Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

11 Comments

  1. A corrupt liar who presided over the looting and polluting of NZ by global corporations and international bankers, and then took up a position which encompassed special responsibility for looting Africa.

    What other qualifications are needed for the top job at the UN?

    1. Well said – AND SO TRUE. Most will have difficulties understanding the truths about Helen Clark. Let us also not forget that Helen Clark did not put her foot down on Genetically Modified Foods/seeds coming in as she should have. A real piece of corporate work, she is. And we all mostly bought the BS for awhile there. No more as we question authority more and more.

  2. That’s a really nasty and offensive hatefest there I had to ggogle who Tim Selwyn is. Among other eyebrow raising things, he’s an ex Act party member who has supported National’s BFF, the Maori party. Says it all really.

    1. Do some research WORDS and see the facts and then you will not speak like your head is in quick sand.
      Helen Clark needs to be exposed for the hypocrisy and ugliness that she swims in and the horrific hidden agendas of the UN. Check out the links I just posted above.

      1. Yes Blake, Clark’s three terms cemented neoliberalism and Labour will struggle until they distance themselves from her failures.

        This is why Corbyn is succeeding: he knows Blair’s ‘third way’ was a failure and he’s offering an alternative.

        In contrast, NZ’s Labour appear unable to admit that Clark’s ‘third way’ was a failure. They’re unwilling to offer an alternative.

        Andrew Little has an opportunity to shift Labour and therefore shift NZ’s ‘political centre’.

        The ERA 2000 is a joke – Key didn’t create a new employment act for a reason.

        Housing prices and affordability spiralled out of control under Clark. See graph here:
        http://www.interest.co.nz/property/54470/nz-house-prices-down-11-april-2007-inflation-adjusted-terms-which-biggest-fall-real

        Prisoner numbers climbed under Clark. See muster numbers here:
        http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jMOKiqo269I/U7DO-jYEGHI/AAAAAAAAAIM/I2zKH0gFBhE/s1600/Crime+rate+and+imprisonment+rate.jpg

        I have no idea why Labour and their supporters continue to look at Clark’s era through rose tinted glasses. Until they change, Labour will struggle to get into power. And if they do get into power, not much will change.

        Sure, Clark was better than Key and Little will be better than Key, but it’s not enough for many of us. Labour needs a major shift – like Corbyn is offering UK’s Labour and Sanders is offering USA’s Democrats.

        1. Well said and I agree with you. Labour needs to make some strong decisions now if they want to get back in with the Greens and bring about some Bernie Sanders type reforms and changes.

  3. Helen Clark and the U.N. are not our friends. We sure do breed them here, don’t we and we thought all the monsters were in America ? ? ?

    I used to be a fan or hers many years ago but over the past 10 years I have learned some very ugly truths about her and the U.N.

    I hope that others do their research and find out what a hypocrite she really is and the hidden agendas of the U.N. that are not in the best interests and well – being of all living things – people and the environment.

    http://www.naturalnews.com/051058_2030_Agenda_United_Nations_global_enslavement.html

    http://www.investigatemagazine.co.nz/Investigate/17193/agenda-2030-does-the-public-have-any-idea-whats-coming/

    1. After her role in the Foreshore & Seabed legislation, the raids on the Tuhoe people, I find it insulting that she should quote a Maori proverb at her selection conference. She is one woman whose actions do not give a toss for the indigenous people of Aotearoa.

  4. Probably the strongest like between candidate Clark and NZ is the civil system itself, which has some difficultly in coming to terms with with constitutional values that did not originate in Europe.

    The Cabinet Manual contains circular reasoning, a casual treatment of democracy, and some assertions that are just plain wrong when it describes this country’s constitution.

    Link

  5. Not really a fan of Helens, but you could have left out the first 7 paragraphs to make your point. I imagine most people would have been turned off by the silly name calling.

Comments are closed.