China, you are reading my blogs----great---please continue!

It is so good to see that China is starting to figure in the numbers reading my blogs. I can only hope that they are also downloading my book(s) and that they are passing my website with its link to my book on Kindle (ROSKILL by Neil Coleman). Perhaps they are using Tablets to read them. Either way, thank you for supporting me, China.
www.authorneilcoleman.com  Follow the link to the Kindle version of ROSKILL.

Obama, Cameron and Hollande say--'Yes we can.' You idiots!

Most people probably say---'No you mustn't!' What can the West and it's allies in the Gulf Region possibly gain from bombing the Syrian regime in an attempt to 'punish' the Assad Government? I do not agree that China and Russia are objecting for totally valid reason but they do have a point. All the proposed actions will do is add flames to an already dangerous situation. Young American/allies lives will be lost---for nothing other than a 'slap in the face' and a 'hand-up' to a group of 'rebels' who will eventually turn and 'beat up' on its neighbours and make a volatile region even more unsafe, to say nothing of the possibility of allowing yet another country to fall to fundamentalist of the very worst kind. That the West has helped in the spread of this movement cannot be ignored either.
Yes, we must make it clear that chemical weapons are a curse on humanity but please note:  conventional weapons have killed far more in the present debacle. Dead is dead in anyone's language.
The USA and its allies, plus China, Russia and the remainder of the world must put aside their own agendas and work with the UN to find a solution to the problems that keep feeding the rise of the 'extreme.' Unfortunately, the propensity of nations to look only to their own interests; and then only certain sectors within those countries that link beyond nationalism and connect 'globally; that is the true driving force for these terrible events.
www.authorneilcoleman.com

My choice keeps changing on me! Is it going to be Shane, David or Grant?

Since posting my last post and adding it to Facebook, I have had a few challenges re my thinking town my way. One aspect of aging for me is that I think I am prepared to reconsider my thoughts about issues of the day as more facts are illuminated. Sometimes, those ‘facts’ are those of others. Now apply this to the dilemma I face re the new leadership of the NZ Labour Party leadership.

On one hand we have David Cunliffe, an able and obviously intelligent man with a strong background in the Labour Party. Some label him as being from the Princess Street Branch, as if that is some sort of ‘strength’ or maybe ‘impediment.’ See what I mean---- it’s all about perception and when the numbers are crunched in an election; one loses votes and attracts, depending on the mass perception of the voting public. IN other words, one person cannot appeal to everyone. Swings and roundabouts I guess.

The next choice is re Grant Robertson, yet another intelligent and effective politician. He has the backing of none other than Titiwhai Harawira (not Hone). I am not so sure that such backing will help him! Don’t go assuming that David has the backing of the ‘Gay’ caucus. Nothing is that simple, given that Louisa Wall has thrown her weight in behind David. Grant is without doubt an excellent debater; absolutely capable of ‘taking it to John Key.’ Will he attract middle New Zealand? Will he lose those voters who cannot countenance a Gay PM? It should not be like this in a perfect world, but---you know the rest! He can most definitely do the job, but that small percentage of voters will not back him because of his sexuality could be enough to lose the election for Labour. I hope and wish that this would not be so.

Finally we have Shane Jones. Once again a small group of New Zealanders will remember the silly scandal re his using a credit card to view motel pawn. If every politician who had accessed a few ‘sites’ at home or elsewhere was ‘exposed’ there may not be a hell of a lot of them left in Parliament. Yeah, I know, you say indignantly, ‘that is not true!’ Yeah right. As the man said, ‘I am not going for the Pope’s position.’ I believe that Shane would be more than a match for John Key or anyone else in the National Party and he is very much in touch with the ‘man and woman on the street.’ He has wit, some may say too much. Once again, don’t assume that he has the backing of the Mari caucus on the Labour Party as we have seen some come out in favour of other candidates.

So where does this leave me--- why I am considering them all and will not divulge my choice until the last moment, Whatever that is, it is open to change as I believe that all three are very much in the run. I am not into putting any of them down; I am merely looking to see who is most likely to deliver Labour the victory it needs next year.

www.authorneilcoleman.com

Labour Party leadership---Even I get to vote!

Imagine my delight when I received an email stating that I will be able to cast a vote re the leadership of the Labour Party. Hell, I hardly remember joining the said party. I vaguely remember receiving a visit from my old mate, Phil Goff a few months ago and signing up. My intention was to support Phil as he is an excellent MP to say nothing of the lost chance to lead the Party. He would have been a damned good PM!

OK, put aside history, although we seem never to learn from the lessons that keep repeating themselves and I shall focus on my upcoming decision. Do I follow the endorsements of the Harawira family whereby Titiwhai gave her blessings to Grant Robertson, or do I accept the recommendations of Hone, who gave the nod to Shane Jones? The very fact that they are not united must have raised a few eyebrows, given the attention the media has given to their ‘united’ actions in the past.

Then there is the plethora of opinion on Facebook, some of which is nothing more than ‘babble’ from souls who have an axe to grind and very little political savvy, but once again, who am I to derail such attempts to take part on some sort of collective decision influencing statements? After all, look overseas and try to understand how leaders of other countries end up in power. At least here, we can make fools of ourselves and take part in ‘opinionating’ and genuinely influencing who would be our leaders, without worrying who is looking over our shoulders.

We also have the Party Whips (I have always wondered about that term!) doing their best to keep a ‘level playing field,’ by controlling who and when questions are asked in Question Time in Parliament. Young Chris Hipkins is doing his utmost to make sure that none of the candidates has an advantage. The result of course is that by the time the actual vote is taken, we will have seen very little of how ‘they’ preform in Parliament, so it is going to be the ‘road show’ that gives us some more to go on when making our decisions as ‘Party Members.’ That 40% influence we get is indeed a new factor in the upcoming battle, so we must exercise our rights with attention to the issues and help deliver a candidate who will make a difference.

At this stage, I am neutral and will be garnering as much I formation as I can and try not to be influenced by stupid commentary that emanates from anyone in the future Opposition National Party or their like. I shall also steer clear of some of the rubbish coming from ‘members of my own Party.’ On the day, I shall make my decision and live with the results. Either way, Labour must unite behind the chosen leader or be consigned to another three years in the wilderness!

www.authorneilcoleman.com