’s “initial approach”, and that led him to speak to them himself.

“I was personally satisfied, at the conclusion of that call, that there had been no deliberate attempt to mislead them [the couple]. And that they had indeed agreed – all three of them [including Bailey] – to making a public statement and agreeing to a photograph (whether to the Herald, or media-wide).

Presso: Is that why nobody in cabinet has a pony tail.

They are all in a box under John's bed.

networkn:

billbennett: Geekzone has just illustrated what we've learnt about John Key over the past seven years:

 

 

1. A large number of New Zealanders hate the man, hate his politics, his image and everything. 
2. A similarly large number think he can't do anything wrong. 
3. Every time he does something stupid or immoral the people in group 1 hate him more than ever. 
4. Every time he does something stupid or immoral some of the people in group 2 dig deeper into their reservoir of giving him the benefit of the doubt.
5. A hardcore handful of the group 2 people might wish he'd go further and stop pussyfooting around. 
6. A few people in the middle drift from 1 to 2 or from 2 to 1 every so often. But for the most part views are entrenched and have been all along. 
7. We go on getting more and more polarised over this. 
8. That causes some people, mainly moderates to disengage from politics and civil society which in turn cranks up polarisation. Loop back to step 7. 
9. We may or may not look stupid overseas. People in group 1 worry about this, people in group 2 don't care or pretend it doesn't matter.
10. This will go on until either John Key does something so incredibly dumb there's a sizable defection from group 2 OR Key gets bored and leaves politics. 

 

I'd argue it's the same with whomever is in charge in almost every democratically elected country in the world.

Geektastic:

networkn:

billbennett: Geekzone has just illustrated what we've learnt about John Key over the past seven years:

1. A large number of New Zealanders hate the man, hate his politics, his image and everything. 


2. A similarly large number think he can't do anything wrong. 


3. Every time he does something stupid or immoral the people in group 1 hate him more than ever. 


4. Every time he does something stupid or immoral some of the people in group 2 dig deeper into their reservoir of giving him the benefit of the doubt.


5. A hardcore handful of the group 2 people might wish he'd go further and stop pussyfooting around. 


6. A few people in the middle drift from 1 to 2 or from 2 to 1 every so often. But for the most part views are entrenched and have been all along. 


7. We go on getting more and more polarised over this. 


8. That causes some people, mainly moderates to disengage from politics and civil society which in turn cranks up polarisation. Loop back to step 7. 


9. We may or may not look stupid overseas. People in group 1 worry about this, people in group 2 don't care or pretend it doesn't matter.


10. This will go on until either John Key does something so incredibly dumb there's a sizable defection from group 2 OR Key gets bored and leaves politics. 

I'd argue it's the same with whomever is in charge in almost every democratically elected country in the world.

He's not unlike Margaret Thatcher in his polarisation. IME it usually comes down to which side of the fence you sit on. If you make your own money and do not expect the government to do more than the minimum in your life, you tend to like people like this. If you expect the government to pay you various allowances and do everything for you, you tend to dislike people like this.

There are still people in the UK foaming at the mouth over the Poll Tax introduced by Mrs T for no reason other than the fact that it actually made people pay for local government on a per capita basis, so instead of one lot of rates covering a houseful of people who therefore got subsidised by all the houses with only one or two people in, all of a sudden they had to pay their fair share - something they seemed to find objectionable for reasons I never understood. That was in 1988 and they still bang on about it.

Geektastic:

He's not unlike Margaret Thatcher in his polarisation. IME it usually comes down to which side of the fence you sit on. If you make your own money and do not expect the government to do more than the minimum in your life, you tend to like people like this. If you expect the government to pay you various allowances and do everything for you, you tend to dislike people like this.

There are still people in the UK foaming at the mouth over the Poll Tax introduced by Mrs T for no reason other than the fact that it actually made people pay for local government on a per capita basis, so instead of one lot of rates covering a houseful of people who therefore got subsidised by all the houses with only one or two people in, all of a sudden they had to pay their fair share - something they seemed to find objectionable for reasons I never understood. That was in 1988 and they still bang on about it.

Geektastic:
If you make your own money and do not expect the government to do more than the minimum in your life, you tend to like people like this. If you expect the government to pay you various allowances and do everything for you, you tend to dislike people like this.

Geektastic:
He's not unlike Margaret Thatcher in his polarisation. IME it usually comes down to which side of the fence you sit on. If you make your own money and do not expect the government to do more than the minimum in your life, you tend to like people like this. If you expect the government to pay you various allowances and do everything for you, you tend to dislike people like this.

ajobbins: 
I've voted for National and JK before, and I wouldn't rule out voting for National again in the future - but not under John Key, and not with National's current direction. I'm not a blind follower of one ideology and have seen a steady decline through the 2nd and now 3rd term of the Key government in terms of doing what is best for the nation and increased pandering to the rich, big business and foreign nations (Particularly the US).

Lias:

ajobbins: 
I've voted for National and JK before, and I wouldn't rule out voting for National again in the future - but not under John Key, and not with National's current direction. I'm not a blind follower of one ideology and have seen a steady decline through the 2nd and now 3rd term of the Key government in terms of doing what is best for the nation and increased pandering to the rich, big business and foreign nations (Particularly the US).

Pretty much exactly the same here.

surfisup1000: Yes, but for whom would you vote? 

Conservatives are religious and colin craig is a bit odd, greens are absolute communists economically and the country would fail, act are impotent and a little bizarre under jamie whatshisface, labour have whacko ideas such as nationalising power generation and forcing you install low pressure shower heads.  As for nz first, I guess if you like horse racing then they might be for you but winnie is a liar and I don't think you can trust him on anything. 

Perhaps JK is the best of a bad bunch? Although , I've had enough of him, time for a fresh face but please not steven joyce!!! 

ajobbins:

surfisup1000: Yes, but for whom would you vote? 

Conservatives are religious and colin craig is a bit odd, greens are absolute communists economically and the country would fail, act are impotent and a little bizarre under jamie whatshisface, labour have whacko ideas such as nationalising power generation and forcing you install low pressure shower heads.  As for nz first, I guess if you like horse racing then they might be for you but winnie is a liar and I don't think you can trust him on anything. 

Perhaps JK is the best of a bad bunch? Although , I've had enough of him, time for a fresh face but please not steven joyce!!! 

Indeed. You're never really picking a good party when it comes to politics, but really trying to pick the least bad one.

FWIW, I think the Green's are far more economically centre than people give them credit for (a legacy view that's been hard for them to shake I think). In the past I have voted strategically for someone other than National, even when I have though National were the best of the bunch at the time. I did this in order to try and balance things out a bit and not give them too much power. Any one party (of any persuasion) with too much of a majority is a bad thing IMO.

surfisup1000:

ajobbins:

surfisup1000: Yes, but for whom would you vote? 

Conservatives are religious and colin craig is a bit odd, greens are absolute communists economically and the country would fail, act are impotent and a little bizarre under jamie whatshisface, labour have whacko ideas such as nationalising power generation and forcing you install low pressure shower heads.  As for nz first, I guess if you like horse racing then they might be for you but winnie is a liar and I don't think you can trust him on anything. 

Perhaps JK is the best of a bad bunch? Although , I've had enough of him, time for a fresh face but please not steven joyce!!! 

Indeed. You're never really picking a good party when it comes to politics, but really trying to pick the least bad one.

FWIW, I think the Green's are far more economically centre than people give them credit for (a legacy view that's been hard for them to shake I think). In the past I have voted strategically for someone other than National, even when I have though National were the best of the bunch at the time. I did this in order to try and balance things out a bit and not give them too much power. Any one party (of any persuasion) with too much of a majority is a bad thing IMO.

It is estimated the greens/labour cost the tax payer one to two billion dollars with their opposition (renationalisation plan) to Nationals power privatisation.  Given national won the election on the proviso of privatising the power companies this is disgraceful. 

The greens want to increase tax to 40% for the top tax bracket, and 50-70% for those earning 1 million +, although they refuse to be pegged down on the specific percentage. 

I just think they would be a disaster based on public comments. 

Maybe the greens would moderate their public stance if in power? I doubt it but you never know.