World view – Tuesday

Monday GMT

WorldWatch2

For posting on events, news, opinions and anything of interest from around the world.

Leave a comment

21 Comments

  1. Mother

     /  29th January 2019

    Herald’s article on Monday where Simon Bridges stands by Sarah Dowie –

    SB has multiple issues of insincerity here.

    He says he has confidence in Ms Dowie because she is a hard worker. Mr Ross is a hard worker too, and for longer than Ms Dowie. Within context of the sex, Mr Ross could have been working at optimum level as a politician, whereas it would have been the opposite scenario for Ms Dowie.

    He says that Ms Dowie’s issue is merely a relationship gone sour. SB once enjoyed Mr Ross’ close support as a colleague and a buddy. Yet he cannot apply the same ‘merely’ concept in the situation of that relationship turning sour.

    Of Ms Dowie he says, “Look, it’ll be tough right now, but I think if she can get out demonstrate that again… she can be again an effective MP.”

    Again? Two agains? (reminds one of the two ’embarrassings’). Meaning she’s not effective ATM? There is tolerance for Ms Dowie’s incompetence, yet there was vitriol toward the innocents of the saga (Mr Ross’ family)!

    “Bridges stopped short of condoning what Dowie allegedly said in the text, but said it had to be viewed in context.”
    SB is gossiping again. Only Mr Ross and Ms Dowie know what that context is.

    What about the context of Mr Ross’ public burst out, and the context of why Mr Ross eventually felt compelled to risk recording his leader? SB failed to apply context (personal to himself) to Mr Ross’ strange behaviour, yet he applies context (regarding others’ private lives) to Ms. Dowie’s strange behaviour.

    As for relationships, SB showed his true colours when he described Mr Ross’ need for leave as “embarrassing.” Some friend he was!

    SB said people have private lives and it was not his job to get involved in that. Oh but he did! He and PB did that exactly and unthinkingly (at the least. I am tempted to insist ‘spitefully’). And now he won’t get involved?

    Simon Bridges is not a listener. He is sadly manipulative. I used to wonder why people seemed hard on Mr Bridges during his tour of engagement. I was quite happy with him, but I’m not now. He is sneaky and out of his depth relationship wise. I don’t see how he could ever hold a cohesive team together. His displayed strength is secretly tenuous.

    The understanding of this saga, as it pertains to the reality of politics, is incumbent upon the timing of the various events. From the outset I did not see fair coverage. Worse, I saw the weaponisation of mental health issues. I saw unchecked hatred. It is time to even the playing field.

    Mr Bridges is an incompetent leader and he possesses a less than desirable character for the job. This is the reason Mr Ross himself behaved sneakily and imploded. And this is the foundational reason why National are struggling with ideas. They need a good shakeup. Why should SB, PB, Ms Dowie and the others have their emotional health pampered at the expense of good government?

    The article mentions again the “claims of inappropriate behaviour towards female colleagues, leading to Ross disclosing two extramarital relationships.”

    Everything about this article is written to scapegoat Mr Ross. Those claims were anonymous, informal, cowardly attacks. Yet they are still mentioned alongside SB implying that Ms Dowie’s behaviour was understandably an involuntary bad reaction to a life experience.

    The women involved in all this should think again about what equality means and Mr Bridges should practise integrity. Men folk in general could stop treating women unequally please.

    Reply
    • Gerrit

       /  29th January 2019

      You still cant get your head around the fact that Ross was an easily led, manipulative and conniving dickhead doing the dirty politics for his handlers.

      What the heck was he doing recording conversations with his fellow MP’s including Bridges?

      Recording designed to undermine Bridges and set him (and the National party) up to fail in an underhanded and abortive coup.

      Ross was found out he was a dirty double dealing scumbag and had to be removed from the inner circle.

      That was done but Ross went feral. Once his handlers realised he was no longer of value, he was left in the ditch to die.

      The mental illness is but a a outcome of his incompetence to firstly lie and do the dirty to his compatriots, secondly his inability to reconcile his dirty double dealing scumbag ways with the fact he was no longer in the National party, would only be in parliament (and on a big wage) for two more years, thirdly, his abandonment by his handlers once he was found out as the undermining scoundrel he was. Ross was totally on his own with the realisation his chances of getting meaningful employment, or status in society, above that of a traffic stop/go person at roadworks as being zero.

      You want Bridges (for all his uselessness as leader) to show integrity after Ross recorded conversations with him? Undermined not only Bridges but the whole National party?

      You must live in an alternative universe to think Ross wears the white hat and is ready for sainthood whilst Bridges wears the black hat and is the the horned evil one to be cast into the furnace of hell, in this play.

      Ross’s affairs are but a sideshow. But again show Ross to be the uncommitted coward he really was. After three years when asked for a commitment he had a brief fling with another woman then went back to his (richer?) wife.

      No wonder Dowie went apeshit at him and wished fire and brimstone to rain down on him.

      “Heav’n has no rage like love to hatred turn’d / Nor Hell a fury, like a woman scorn’d”

      Ross got the mental illness help he needed so what is the problem?

      Ross also realises that whatever recordings or other “dirt” he has on National, will be the ravings of a failed person and not be taken seriously.

      Who is going to believe the rantings of a bitter and failed man?

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  29th January 2019

        “You must ….. think Ross wears the white hat and is ready for sainthood whilst Bridges wears the black hat and is the the horned evil one to be cast into the furnace of hell, in this play.”

        I have never expressed this. This comment misrepresents me.

        “Who is going to believe the rantings of a bitter and failed man?”

        Failed yes, but from what I’ve seen not bitter (by comparison). SB and co displayed bitterness to a far greater extent than Mr Ross.

        My main point is that if Mr Ross is so bad, cowardly, incompetent etc then his leaders and co crazies are just as bad. By nature of authority, the leaders are the worst.

        I agree with your comments re Mr Ross’ cruel handlers. However, his track record shows that he will learn from that hard lesson. Admittedly, it’s a shaky track record. Nothing, except for blaspheming the Holy Spirit, is unredeemable.

        You are too harsh on Mr Ross. I haven’t once seen Mr Ross raving. But several others’ ravings are on public record. I perceive it would not take much pressure for us to see Mr Bridge’s internal ravings erupt.

        “Heav’n has no rage like love to hatred turn’d / Nor Hell a fury, like a woman scorn’d”

        Then what the hell is Ms Dowie doing in Parliament? Are we serious about good government or is it all just a joke to menfolk, and ok with Mr Bridges, when a woman goes belly up?

        I want equality Gerrit.

        Reply
        • Gerrit

           /  29th January 2019

          Ross was a ratfink (60’s expression) and beyond redemption. You belittle Bridges for not supporting Ross but still supporting Dowie.

          Reason is simple, no one will support a ratfink who pisses in their own nest, but all will support one who is capable of redemption and show contriteness. Dowie is worthy of redemption.

          You think Bridges and Bennett are showing bitterness in giving Ross the middle finger? I would say they showed him the door restrained and with all the empathy he deserved.

          Ravings have many conniptions. I think that Ross’s releases of personal telephone transcripts are the ravings of a lunatic led astray by promises of grandeur. Now he might have made them in a gentle voice but they are still ravings.

          You cannot get equality when one party is a total waste of space, makes no apology (except to grovel back to the wife) asks not for forgiveness or redemption, whilst the other party lays the truth on the line, offers explanations and ask for forgiveness.

          There is no possibility of equality when one turns traitor and rats on the compatriots. In times gone by summary justice would have been served. In a perverse way non lethal justice has been served on a ratfink..

          Reply
          • Mother

             /  29th January 2019

            “Reason is simple, no one will support a ratfink who pisses in their own nest, but all will support one who is capable of redemption and show contriteness. Dowie is worthy of redemption.”

            Harsh unfair judgement. So far away from truth.

            Do you have evidence of Ms Dowie being contrite? I only see evidence of cowardice.

            Reply
      • Mother

         /  29th January 2019

        “You want Bridges (for all his uselessness as leader) to show integrity after Ross recorded conversations with him? Undermined not only Bridges but the whole National party?”

        Yes, that’s what I want and I think people should demand it. (What seems like ‘undermining’ to some, is ‘helpful exposure’ to others.) There were valid reasons for Mr Ross to record conversations. I actually don’t see the big deal. I think that any public figure who is upset about secret recordings while doing public work is just too precious for the job. And constituents who can’t see the other viewpoint on this matter are probably tending to dishonesty in their own lives too.

        Gerrit, you seem comfortable to tell me that I can’t seem to get my head around the popular viewpoint. You’re wrong. The popular viewpoint is always easy to understand.

        I could pick your argument to pieces, yet you succumb to telling me I don’t understand, while regurgitating the popular viewpoint.

        We are a long way off equality. As usual, it’s the women in general who do the hard yards. Considering our weaker physicality, is that fair? Men should be getting stuck in to help even things up.

        Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  29th January 2019

        I bet that you don’t know which of Congreve’s plays that quote’s from….NB, I quoted it before this.

        Reply
    • Gezza

       /  29th January 2019

      World view’s a strange place to raise this issue.

      Reply
    • Duker

       /  30th January 2019

      Did they ask Bridges about the caucus leaks continuing?

      Reply
  2. Blazer

     /  29th January 2019

    the malady of JLR….

    ‘All depression has its roots in self-pity, and all self-pity is rooted in people taking themselves too seriously.’

    ― Tom Robbins

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  29th January 2019

      I agree. Again, compared with the others, Mr Ross has shown that he is the one most willing to lay aside his self pity. By way of reason then, we currently have some very depressed people in Parliament.

      Mr Ross is now in a position where he has space to continue dealing with his self pity. More power to him! Not so the others. They are behaving like losers.

      Who will put the right pressure on Mr Bridges? Clearly, somebody who does not take themselves too seriously. That’s servanthood. Mr Bridges and PB are self serving. And Ms Dowie is not a woman who practises equality.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  29th January 2019

        it has become apparant just whose…mother…you ..are!😂

        Reply
        • Patzcuaro

           /  29th January 2019

          Ma Ross or morass?

          Reply
          • Mother

             /  29th January 2019

            I am the mother of my children. Ignore me if you don’t like my opinions.

            I wonder what your mothers are like.

            Reply
            • Patzcuaro

               /  29th January 2019

              morass

              noun
              1.
              an area of muddy or boggy ground.
              “in midwinter the track beneath this bridge became a muddy morass”
              synonyms: quagmire, swamp, bog, marsh, mire, quag, marshland, peat bog, fen, slough, quicksand; More
              2.
              a complicated or confused situation.
              “she would become lost in a morass of lies and explanations”
              synonyms: confusion, chaos, muddle, tangle, entanglement, imbroglio, mix-up, jumble, clutter;

              This sums the saga up, none of the key players in the National Party comes out of it with any credit.

  3. duperez

     /  29th January 2019

    Reply
  4. Blazer

     /  29th January 2019

    ‘batshit Bolton’…super Hawk…and prelude to Trumps …war…’make the economy scream'(Nixon-Vietnam).

    https://www.mintpressnews.com/with-troika-of-tyranny-boltons-long-standing-push-to-target-cuba-venezuela-and-nicaragua-finally-pays-off/251422/

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  29th January 2019

      Bolton’s probably only got less than a year to go. Giuliani too. Work for Trump & you’re stuffed, sooner or later.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  29th January 2019

        PRETTY FRANK AND COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS TO ANY MORALITY!

        Reply
  5. Here’s President Trump’s southern border crisis:

    Rachel Maddow on MSNBC:

    We don’t know why the president is saying either of those two things about the southern border. Apparently the border patrol does not know either and Trump appointees were surveying members of the border patrol to find out if there is any factual basis for any of these things the president has been saying. It should be noted that both of those things … do feature in a movie. …

    In that film, which is fiction, one of the things that happens is there a woman taped up in the car.

    In that same movie, there are also Mexican smugglers with amazing vehicles that are too fast for American law enforcement to keep up with.

    Also, you know that thing the president keeps saying about the prayer rugs being found in the desert at the border? That’s in that same movie, too.

    Again, all plot points in the same movie, which is fiction.

    Now, in a normal administration, it would be insane to suggest, even think about, even joke about the president of the United States seeing stuff in a movie and him maybe thinking it was real, or at least real enough to justify an actual U.S. military deployment of thousands of active duty U.S. troops to the border. …

    I mean, is it possible that that is where the president cooked up these justifications for the supposed crisis at the border and the pretense for sending U.S. troops there right before the election? Could that actually happen in real life? I don’t know.”

    So President Trump’s crisis comes from the movie script for Sicario: Day of the Soldado

    I’m speechless.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Call me Ishmael... Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s