The Brit media are full of their Queen’s diamond jubilee celebrations. Perhaps it helps distract them from the parlous state the country is in. Given the loss of national sovereignty, the destruction of ancient institutions and culture, the rise of a bureaucrat class that’s not answerable to its employers and the tacky celebrity culture that dominates public awareness, they sure need a distraction. But this item is simply nausea-inducing:
‘The Queen has kept the faith’
No she hasn’t. She is a useless figurehead who could have been the last chance for the Brits to claw back their sovereignty from Brussels, who could have spoken up against the Blair Gang’s deliberate project to change British culture forever, using the weapon of mass immigration and who could have used her position as “Defender of the Faith” to speak up against the calculated attacks on Christianity in her country.
Nothing. Silence.
Don’t bother telling me about constitutional conventions which prevent her from speaking out–if ever there was a time in that country’s history for the monarch to break with convention, the past ten years have been that time. Her silence isn’t regal, not principled and not excusable. It’s cowardice.
So when I read articles which babble on about the woman’s “sense of duty” I reach for the sick bag.
Leftists/”progressives”/socialists are not welcome here. Pay for your own soapbox.
Recent Comments
- Michael in Nelson on Open House 3/22/24
- Michael in Nelson on Iran launches attack on Israel
- Darin on Iran launches attack on Israel
- Michael in Nelson on Iran launches attack on Israel
- Darin on Iran launches attack on Israel
- Michael in Nelson on Iran launches attack on Israel
- Darin on Iran launches attack on Israel
- Michael in Nelson on Open House 3/22/24
- Darin on Open House 3/22/24
- Darin on Open House 3/22/24
‘I believe that politicians, lawyers, busy-bodies and do-gooders are like salamis- greatly improved by hanging for a time.’ Oswald Bastable
- "The loss of freedom is like cancer; it will spread slowly but surely across all parts of society until our liberty has been utterly eaten away and we are left with nothing but a half-forgotten idea of what freedom was."
Meta
Unknown FeedBlogroll
- "SPEAK FREE OR DIE"
- A Nation of Cowards
- AA Stoic Philosophy and the Profession of Arms
- AAAKIWI GUN BLOG
- AAAThe Misguided Advocates of Open Borders
- America's Ruling Class
- Australian Morning Mail
- BARBARIANS AT THE GATES
- Belmont Club
- Bill Whittle
- bluebird of bitterness
- Carol's Blog
- Cold Fury
- COLONEL B. BUNNY
- Common Cents
- Countenance Blog
- Daily Media Review
- Deringer Files
- DownTrend
- Ed Bonderenka
- European Civil War
- For Feminazis
- Freedom Fighter's Journal
- Freedom Outpost
- Gates of Vienna
- Gecko's pics
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty's Torch
- Mad World News
- mawm (NZ)
- Morning Mail
- Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery (.pdf)
- Not of this World
- NZCPR
- ON GUN CONTROL
- On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs
- ONELAWFORALL.NZ
- Orphans of Liberty
- Oswald Bastable (NZ)
- Paladin's Page
- Pascal Fervor Blog
- PM of NZ
- Popehat
- Powerline
- Quadrant Online
- Real Science
- Right Truth
- Right Wing Theocrat (MK)
- Rough Diamond
- Sarah, Maid of Albion
- Sultan Knish
- Tamockcommanderie
- Terry's Blog
- The Conservative Co. NZ
- The Deringer Files
- The Destruction of Macquarie Island
- The Freedom Community
- The Threat We Face
- TrueBlue NZ
- Western Rifle Shooters
- Wolfhowling
- Woman Honor Thyself
- Woodpile Report
Agreed – I’ve often wondered why she’s never stepped up as the supreme leader like what it says in her job description and taken a forthright public stand against the more outrageous acts of political rape and insanity that have been committed during those long 60 years.
The current celebrations are really little more than a classic Public Relations Weapon of Mass Distraction that will soon be followed up by the even more overblown Olympic mass masturbation.
Economically and socially however……Tick Tock.
Absolutely.
Damn right!
I will drink to that!
Elizabeth II is a gutless wonder and worthless parasite who sat in silence as her nation fell to socialism.
The Queen is the poster girl for ending the monarchy.
My thoughts exactly from watching the celebrations over the last few days.
It’s all very strange – the Brits carry on with this traditional stuff (like Will’s and Kate’s weddding last year) as if the destruction of Britain isn’t really happening.
About twenty odd years ago I recall seeing a photo in the NZ Herald of the Queen toasting champagne with Robert Mugabe at a CHOGM meeting and thought, wow, the royals (and most of the elite who rule over us) really do live in a different universe.
Its all just theatre. A distraction for the masses. The general election. The royal wedding. The jubilee. The Olympics.
Meanwhile,elsewhere in Airstrip One …
You should have gotten rid of the old broad years ago. We got rid of them in 1776.
Monarchy the only thing left in the infernal country that is recognisably British and traditional. I used to sneer but am increasingly content to see its survival, at least for now, despite the undoubted imbecility of some “royals” and the anachronistic nature of the thing. I lay blame for the destruction of Britain squarely on the shoulders of weaselly, traitorous politicians of all stripes that have been largely self inflicted on the nation. Who believes that if the Royal family did not exist, that something equally “bread and circusish” would not have had to have been invented to entertain the proles. In other words don’t blame the old lady … other heads should be rolling as we speak!
I do blame her, Mara because who carries the prestige and the honour of being in her position also carries a huge moral responsibility, regardless of constitutional and other conventions.
In 1912 Britain was in a crisis and close to civil war in Ireland over the third Home Rule Bill for that divided nation.Elements of the army even openly stated they would not enforce the law on Ulster (Curragh Mutiny).
The leading Ulster Unionist and lawyer Edward Carson(who was bitterly opposed to Home Rule) stated
“if the King was asked to sign a bill for the abolition of the monarchy he must as a constitutional sovereign obey!”
That was at the height of the most powerful and greatest empire the world had seen.
Britain has been through many crises before and since and no doubt faces a grave future as KG points out.
The monarchy will outlast the current crises and provide Britain with a rally point. The Jubilee will help to reinstil a sense of Britishness,pride and continuity in the UK that the powers of the left have been seeking to destroy. If for that reason alone we should support the Crown.
A British, Christian and democratic institution that has outlasted all these fads ,dangers and attacks.
Long live the Queen.
“The monarchy will outlast the current crises and provide Britain with a rally point. ”
A rally point? For what? To rally around and watch as the country’s dismantled? A garden party, perhaps?
Might as well rally around Wellington on his horse–he’s about as useful.
“A British, Christian and democratic institution that has outlasted all these fads ,dangers and attacks.”
It hasn’t outlasted them yet and it’s only lasted this long by becoming an irrelevant joke which is no danger to politicians.
In Aust if you aren’t a monarchist you are going to get Justice Kirby or some other symbolic niche apparatchik as President.
A President who will be elected and therefore in direct political competition with the PM and Parliament, a President with a mandate. A ribbon cutter we want, a politician with reserve powers and election promises or at the very least “implications” to keep.
If you aren’t a monarchist you’re a bit slow.
“If you aren’t a monarchist you’re a bit slow.”
And if you support the monarchy for the reasons stated, Al, you’re worse than a bit slow–you’ve been conned.
The alternative to a monarchy–for Australians–doesn’t have to be anything at all. You’ve been sucked into thinking there has to be some kind of alternative to the Brit queen. There doesn’t.
After 2,500 years of experiments with governments of various types, a constitutional republic where the People rule by means of checks and balances on those in power is the only solution.
Of course, the problem with a republic is the civil war every 100 years or so, because some members of the nation feel that treason against the constitution is acceptable.
But warts and all, I will take the civil wars over tyranny any day.
Alas, not an option KG.
The post referendum polls revealed absolutely that only an elected Pres will do for the punters. An appointed fete attender gets no guernsey.
There is no ‘no Pres or GG equivalent’ proposal from any political party in Aust, and without that it can never get up.
The Aust Republic will have a Pres….now think how that’s going to work……
I fail to see (perhaps I’m a bit dim right now) why getting rid of the monarch as Australia’s head of state requires a substitute. I said “The alternative to a monarchy–for Australians–doesn’t have to be anything at all.”
And you haven’t really answered that.
But this is all rather beside the point. The post asks why a woman who has done nothing to arrest the filth going on in her own country should be revered.
Al’s (unwittingly) answered the conundrum. There is, must be and always will be a GG (Gantt Guy). For a nominal fee, I would be happy to take the role of the other GG : Head of State for HM Prison Colony at New Holland.
:popcorn
‘Unwittingly’? Thought it was obvious.
Unless you have a switch flipper, ie GG or Pres, a Parliamentary Constitutional crisis spends 3 months with the High Court under the KG system =s societal disaster …….instead of there being an election to fix it when the switch is flipped.
Without a Constitution that foresees the mechanics of every possible future Constitutional crisis (impossible) you can’t get by without a GG or Pres.
KG has no “system” Al and neither do I intend to propose one.
I merely object to that woman not doing her duty.
Ok, KG…what’s her duty?
Lead an anti Fabian State movement?
Sorry, the Poms love their welfare state or they wouldn’t keep voting for it.
Rant about the EU membership?….oops, Conservatives and Labour both have it as party platform and the Poms love it or they wouldn’t keep voting for it.
Rave about immigration? You’ve got it now…..the Poms keep voting for ConsLab both of whom love it.
What’s a monarch to think? She gets the best opinion poll every 4 years at the election……….
If the plebs don’t like it they need to stop voting for people who do.
Duh.
Sorry Al, that’s such a simplistic and distorted reading of the current state of affairs in Britain I can’t take it seriously enough to be bothered answering it.
I’ll take that as a concession.
You may take it as a stale quiche, for all I care, but concession it most certainly isn’t.
To back KG up, Al, I’d like to ask you why you think the Queen is merely a nice little old lady who should be praised for her survival skills when I just saw this morning on the news coverage (watching as I did in nominal interest from my home in Houston, Texas) a little confab between the American news lady and a man who was apparently some kind of official who got to see the Queen up close and personal first thing in the day and last at night (please forgive that I don’t know his official title) talk about how the Queen was EXTREMELY aware of what went on in her country and Parliament and met with every Prime Minister since the beginning of her rule every week (usually on Tuesdays, from what I understood of the conversation.) Apparently, according to this former official administrator/confidante, the Queen would give a kind of prime directive for her Prime Minister to pursue with Parliament. Now, Al, I ask you, if that were true, do you not think that the utter degredation that KG points out is because the Queen had something to do with it? I agree with KG: she has been aware and has had enough influence to do something about it, and apparently has been treated with utter disdain by the Parliament that claims to respect her, or she has FAILED to recognize those duties that will maintain the sovereignty of her country.
Right now, we’re looking at that kind of shit in the White House and believe you me, the words impeachment is the LEAST of the nasty words we’d like to lay upon Obama’s head…
I’m not especially anti-monarchist or Republican or anything else, much. I just fail to see why a woman who could have at least spoken out against the horrors taking place in Britain didn’t and won’t, yet that same person is the centre of something approaching national hysterical god-worship right now.
Mate, she presided over the disintegration of what was once the world’s most formidable empire. Why should she worry about one small subset of that empire? Just because she lives there?
Gantt, I think of some of the courageous people who have spoken out against tyranny at the risk –and often the cost–of their own lives, then look at the modern brit royals and I’m filled with contempt.
I went looking for the story about an Italian priest who was ordered by a German commander to provide a dozen locals to be shot in retaliation for partisan action. The priest (or was it Bishop?) supplied the names of priests and bishops (his own at the top of the list) instead, and invited the Germans to shoot them. Can’t find the story, alas.
But that’s real courage and it makes mewling and whining about constitutional niceties look like the lame excuse it is.
I am not familiar with your Italian bishop but I am familiar with Archbishop Damaskinos of Athens who protested loudly about the deportation of Jews from Greece and told the faithful it was their duty to hide them.
The German commander threatened to have him shot and his famous response was
Who had a set of balls.
In reality since the “Glorious Revolution” in 1789 (I think) the Monarchy has been a decoration much like the fairy atop a Xmas tree. Why the Monarchy is retained is something I do not understand at all. If NZ was to become a Republic I expect the Klarkenfuhrer will want to be the inaugural el-Presidente! (Now there’s a reason to keep the Windsors!)
Cad,1688. Brought William of Orange to the throne and established primacy of parliament.Very much a part of our unwritten constitution.
Pity so little is made of it and so much of the French and American revolution and rebellion.Pop history and Hollywood have a lot to answer for.
Also, Cad, if NZ was to become a Republic rest assured the [adjusted] Treaty would become the default Constitution.
Yet another reason to retain the monarchy.
That’s exactly how they’ve skewed the Constitutional Review that’s currently underway. Every single one of the panel members, bar one, is a pro-apartheid plant.
http://johnansell.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/non-iwi-kiwis-dont-count-on-coddington/
Yeah, Gantt – Isn’t ‘democracy’ wonderful.
Sure is. Especially when used by traitors intent on ‘fundamentally transforming’ their nation!
Talking of the tyranny of commies there’s an arresting article in a recent New Yorker about William Alexander Morgan who as a US citizen fought bravely through the Cuban Revolution only to be executed by Castro (largely at the bidding of the ultimate piece of filth, Che Guervara.) Morgan wished for the demise of Batista rather than the establishment of a Socialist State in Cuba which accorded with the original intentions of Castro, sadly for Morgan, Castro’s brother Raoul, and Guervara, had other aims.
“Every revolutionary is a closet aristocrat.” – Frank Herbert
Kg, I appreciate your aversion to the “national hysterical god-worship” forelock tugging, 2 bob paper flag waving, sunday-best wearing , teary behaviour by the loyal subjects. That sort of thing makes me queasy wherever in the world it occurs, so I don’t look. Much. btw … When in history did the last Monarch anywhere stand on the throne and incite warfare? Just curious.
Mara, I’m not suggesting she should incite warfare. (I’d love to see it happen, but I’m not suggesting it).
But she could have spoken up about politicians handing over what isn’t theirs to hand over to Brussels–national sovereignty. She could have spoken up about the program to gut the power of the Lords and the sale of peerages to political donors. She could have spoken up about the deliberate (and admitted) project to “change British culture forever” by importing vast numbers of immigrants on the part of the Blair gang.
Most of all, perhaps, she could have refused to take part in the empty pomp and ceremony of the “speech from the throne” where she sits like an effing stuffed-and-wired-for-sound dummy and regurgitates the lies and bullshit of the political party in power.
A figurehead who finds herself powerless to alter events, yet is used to advance the agenda of the enemies of England ought to have the integrity and self-respect and courage to step down rather than be used.
Her Christmas address last year or the year before that was quite a sharp message of Christianity, and it was almost shocking hearing a senior British figure not talk about ‘faith’ but referring specifically to Christ.
She clearly however will never explicitly condemn anything the British Government does, quite possibly out of her own sense of staying out of politics as much as convention.
I remember that speech, and the stir it caused, Moneo.
Just about all of life is politics. By staying out of it she gives the impression of tacit agreement.
You know KG – I think that unlike the Greek Church that was in the forefront of trying to save it’s Jewish Greeks from the the German invaders, the British Churches have been shamefully silent regarding the influx of Muslims into the UK.
They have, Rivoniaboy. I think they’ve been intimidated by the stifling PC culture and also to a large extent they’ve adopted that culture themselves. In a larger sense they stand for nothing, because moral relativism has hollowed them out from within.
Got to agree with KG even though it pains me to say it, I’m not a republican but the current Queen of NZ is a failure. Even a figurehead monarch in a constitutional monarchy who is normally bound by convention to accept the advice/laws/warrants placed in front of them by the representative assembly still has “reserve powers” and an enormous moral weight if they do exercise because they are so rarely invoked. Their ultimate duty is represent the people if their elected representatives are in fact working against and betraying the people and whatever constitution they have (written and unwritten) – they literally are THE very last line of defence.
Take World War II and a true monarch for example – Norway, after the Nazi occupation – fully aided and abetted by internal traitors and elected representatives who formed the lawful government presented a list of laws and demands to the King which effectively gave limited self-governance (but under ultimate Nazi control).
King Haakon VII replied “The decision is yours. But if you choose to accept the German demands, I must abdicate. For, I cannot appoint (Vidkun) Quisling as prime minister and his party as government”. A few hours later he abdicated and was put under close house arrest out in the country for the rest of the war, the Quisling regime became government. The King’s former personal retainers and guards while he was internal exile formed the core of the resistance government and army. He was restored to head of state by the CITIZENS with a 92% popular vote in a referendum after the war and reigned until his death in 1957. Now that’s a real King. Similarly other monarchs in WWII – Christian X of Denmark, Petar II of Yugoslavia, Wilhemina I of the Netherlands, etc all resisted as best they could the loss of sovereignty to foreign powers, NOT ONE cravenly and venally to retain their position signed everything put in front of them.
Thanks, Benares. That says it far better than I could.
“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Edmond Burke 1770
And one must ask the question, When “good men” [including monarchs and elected officials] do nothing just exactly how ‘good’ are they?
I’m also reminded of an equivalent [of sorts] requirement for Bible-believing Christians:
“Good men”, I would posit, are ONLY good when their actions and words stand in defiance of evil.
What the UK needs more than an activist monarch are binding referenda, triggered when X % of voters petition a govt or Parliament wants one.
That way immigration, EU membership etc get fixed quickly and fairly permanently. Of course, the Establishment would rather cut off their own ears than allow such a thing.
Be luuverly for NZ? Maybe not without a strong Constitution, the punters vote themselves other people’s money each election cycle as it is…… binding referenda might be a temptation too far…..tho on second thought, capital flight would be a great life lesson for the takers left behind to redistribute each others money..
Right back at the beginning, Lee S said: “It’s all very strange – the Brits carry on with this traditional stuff (like Will’s and Kate’s wedding last year) as if the destruction of Britain isn’t really happening. ”
I think that’s because the full extent of the destruction STILL hasn’t permeated the collective consciousness – which means that it’s still going to have to get worse before it’ll be resisted (by which time it’ll be too late).
KG then asked: “… why a woman who has done nothing to arrest the filth going on in her own country should be revered.”
Same answer: the masses haven’t caught on to the full extent of the destruction yet, and so they don’t realise that the Queen and co. have been about as useful as garden ornaments.
———————
ON THE OTHER HAND, maybe the current outbreak of patriotism, however mawkish, means that deeper down there’s a reserve of Britishness that’s yet to be provoked/tapped…. As the actress said to the bishop, I’m damned if I know.
FOR SALE….. House lot, special price. 20 metres red/white/blue bunting (English quality) , 10 Union Jack wigs (med size), 5 inflatable corgis (debarked) and an electronic waving queen. Only used once, though I can’t speak for the Queen.
ONLY $100 to KG’s royal bloggers. Be quick etc………
Are the Corgis and Waving queen still available?I may have a use :gunner for them this Saturday if so :popcorn
Sorry to interrupt
My comment here:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/06/general_debate_4_june_2012.html#comment-979115
“My old man worked his passage to England in 1936 and joined the RAF. After the war started he did TWO tours (81 raids) flying Wellington bombers on night raids over Germany. After his TWO tours (DFC & Bar) he came home and became a founding member of RNZAF 40 Squadron flying resupply to Pacific Islands in UNARMED Lodestars and C-47′s. When that tour was over he went back to England, turned down promotion as CO 75 Squadron and joined a Mosquito squadron in which he flew on low level raids over France and Europe until the end of the war. Pop was never offered a knighthood and I daresay he wouldn’t have wanted one. His only concern that I know of since I got to know him was for all his young mates that died in their efforts to beat the NAZIS.
To see that commo CUNT Cullen get a knighthood for his efforts to undo all that my father and his mates fought for should be an offense to all Kiwis. It sure is to me!! “
Mighty well said Wratty. Certainly puts into words how I feel about the hypocrite CUNT Key nominating him and the hypocrite CUNT Cullen for accepting. Two arsehole sides of the same hypocritical cow-turd.
Spot on GG.
WW,I thank God for men like your Father!
And I feel the same way,look at all the men who fought and died trying to stop the spread of Communism…….and then look at the A–hole Communist we have in the White House
Oh,and I especially like your second comment,it’s the same thing I say about our elections.They are nothing more than a choice between rotten SOB “A” and rotten SOB “B”.
Damn straight.
Knighthoods for an unrehabilitated communist politician and a boofhead rugby moron? Unbelievable.
Spit!
The best NZ joke is they don’t get that reintroducing knighthoods etc is a cultural cringe of embarrassing proportions. The Australians laugh and the Poms condescend.
Graphic Truth.
http://barenakedislam.com/2012/06/04/tunisia-is-cutting-off-the-heads-of-christians-part-of-their-new-democratic-revolution/
Something for the Queen and her subjects/sheeple to look forward to.
Ironically the tawdry tackiness that is 2012 Kool Britannia was evident during every excruciatingly second of the bad coverage given to that ‘Thames water event’ by BBC television. My God I have never seen such low-quality live broadcasting!
On the bright side, although Queen Victoria had a Real Navy it is good to know that when a National Need arises Kool Britannia can still pull together a small flotilla of strange kayaks, odd row boats – plus a cluster of fat Maoris in a waka.
I didn’t watch a single minute of the spectacle, Flashy, but I was listening to the radio yesterday when some talking head was interviewing some old-time Brit journo. The journo was laughing his ass off at some if the nonsense the “commentators” came out with. Apparently the hat worn by Her Maj was crafted by a firm of milliners that has been in business for 100 years, and who made the hat worn by Nelson at Waterloo! And the Queen’s official title is “HRH Her Majesty”.
I used to be a Republic of NZ supporter. I thought it was ridiculous to have a head of state based on gender, hereditary succession, religion, race, etc. Still do actually, but after realising that Constitutions cannot be written in the “good times” only after hard won freedoms and seeing the power grab but US Presidents over the years, I’ll dance with the one who brung me for a while yet…
The shame is our governments could be kept in check and our liberties preserved if we didn’t have a lying treasonous press who is the enemy of the people. :gunner
“although Queen Victoria had a Real Navy”
She sure …Did.
The ships of the Royal Navy, 165 of them, drawn up at Spithead on June 26 1897 to mark the diamond jubilee of Victoria, for 60 years Queen of Great Britain and Ireland and her dominions beyond the seas, and, since 1876, Empress of India.
There were 21 battleships and 44 cruisers.
Bwaaa.
Bolta last night said re Key, “He’s a New Zealand Conservative, who knows what that means”.
Quite.
Love it, love it, love it!
“John Key is a Conservative. Sort of. He’s a New Zealand Conservative, whatever that means. And Stephen Harler is a real Conservative.”
Adolf?
Your quote is the accurate one.
Do Kiwi “conservatives” realise that their Aussie namesakes regard them as a socially conservative branch of the NZ Labour Party?
As KG can’t accept…..the NZ populace keeps voting for the welfare state, so it must be what they want.
I suspect you misunderstand, Al.
First, pretty much the only place you’ll find kiwi Conservatives is here and TrueBlueNZ (and a small number ofmother places). Most of the rest of the so-called “right” (notably Farrar and Slater) are Leftards in disguise, on a mission to harm the Conservative cause.
Second, I suspect you’ll find KG *does* accept that the NZ populace is so conditioned, so stupid and so undeserving of a say in the process they can’t do basic maths, and believe they can continue to vote themselves a slice of Other People’s Money forever. KG, I suspect, accepts the Universal Franchise has been a complete and abject failure, nowhere more obviously than in New Zealand!
Oh…..
So Key and his comrades don’t describe themselves as “conservatives”?
Now I get it. They don’t and they aren’t.
Snap.
I thought they did.
Alas, your second point is worse than wrong, it’s disinformation..
KG doesn’t believe if you keep voting for people who crave the welfare state you are a welfare statist. KG believes that someone else is responsible for your vote.
QED.
No, Key and Co dnt describe themselves as Conservatives. In fact, from the day Key took over the leadership of the party he lurched to the left and has run as far away as he possibly can from any policy or principle that might be considered remotely Conservative.
And I can’t speak for what goes in inside KG’s head (hence my use of terms such as “I suspect” in my previous comment), but I will speak for me. Yes, fools who vote for an ever-increasing share of Other People’s Money should nit be surprised when they find themselves living in a broke, broken-arsed welfare state. Again, the Universal Franchise has been a complete and abject failure. The only people who should ever have a say in the democratic process are those who make a positive contribution to the treasury.
Sadly, New Zealand is fucked. It is the direct result of a century-long experiment with various flavours of socialism. The entire electoral process is so corrupted by mendacious politicians and the self-serving morons who vote for the that to even participate is to give at least a tacit approval.
NZ is a welfare state junkie. The all-important “political center” is defined by this fact.
A nudge to the left and more socialism is simple to accomplish if the majority get it into their veins and feel the rush [Working for Families anyone?]. Ergo the center has shifted to a “new normal”.
The only thing I can see changing the fundamentals is a catastrophic economic implosion that renders the tax and borrow regime. And if Europe is any indicator, that is probably arriving down The Old Trunk Line any week now.
In the meantime isn’t it good to know that $1.1 million of Other Peoples Money will be spent by Waikato University [who else?] to “research” the ethics of using Maori body parts in medical research: Oh! the Irony?