tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post1832555022517949339..comments2023-11-06T00:01:30.085+13:00Comments on New Zeal: Mike Moore on the Evils of MMP, Cowardly Politicians and Party LackeysTrevor Loudonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17040453691836232676noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-43166387308225252722008-03-23T14:13:00.000+13:002008-03-23T14:13:00.000+13:00you have to be rich to kill a child tager and get ...you have to be rich to kill a child tager and get away with it, is what wealth has to do with it.<BR/><BR/>murder is fine for the rich or the army. anyone else does it and their 'commies'?<BR/><BR/>sounds a bit rich ehAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-6814996859462266462008-03-20T18:07:00.000+13:002008-03-20T18:07:00.000+13:00With the greatest of respect Mike Moore "on" ANYTH...With the greatest of respect Mike Moore "on" ANYTHING is just excruciating.<BR/><BR/>A vainglorious fellow who's done exceedingly well in selfish "look at me look at me" terms. <BR/><BR/>An "aggrieved" fellow however....aggrieved on account of his not being universally recognised as Labour's modern day Mickey Savage. <BR/><BR/>Therein lies the answer to his being ALWAYS excruciating. Big egg ! <BR/><BR/>And snapped up by Trev of course. Straight to the breast !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-49791087910551555442008-03-17T21:10:00.000+13:002008-03-17T21:10:00.000+13:00"You don't have to be rich to own a fence some rat...<I>"You don't have to be rich to own a fence some ratbag defaces"</I><BR/><BR/>No but it certainly helps<BR/><BR/>http://www.stuff.co.nz/southlandtimes/4411817a6570.html<BR/><BR/>Y.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-73244080831095892342008-03-17T20:18:00.000+13:002008-03-17T20:18:00.000+13:00Child taggers? Teenage vandals more like. They cer...Child taggers? Teenage vandals more like. They certainly don't warrant the death penalty, but taggers are a bunch of empty-headed yobs.<BR/><BR/>And what's a person's financial status got to do with it? You don't have to be rich to own a fence some ratbag defaces.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-7082449402370544422008-03-15T22:22:00.000+13:002008-03-15T22:22:00.000+13:00On Danyl Strype's interesting point: yes the quest...On Danyl Strype's interesting point: yes the question is WHETHER Hitler was elected under true representative democracy? Can MMP provide that? <BR/><BR/>Does the MMP electoral system reflect true democracy or does it give such power to small minorities that it can create power rungs for a tyrant like Hitler?<BR/><BR/>Danyl sounds like a syndicalist type anarchist. Small group democracy would be great for so many things, but surely we would still need a State, hopefully minimum, to run an umbrella legal system, provide or co-ordinate defence, and oversee and encourage communications from planes, airports, roads, railways, to broadband.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-72033057621082355812008-03-15T19:50:00.000+13:002008-03-15T19:50:00.000+13:00Kia oraMike Moore is, as usual, talking horse shit...Kia ora<BR/><BR/>Mike Moore is, as usual, talking horse shit. There are still electorates where the people can support a good MP regardless of party loyalties, and a party still has to win the lion's share of these electorates to have any chance of forming a majority government in parliament.<BR/><BR/>Good point raised by anonymous though, Hitler was elected under representative democracy, therefore let's get rid of representative democracy altogether, MMP or FPP. Let's have direct democracy instead, based in face-to-face processes in real communities. That way we can recognise Māori sovereignty based on haputanga, not a Māori state, as well as pakeha also having real control over their neighbourhoods, rather than council/ business quangos.<BR/><BR/>Danyl StrypeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-7668627496781620122008-03-14T20:05:00.000+13:002008-03-14T20:05:00.000+13:00Peter Shirtcliffe was the Business Roundtable man ...Peter Shirtcliffe was the Business Roundtable man who led the anti-MMP campaign.<BR/><BR/>He is/was a decent man, and a capable chairman of Telecom as I recall. However, he was a poor choice for campaign leader, and having the Business Roundtable openly as the prime backer was an even worse problem<BR/><BR/>I share the previous poster's opinion a resultant bugger-you vote gave MMP its narrow margin. I think it needed only 50 per cent, which was too low for such a constitutional change.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18947592.post-63713194611798215882008-03-14T16:05:00.000+13:002008-03-14T16:05:00.000+13:00Three additional points.1. When MMP was adopted it...Three additional points.<BR/><BR/>1. When MMP was adopted it was simply described as the same system as that used in Germany. No-one I know of pointed out that it was almost precisely the same MMP system under which Hitler came to power in then democratic Germany, without having a majority of Germans vote for him (that came later). Who would have supported putting in the system that Hitler successfully climbed?<BR/><BR/>2. In the referendum, the Business Round Table made a rather arrogant blunder when it sent one of the country's biggest businessmen round the country fronting opposition to MMP. Many people then thought that to oppose MMP was to side with Big Business.<BR/><BR/>3. We were promised another referendum. Where is it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com