-
I actually do believe by "pig" he was referring to the labour party....but he's stirred The Righteous Indignation™ of the likes of Lizzie Marvelly...so he could be in for a fun day.
-
That phrase is utterly innocent - it means dressing something up to make it look better. Of course, he's referring to a new leader in charge of the same party (with all of its previous limitations still intact).
But of course, he words it so clumsily that the media can take it as a reference to a woman's appearance. Of course, the media will jump all over this. The Newstalk ZB radio news headline I heard at 8am used the phrase "lipstick on a pig" twice in 30 seconds.
His earlier tweet specifically says "personality politics is utter crap." And then he turns it into an issue of identity politics. It all adds to the pro-Jacinda message - she'll save us from these sexist men.
-
@jegga he should probably just stop talking, full stop.
Reckon he has just given Labour a few more votes, if Labour are in power, I actually hope they get enough to govern alone, although I wonder what issues Whinny would hold them to if they want his help.
-
@taniwharugby said in NZ Politics:
@jegga he should probably just stop talking, full stop.
Reckon he has just given Labour a few more votes, if Labour are in power, I actually hope they get enough to govern alone, although I wonder what issues Whinny would hold them to if they want his help.
He'll just want a cushy post MP job, I'm less concerned about him than the Greens. National struggling to battle the young gun vs old fuddy duddy narrative. New roads aren't particularly exciting vs climate change to younger voters I reckon
-
The meeting with David Parker and the Canterbury farmers must have gone pretty badly judging by the stuff that came out over the weekend. This is probably going to get a fair bit of attention I think .
https://m.facebook.com/david.clark.56232/posts/10155819473134448
-
What National can weaponise this election is Labour's fudging on a capital gains tax on your family home (and business and farm etc.).
Here's excerpts on the CGT discussions from the weekend's political shows (
Labour seems to be promising a tax working group that will recommend a significant shift in the tax system.
-
@jegga seems crazy to take a broad and inflammatory presentation (with wobbly data) to the very folks that intimately know about water management etc. Trying to set up agriculture as a fall guy/gal, when there are gaps across the spectrum - waste treatment, council permissions, free bottled water, etc, etc - is stupid. Why not highlight good practice across these areas then pursue more of it?
One aspect of TOP is that I reckon they provide a fuller picture of related data - and do seek to show the breadth of opinions alongside their party position. Or I've found their data a easier to find that Labour/Nat. You might not agree with Gareth and co, but at least they are trying to engage people with information.
-
@Paekakboyz I genuinely thought Parker was a lot smarter than that. Someone was tweeting his comments during the meeting and if true they were not a good look.
That post on Facebook was pretty astonishing, shows the level of sophistication on our farms these days. -
It's the most infuriating aspect of politics imo - if you hold a moderate or balanced view it gets lost in the shouting from either end. But is that the cost when they are targeting the less informed majority, compared to the minorities with the deeper knowledge and experience?
Why not provide tech and support to get all farms online. Then work with that data and the farming community to improve the situation. Connect that into broader environmental work that will collectively improve our waters. If things aren't good you'll have evidence to trigger changes, or engage with 'other' views. On the plus side we'll see more data on the initiatives that do make a difference for good.
Don't the fish heads know that coming in hot and slamming folks is only highlighting how disconnected they are?
-
@Paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
Why not provide tech and support to get all farms online. Then work with that data and the farming community to improve the situation. Connect that into broader environmental work that will collectively improve our waters. If things aren't good you'll have evidence to trigger changes, or engage with 'other' views. On the plus side we'll see more data on the initiatives that do make a difference for good.
Don't the fish heads know that coming in hot and slamming folks is only highlighting how disconnected they are?
this is one of farmings problems and im not haveing a go at you but everyone thinks they know what farmers should do
truth is irrigated farming is hi tech majority of these farmer would have,
soil moisture monituring
fertilizer proof of placement
yield mapping
weather stations
nutrient budgets
plus online monitoring of milk ,milk cooling etc
gps on tracterswhere i farm in the waitaki the regional council are so happy with the environmental performence that the catchment area is going self regulated as long as the sites that they monitor dont drop in performance. and this is a area that has had dairying in it from the 1980s
-
@jegga said in NZ Politics:
The meeting with David Parker and the Canterbury farmers must have gone pretty badly judging by the stuff that came out over the weekend. This is probably going to get a fair bit of attention I think .
https://m.facebook.com/david.clark.56232/posts/10155819473134448
So many excellent points made in that post. Yes there are some fucking shitty farmers, and I know for a fact that some have gotten away with ludicrous environmental damage because they sweet talked/sob storied some idiot at Environment Waikato. (Like the fuckstick who buried chemicals next to a waterway.) But most farmers nowadays spend absolute fucktons of money on technology. The modern milking sheds are more than a little bit Starship Enterprise with all the bells and whistles. They aren't lumbering knobs, they are businessmen. They have to be. And they very much care for the environment they are utilising.
Yes, in some places, agriculture is responsible for bad pollution. But trying to claim it is the only thing is complete bullshit, if you'll excuse the term. If every council in NZ can show they are utilising the very best and most efficient technology to deal with their stormwater/wastewater/sewage, and it exits into waterways clean as clean can be, then sweet. Ditto for all factories and their waste. -
@ploughboy farmers are all cnuts mate, scurge on society apparently, need to get rid of the polluting industry.
-
Peter Dunne Goooooooooone...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11908155
-
pushed through with some pretty average legislation, such as the recent FSL charge changes.
-
@Donsteppa said in NZ Politics:
@jegga said in NZ Politics:
Peter Dunne just quit politics, will anyone notice?
Me.
And you, apparently
And synthetic cannabis users?
NZ Politics