National Minister Off To Get Ideas From Hillary Clinton

A woman employed as a day labourer in a South Auckland factory would probably have to work for six months to pay the cost of National’s Minister of Women’s Affairs, Hekia Parata’s visit to San Francisco, where she will live it up in a talkfest chaired by one of America’s most dangerous Marxists.

Ms Parata will attend the APEC Women and the Economy Summit, also in San Francisco from September 13-16. US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, will chair discussion which will focus on the Government’s key priorities of: increasing the number of women in leadership; increasing women’s economic independence; and driving economic growth.

“New Zealand already has a strong international reputation for gender equality, as shown by our 5th ranking in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report 2010,’’ says Ms Parata.

“We have also had a lot of recent success with the NZX proposing new rules that will require all publicly listed companies to declare how many women they have in senior roles and the New Zealand Institute of Directors’ establishing a new mentoring scheme aimed at increasing the number of women on NZX-listed boards.

What utter crap. Hekia Parata is yet another National politician who would be a better ideological fit for Labour than National. How the hell can we ever turn NZ around when the National Party is so hopelessly confused about what it stands for and has so few real differences with the Marxists of Labour? As for the NZX and the Institute of Directors, spineless political cronyists showing typical symptoms of the fatal socialist disease by their cuddling up to Marxists. We need a Sarah Palin to sort these losers out.

30 thoughts on “National Minister Off To Get Ideas From Hillary Clinton

  1. “How the hell can we ever turn NZ around when the National Party is so hopelessly confused about what it stands for and has so few real differences with the Marxists of Labour?”

    Vote ACT

    Like

  2. Chuck, ACT came from left wing origins and still has a hard core of left wingers at its center. I said Brash was making a mistake going with ACT, and that he should have gone for a new party and that opinion has been validated by recent ACT polling.

    The brand is damaged beyond repair because NZ hard left in the Labour party saw them as apostates and, through their media agents, were determined to destroy them.

    Also, ACT has completely failed to attack NZ’s left wing media. The person who gets my support is the one who will attack the real left in NZ, and that is the highly partisan mainstream media and their cheer squad of left wing academics.

    These are the real Labour Party and the real group stunting this country’s growth and success. Marxist university professors and their followers in the mainstream media. These are the people at the root of NZ’s misfortune and they have to be identified and defeated. ACT will not acknowledge this problem.

    https://truebluenz.com/2011/04/28/brash-takes-act-wrong-move-im-my-opinion/

    Like

  3. Can national be sued for misrepresenting itself and for misleading the public? It doesn’t stack anything like its core founding principles.

    Like

  4. ACT is not the solution………but a strong ACT will help with stopping the continual shift to the left of ‘centrism’. Unfortunately there will never be a true right-wing party as almost all New Zealanders have been so indoctrinated in their thought and politics.

    For the trolls – right-wing doesn’t mean racist, however your abject fear of being perceived as a racist is part of your left-wing indoctrination. 😮

    Like

  5. ACT might not be the solution but what other party opposes the ETS? What party believes we should have one electoral roll? The right under MMP needs a party like ACT. In the unlikely event that ACT fails to exist after the election the chances of Labour getting in in 2014 are a lot higher.

    Starting a new party is a lot easier said than done. If Don Brash had of tried to form a new party with Colin Craig there would be infighting already.

    Like

  6. That’s as may be Chuck, but Don took over ACT and immediately went back to the future (2005). New Zealand is broke. Flat broke. And getting broker by the day. Brash is one of the world’s foremost economists. This time in our history should be a perfect fucking storm for Brash, but instead of that he’s focussing on the race issue, Boscawen is utterly failing as campaign manager and ACT will be bloody lucky to get back in come the election.

    You’re right, New Zealand needs a party to the right of National to keep them honest. Brash has already laid down and invited John Key to have his way with ACT. Where’s the incentive for Key to treat ACT with respect? Key is, as Redbaiter’s excellent latest post articulates, an empty suit living his boyhood dream. He has no vision for New Zealand’s future; that is being painted by the subversives in his caucus like the traitor Finlayson. Key is a weak, wavering fool. At some point Liarbore will reinvent itself, and then National will need a strong partner on the right. At this stage, it isn’t looking like ACT.

    Like

  7. :Starting a new party is a lot easier said than done. If Don Brash had of tried to form a new party with Colin Craig there would be infighting already.”

    An interesting prediction Chuck. What about do you think? Y’know I can’t help getting the feeling you’re not entirely happy yourself with ACT.

    Like

  8. “What about do you think? Y’know I can’t help getting the feeling you’re not entirely happy yourself with ACT.”

    Of course. I have stated my views directly to Don. No party can satisfy everyone. I am an ACT member and I am looking to the future. David Seymour, number 6 on the list has the potential to lead ACT. The is someone I would have liked to get a high list rating. Other ACT members may have felt the same about other potential candidates. However you do not throw your toys out of the cot because you can not have everything your own way.

    I think those who believe ACT should move further to the right are wrong. What other party will they vote for? The only parties they can vote for will not have a show of getting in Parliament.

    The only way National’s agenda can be modified is with a strong ACT presence. If people are not happy with ACT’s policies and priorities then only way to change them join the party and volunteer to help with the campaign. When you do this you will be listened to and if enough people share your view you can have an influence.

    Like

  9. Chuck, I acknowledge your good intent here. That’s never been the question, but we seem to be at loggerheads over ACT being a right wing party. It would seem that many within want it to be, but there are just as many (maybe more) who don’t want it to be. That’s my problem. I can’t see ACT as a RW party. I see them as springing from the loins of the left and therefore severely compromised. I’d rather have a clean start.

    We need someone like Sarah Palin in NZ, in the context that she has not been cowed by the media or the left or the left in the Republican Party. She has stuck to her guns, and by her courage and her persistence and her rhetoric, she has won over many people and now stands as the most serious threat to Barack Obama’s power and the left’s long time dominance of the political field.

    We need someone brave and new and who can articulate.

    Like

  10. Red, there are a number of reasons ACT polled very poorly under Rodney. One was obvious that was Rodney misjudgment which he acknowledged. A bigger reason was disloyalty and disunity. That is one thing that puts voters off any party – right or left. I can only hope after this election there is a lot more unity.

    There is not much time to the election. ACT is the only party right of National that has any chance of getting into Parliament this election. If people are not happy with ACT join and change it. The problem for some is that some libertarians think they can dictate their philosophy particularly on matter homosexual. They can’t.

    Unless ACT can at this election or the next election get over 5% they will have little effect. This can only happen if we can attract members who are prepared to accept than no party will have policies all to their liking.

    Like

  11. There probably is no policy that ACT is fully united on. That would be the same for any party in Parliament. There are those who disagree with ACT’s stance on one electoral roll. I agree with that policy but disagree with others but I am not going raise them on a public blog. That is what is needed amongst the members particualrly amongst board members and candidates. State your views within the party but do not go public.

    I think lowering taxes and government spending would be something most if not all members would agree with. The amount and targeting of the reductions would be where members wold disagree.

    Those making policy must consider not just their own views but those which will attract voters. There are always a lot more people below the average wage than above it. Many of those have no idea of sensible money management in their own lives so it is a hard sell to get then to accept reality – just look at Greece.

    I think we should not be giving free rides on trains and ferries to those over 65. However, I do not think it wise for ACT to raise this issue before the election. It would just give Winston a platform.

    Like

  12. “However, I do not think it wise for ACT to raise this issue before the election.”
    And there, in a nutshell, is the problem with fucking politicians and their one-eyed supporters for me.
    EVERY damn issue should be raised before the election. Raised and debated. Jesus H.Christ! Key slithered in on a wave of resentment against Labour by refusing to clearly articulate a set of policies and principles. And look what we got.
    Have you learned nothing from that?

    Like

  13. “vote for a pig in a poke–and trust us”
    Like hell.
    If you can’t say it before the elections then you have no right to pretend to be part of any democratic process.

    Like

  14. Red, I had another thought. Lindsay Perigo rubbished ACT for a long time for not being far enough right and not fully accepting libertarian policies. He has now joined ACT. I beleive he is paid but he has turned out to be a very good team player. I was very disappointed in Ansell. How much chance would we have of winning the World Cup if all the players did there own thing.

    You have very good writing skills. If you joined ACT you could make a difference. You would have to compromise like Lindsay but like him you would have influence.

    Like

  15. If you ask an ACT MP their view on the Gold Card they will tell. There is no sense in raising an issue that will lose vote but not gain them.

    Like

  16. KG, I did a lot of voluntary work for ACT before they got 9 MP in Parliament. One thing I did was phone polling. The way we did was to identify the voters who might vote ACT. This is how National has such a high poll rating. Do you think ACT should do as you suggest and not worry about how many votes they will get?

    BTW – what party will you vote for?

    Like

  17. “If you ask an ACT MP their view on the Gold Card they will tell.”
    No doubt if voters had asked individual National MPs their views on the Maori seats, the RMA, the ETS and a host of other issues they’d have told. But that’s not the point. A party which is looking for support before the elections has an obligation to make it’s position clear as a party on major issues.
    “BTW – what party will you vote for?”
    None. For a variety of reasons. The present choices are no choice at all, since all of them represent the current racist,socialist mindset of the country. Every damn politician I listen to is a hypocrite, a liar, a crypto-fascist, a collectivist and/or a statist. I can see not one honourable person among them. More, I can see not one with a principled, clearly articulated vision of a future New Zealand which will respect the individual, property rights and liberty.

    Like

  18. When somebody joins a political party–or at least decides to support it–there seems to be a very human mechanism which swings into action. And that mechanism renders the person blind to the failings of the party and it’s representatives or at least causes the supporter to rationalize those failings. The excuse most often heard is that “no party has a platform which everybody can agree on 100%.”
    Which is of course true.
    But until there exists a mechanism whereby politicians can be called to account by the people immediately for lying, for flouting the expressed will of the electorate, for enacting laws which give one race preferential treatment and so on, then “democracy” will remain a sham, a shadow-play and a farce. And I want no part of it. Especially, I want no part of the lame coward’s excuse that they voted for “the least-worst option”.
    Voting for three -year rotating dictatorships just ain’t my style.

    Like

  19. Sorry KG, you’re wrong. Key won’t touch it. First, he’s said unequivocally he won’t (and this isn’t one of those “no carbon tax under a government I lead” promises). Second, and this is the inportant one, if Key leads National into the 2014 election, he’ll stand down by mid-2015 for someone else to take over (the alternative being that he will stand down part -way through 2012). His boyhood dream was to be Prime Minister. It wasn’t to be New Zealand’s longest-serving Prime Minister, and it sure as shit wasn’t to be a Prime Minister who lost an election. By 2017 Liarbore will either be less of a basket-case, or gone in favour of the Watermelons, and kiwis (being the electorally- and politically-unaware shep they are) will believe by then it’s time to give the other team a go. Third, come that time neither will the shit have hit the fan, nor the chickens come home to roost, so our empty-suited smiling, waving special needs Prime Minister can afford to just kick the can down the road.

    Touching the OAP is one risk he won’t take.

    Like

  20. Well, you’re most likely right, Gantt but my hunch (and those are very often wrong.. 😉 ) is that he may do it as a “look how I’m making the tough decisions” act. It’s probably the cheapest way in votes terms he can look decisive.

    Like

  21. You might be right KG, if the time comes he ever feels he needs to look like someone who makes tough decisions, but even then I reckon he could find something else … something that doesn’t ttach the label “hypocrite” to him (by those who get their information from the 6pm nightly news that is, not those who have followed his destruction of New Zealand society these past 3 years).

    Like

  22. “The present choices are no choice at all, since all of them represent the current racist,socialist mindset of the country. Every damn politician I listen to is a hypocrite, a liar, a crypto-fascist, a collectivist and/or a statist. I can see not one honourable person among them.”

    In your opinion is that the case in all other countries in the developed world?

    Like

Comments are closed.