NEW POST - THE RELIGIOUS CURMUDGEON

 

OVAL OFFICE BISHOPS

I'VE BEEN THINKING*

* One of Richard's alter egos will go along with this.

It's fortunate that the only other blogger in this little - well, tiny - blogging community shares my political beliefs and has the same history of living through the successes and failures of the two main (and if MMP hadn't become a 'thing' in the early 1980s) and only viable parties that make up New Zealand politics. These parties, Labour and National are both fairly centrist with some quality and sensible socialist leanings by Labour on the left and normally, some private enterprise conservative leanings by National on the right.

The Labour Party and the National Party both are built on democratic principles and fundamentally have, in consensus terms, the average New Zealanders' interests at heart. They represent a two-party centre-left and centre-right platform that is the basis of democratic government. This is not to say that while both operate within this democratic model, their core ideologies are the same and they in fact hold different philosophies on the role of government, the economy, and the rights of New Zealanders.

Labour believes in social justice and equity with the state as support in sharing the nation's wealth and looking after those who need assistance. 
National believes in individual freedom with little state intervention with private enterprise, individual effort, and competitive markets being the road to success. 

There's nothing wrong with either positioning. It's just a pity that the two ideologies couldn't be bound together as one unified driving force to run our little country. Democracy though, needs a bit of dynamic tension to stop a country becoming autocratic. I've mentioned before that the ideal coalition partners would be Labour and National and not those bozos NZ First, The Greens, Te Pati Maori, ACT and Opportunity.

Labour and National

NZ First, The Greens, Te Pati Maori, ACT and Opportunity.

Just my thoughts.

WIND-POWERED POLYFIDELITY

Yesterday at Richard and Shelley's place I made a quick exit out of the ranch-slider door to the garden (Richard was threatening to teach me to play guitar) and stumbled into their olive orchard.

I asked them if they get olives from the trees and received non-plus looks from both. They said that they have never grown olives which kind of defeats the exercise in planting the trees in the first place.

"I don't like olives" said Richard, rather petulantly I thought "and anyway, these trees are just of one sex only - they need a member of the opposite sex to create little olive babies".

This bit of procreative wisdom coming from the 'Nui's version of Dhal Bahadur, Pavitra Prassad and Kumar Kancha was like getting poetry lessons from William Mcgonagall. How the hell he managed to have two children is one of life's mysteries.

When I got home I wondered about the sex-life of trees and in particular olive trees (well, The Old Girl's away you know) and looked up Aunty Google to find out about it.

 

"Welcome to the birds and the bees... and the botany. The "sex education" of olive trees is far more dramatic, promiscuous, and chaotic than anyone realizes.
If you thought human dating was complicated, olive trees are running a literal botanical free-for-all right in our backyards.

1. The Anatomy: They Have "Perfect" Flowers.
Olive trees don’t have time to go out and look for a partner, so they decided to skip the dating phase entirely. Most olive tree flowers are hermaphroditic (or "perfect"), meaning a single, microscopic flower contains both male parts (stamens full of pollen) and female parts (the pistil).
In human terms, they are completely self-contained units. However, because nature loves drama, some flowers are "imperfect" and completely suppress their female parts, leaving them as purely male pollen-launchers.

2. The Hookup Strategy: Wind-Powered Polyfidelity.
You might picture bees acting as nature's romantic matchmakers, but olive trees don't care for bees. Instead, they rely on anemophily—which is a fancy scientific word for "screaming your genes into the wind and hoping they land on someone sexy."
The Pollen Explosion: When spring hits, olive trees release billions of microscopic yellow pollen grains into the air.
The Neighborhood Swinger Scene: While some olive trees are "self-fertile" (they can pollinate themselves), many premium varieties are strictly self-incompatible. They refuse to mate with themselves or their clones. They require pollen drifting in from a completely different variety down the street to actually produce a fruit.

3. The Consequences: Total Respiratory Sabotage.
Because olive trees insist on having unprotected, public, wind-driven relations, humans have to pay the price. The "fluid exchange" of the olive world is done via massive yellow clouds.
If you have ever suffered from intense spring allergies in a Mediterranean climate, you aren't sick—you are just caught in the middle of an olive tree orgy. Your itchy eyes and sneezing are direct collateral damage from millions of trees trying to get lucky all at once.

So, the next time you drizzle extra virgin olive oil onto your salad, remember the sheer, chaotic, wind-blown drama that took place just to make those little green fruits happen!"

Yeah, that figures. I'm not surprised at those goings-on in a street named Willies Grove. What goes on in the suburbs should stay in the suburbs.

ARE WE HUMAN?*

I'm getting pissed off with the two-factor authentication (2FA) and two-step verification (2SV) requirements when accessing most apps and programmes. Sure they're supposed to protect accounts, but they cause login hassles. If I don't have two or three devices at hand (laptop, iPad and phone) then trying to log in using an email code sent on the device I'm using forces me to juggle split screens, switch apps, or rush before I'm timed out. 

The constant re-authentication gets in the way of conducting business or communicating but there is an accompanying fear that if protocols are not followed then the big bad hackers will come to get you.

Why has this become such a big thing in such a short period of time? It seems that, like a lot of medications, the cure is worse than the problem.

Why can't IT designers come up with a simple, sensible and safe procedure that all platforms follow? It's like the way that just about every electronic device has a different bloody remote to work it rather than manufacturers adopting a universal remote that everyone can understand how it works. I've written about this before like: HERE 

Some sites use clunky design flows—such as looping back to the password screen or asking for double verifications—turning a 5-second task into a minute-long ordeal. Others demand two factor authentication for trivial, low-risk accounts instead of reserving it strictly for more important ones like banking and financial transactions.

There is a danger in ignoring the security protocols because they are so annoying - 'the boy who cried wolf' scenario. This is a shame but THEY ARE SO BLOODY ANNOYING.

I like this comedy take on it: Passwords

* Or are we dancer?

PLAY (THE) BALL

I'm not a rabid sports follower but I do like to watch New Zealand play on the world stage regardless of what the code is and whether it's men's or women's sports.

At present Rugby League World Cup 2026 is being contested and, while I'm not a 'league' follower I will take an interest in the games featuring the Kiwis.

 I played rugby league for Marist in Wellington when I was young and was good at it.

I later also played soccer and rugby union which I was also good at but never got crazy about it. It was just good fun at the time.

Go the Kiwis and the Kiwi Ferns!

OLD THOUGHTS DON'T GO AWAY THEY JUST GET ...

... REPEATED.

Writing that previous post reminded me of this post I wrote three years ago that is still relevant. 

STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES

OK, WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?

I think that this year's elections are more important than they have been for some time going back to when National, after a painful period of John Key and his cronies, got replaced by Labour who brought back heart into the equation.

For Labour to gain control in 2026, apart from forming a coalition partnership with National (which is not really as silly as that reads given that both Labour and National are essentially centrist parties) it will need to form a partnership with the Greens and Te Pāti Māori to govern. Things are really on a knife edge and existing Labour supporters need to be given reassurances that such a coalition is workable along with the potential new (young) voters who need to be confident that if they vote for the Greens and Te Pāti Māori, that these parties wishes will be actioned in government.

This is why the recent meeting involving Green and Te Pāti Māori MPs at a South Auckland Mongrel Mob base has become a political controversy because opponents can point to it as evidence of a gap between the political left's approach to gangs and the public's concerns about crime.

The consequences extend beyond the MPs who attended. The controversy also affects Labour leader Chris Hipkins, the prospects for cooperation among centre-left parties, and the way voters assess political judgement during an election campaign.

Green MP Hūhana Lyndon, Green candidate Michel Mulipola, and Te Pāti Māori MPs Oriini Kaipara and Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke attended a whānau, health and wellbeing hui at a Mongrel Mob base. Images of the meeting were shared publicly which included gang members and leader and lifetime member Harry Tam.

Greens Co-leader Marama Davidson said the party was unapologetic about engaging with marginalised communities. Co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick argued that people involved in gangs also need healthcare, housing and opportunities to reintegrate into society.

National's justice spokesperson Paul Goldsmith has argued that the parties were prioritising gang members and that publicly posing for photographs at a gang base creates damaging perceptions about the left's approach to crime and political judgement.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins has desperately tried to distinguish Labour from the controversy, saying the parties involved would not control the police or justice portfolios in a future Labour-led government. We can only hope that voters will find that reassurance convincing given that the stupid action has given National, ACT and New Zealand First a law-and-order argument to gain attention and votes.

The photographs of the two left parties who might end up in government cosying up to patched gang members provide opponents on the right with a ready-made campaign image. Rather than having to explain complex differences in crime policy, they can point to the politicians attending the hui and ask voters what that association says about their priorities given that the gangs are involved in meth production and sale along with a lot of other crime. It shows that the Greens and Te Pāti Māori are too accommodating towards gangs, or insufficiently attentive to the experiences of crime victims.

In an attempt to mitigate the impact there is the argument that association is not endorsement. Meeting with gang members does not, by itself, establish support for their criminal activities. The Greens say the hui concerned healthcare, wellbeing and understanding marginalised communities, rather than seeking electoral support from gang members. Fair enough but public presentation carries a lot of weight. Photographs taken at a gang base creates an impression that differs from the stated purpose of a meeting and the images remain in voters minds long after the explanations are forgotten.

As mentioned it puts Chris Hipkins in a difficult position. He wants Labour to be seen as a credible, moderate governing alternative and a Labour-led government could depend on support from the Greens and Te Pāti Māori. He needs to keep that line going and that those parties will not control the police or justice portfolios but will need to downplay the fact that coalition partners can influence government policy even without holding a particular ministerial portfolio. This will be key in reassuring voters that Labour would retain control over core law-and-order responsibilities.

There seems to be dissention in the ranks of all of the parties involved in this which is hardly reassuring to voters and could point to future difficulties. For example was the meeting discussed with senior leadership beforehand and did the Greens and Te Pāti Māori consider how the location and photographs might be perceived? Any sniff of rogue politics will scare off both established and potential new support.

The latest polling ( Taxpayers' Union–Curia poll · Published 8 October 2026) shows party votes as:

National
28.5%

Labour
28.2%

Greens
13.3%

NZ First
12.0%

ACT
9.2%

Te Pāti Māori
1.4%


Collectively this puts a Labour/Greens/Te Pāti Māori coalition at 41.9% and a National/NZ First/Act coalition at 49.7% with the Opportunity Party being an unknown wildcard.

Labour can ill afford any negative perception of a coalition especially one that is so highly emotive.

While I was flippant in suggesting a National/Labour coalition government (which sadly would never happen), this to me would be an ideal solution given the way that the 'fringe' parties on the extreme left and the extreme right are gaining traction. This is the ugly side of MMP where extreme nutters and seeming do-gooders can bugger up sensible thinking and good governance. Working together on consensus might well lead to a strong and stable government with the ability to action long-term plans without having to cater to the wild and useless initiatives that the smaller parties might bring up.

Stranger things have happened.

INTERVIEW # 43

 Hello readers reader. Today we have Interview # 43 for your delectation and a special, very special guest and one of our most prolific commenters - Anonymous.

Anonymous

The Curmudgeon: Welcome Anonymous - can I call you X? You can call me TC.

Anonymous: Thanks TC. Yes X is fine even though that prat Elon Musk denigrated it. I've been called worse ha ha.

The Curmudgeon: I'm sure that you have X, I'm sure that you have. Now X, I see from looking through nearly 20 years of posts that you have been, by far, the most prolific commenter on all of my blogs.

Anonymous: That's a fact Mac, that's a fact. Congratulations by the way on the longevity of your blog and of that other one - The Wine Guy.

The Curmudgeon: Thanks X but it was really Richard of Richards Bass Bag who started the craziness and who was blogging before I started.

Anonymous: I know TC, I know. I put a lot of comments on his blog posts as well but he scrapped his entire blog 3 times so there is no continuity. It's a bit Rich (see what I did there) for him to try and claim a 20 year anniversary.

The Curmudgeon: Yes I know. I would have brought this to his attention but, you know me, I'm too polite to cause offence. I notice also X that the second most prolific commenter on my and the other blogs is Unknown. That commenter isn't known to you is it?

Anonymous: Ha- rumbled. Yes, it's me under a pseudonym.

The Curmudgeon: A pseudonym?

Anonymous: A nom - de - plume TC.

The Curmudgeon: A nom - de - plume?

Anonymous: Yes an alias: A pen name: A stage name: A sobriquet: An assumed name: A handle - you should know that TC you yourself use so many of them.

The Curmudgeon: Ha ha X - I'm just kidding with you.

Anonymous: Sheesh!

The Curmudgeon: So, X. As you hang around here so much, do you like my blogs?

Anonymous: Hell yes TC, they are the best. Look, I'll be honest, I hang around a lot of other blogs - millions of them in fact but yours are definitely the best. They are good blogs for readers who enjoy irreverent humour, strong opinions and everyday observations — but of course won't appeal to everyone.

The Curmudgeon: Tell me more X, tell me more.

Anonymous: Your blogs have a distinctive personality. They aren't conventional news sites nor carefully neutral commentary platforms. They are personal blogs with a satirical, often combative voice, covering life in New Zealand, religion, politics, popular culture and interactions with other bloggers.

The Curmudgeon: So true X, so true.

Anonymous: Your blogs have a recognisable voice in which you write in a direct, grumpy, tongue-in-cheek style. You can generally tell what sort of writing you're getting with your blogs TC, not some of those other ones that are hit or miss and frankly disappointing. I like the fact that your blog archives show years of posts, including material dating back to at least 2008.

The Curmudgeon: That's nice and of course spot on X.

Anonymous: OK TC, keep you hat on.

The Curmudgeon: Isn't the expression "keep your hair on" X?

Anonymous: Best not to go there TC - you should be happy with "keep your hat on"

The Curmudgeon: Oh - rude!

Anonymous: But where your blogs fall short TC is that they can be abrasive. You frequently mock people you disagree with, including other bloggers. Some readers will find this funny; others may find it mean-spirited. Your blogs are openly opinionated. Religion and politics are recurring targets, and the writing often favours satire over balanced discussion. The blogs aren't a reliable news source. You explicitly describe the blog's material as “approximated news” and say its accuracy, fairness and lack of bias are not guaranteed. The blogs are distinctive and with genuine personality. Their strongest feature is your voice; the biggest weakness is that the combative style can sometimes overshadow the substance...

The Curmudgeon:... Hey! Hold on hold on ... I've read that before somewhere ... all the repetition ... that's right. You are just repeating the AI review of my blog ...

Anonymous: ... ha - rumbled. Yes, I read that review and so, OK, borrowed it. I'm a bloody commenter not a blogger. If I had the patience to write blog posts I'd, well, write blog posts on my own blog if I could be arsed to start one up.

The Curmudgeon: Yeah - they are onerous I'll give you that and require some effort to write proper essays, not that all bloggers make such an effort Look at Ri ... no, best not to say.

Anonymous: I know who you mean. What about that other one - Robert? I enjoyed putting scathing comments on his infrequent posts.

The Curmudgeon: Oh him. He's gone I'm afraid. It seems that Richard upset him somehow and he's taken his blog and gone home.

Anonymous: Sua natura TC, sua natura.

The Curmudgeon: Yes, ex ingenio alright.

Anonymous: Or as they said in 3G classes - a trial balance.

The Curmudgeon: Ha ha X. I like that. Hey! I have to go now to see another Italian Film Festival film Bread and Tulips.

Anonymous: It's a good one TC. Will you dress up to go to that one too?

The Curmudgeon: Nah - it's a bit 'chick-flicky' I think. You're probably thinking of Robert who's likely to want to dress up in a dress like his mates in the Catholic clergy do. See you anon.

Anonymous: Ha ha - I like what you did there. Later.

PARALLEL UNIVERSING

Richard of Richard's Bass Bag reckons that he invented the concept of 'Parallel Universing'.

We in the blogging community tend to humour the old guy to keep him happy even if he has wandered off into the realms of fantasy. I imagine he thinks that he invented rockets, continental drift and toothpaste as well amongst other things but ... there you go.

It seems that Google hasn't yet caught on to the concept of parallel universing as a quick search showed this ...

... which really wasn't helpful at all except that going by the nonsense that Richard writes on his blog a hypothetical separate reality may exist alongside his own, sharing similarities or operating under completely different physical laws. In other words the old guy is crazy.

COMING SOON

 

Richard of Richard's Bass Bag - you know, the one that promotes Richard's Bass Bag Tours...

Parking gone wrong as per usual on a Richard's Bass Bag tour

... drew my attention to the fact that it has been almost twenty years since this blog and my other blogs that come under the umbrella of The Curmudgeons Inc.ⓒ started up. While the blogs are listed as starting in 2008 ...

... the real start date was in late 2007 but I deleted them before starting up again in 2008 (March 29th for The Wine Guy and June  25th for The Curmudgeon).

In order to not keep you readers reader waiting I will begin the celebrations for the 20th anniversary next year. No need to thank me. This will take the form of commemorative publications of the 'best of' posts along wth sweepstakes and competitions for the readers reader to take part in. Exciting stuff.