EVERY PICTURE TELLS A STORY

 

Yet listen to his mealy mouth explanation of the photograph while still berating Labour, The Greens and Te Pati Maori for the same things.

Hypocrite!

JUST THE THINGS FOR A SUNDAY

 You know, for the only one in this blogging community who doesn't speak Italian, I'm doing an awful lot to support Italy's culture.

Today I watched the third Italian film in a week as part of the Italian Film Festival. Today's offering was Napoli-New York by director Gabriele Salvatore.

It was not too bad or, as Richard would say "it was pretty good".

The year of the story is 1947 and is about two Neapolitan orphaned children - one ten and the other about 14 - struggling to survive in post war Naples and who stow away on a ship bound for New York.

The film made in 2024 is based on a script and film outline created by Federico Fellini and Tullio Pinelli. It does have a bit of Felliniesque character, especially the first half set in Naples. The second half set in a stylised New York has less of the pathos and more of farce with a Wes Anderson character to it.

It's a very emotional film with a feel-good sentiment even if there's a heavy coating of 'rose-tinted glasses' to it in contrasting 'the American Dream' with the reality of post-war European hardship. 

I liked it even if it was a bit disjointed and anachronistic and am thoroughly glad that I saw it. I must track down and rewatch the Fellini films I like.

I'm finishing off the bottle of Villa Maria Reserve Methode Traditionelle I opened last night. This is a stunning New Zealand sparkling and is a cut above other offerings. It is rich and creamy with a great depth of flavour, persistent bead and a nice brioche character. This is due to the fact that it was aged on its lees for 5 years before disgorgement giving it a complexity normally found in Champagne. I'm glad that I bought a case (6) of it and might look to buy some more.

A CHANGE IS GONNA COME

 

That's a great song and prescient given the current state of our New Zealand and the USA's political situations.

Sam Cooke sang:...

"I know a change gon' come
Oh yes, it will"

 ... but, as we know, he was murdered well before any significant changes he was looking forward to would happen in the evil empire.

So too for us here and the Americans there in 2026.

The 'Blue Wave' that is supposedly sweeping over the USA political landscape threatening to bring major changes and helping to eradicate the worst president that country has ever seen will likely hit the breakwater of disinterest, vested interest, partisan politics, the egregious filibuster in US politics that favours the presidential party, the quasi-legal blocks to 'blue' voting that Trump and his cronies have installed and of course the entrenched red 'bible-belt' states who will, as ever, look to their stupid Christian lobbyists and influencers to give them the nod as to which way to vote. It's no coincidence that the bloated orange idiot has gathered a coterie of befrocked Catholic bishops to endorse him a week or so ahead of the midterm elections.

It's likely that even with a big move to the Democrats in USA that Trump and the Republican Senate will still either rule or stonewall any radical changes.

At home in a few weeks we have our national elections where we have a chance of ridding ourselves of one of the worst governments in our history and certainly one that has showed up the idiocy of MMP voting which allowed a coalition of disjointed and self-serving factors to pull against each other and in the process rip the country apart. After John Key I didn't think that we'd get a worse and more cronyist PM but this mini-me is just that - worse.

So is he out?

Unfortunately, even though his polling is atrocious along with his record of governing (and trying to herd the cats that make up his coalition government) the oppositions which by all things that are good and sensible should boot out Luxon, Peters and Seymour and their useless teams are, by the most recent polls looking like they have an uphill battle.

The probable Labour partners of Te Pati Maori and the Greens have shown themselves to be irresponsible and unrealistic in their actions and their aspirations. They just keep getting worse and, like the idiot Trump, seem to be hell-bent on destroying the platform that they are sitting on. Add to this that Hipkins, nice enough bloke that he is, lacks the oomph and charisma that a Norm Kirk, a Helen Clark, a Jacinda Ardern or a Michael Joseph Savage ever had. It's not his fault it's just the way it is in our present age. 

Unfortunately it looks like a National led coalition will win out especially if weasel Luxon does what I suspect he will do - make a deal with the Opportunity Party even though, in order to gain current votes, he has grandstanded by saying he would never do this.

Watch this space or ... hide.

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.