General Debate 10 November 2007
Three parties to choose from tonight! ….
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: UncategorizedGeneral Debate 10 November 2007
142 Responses to “General Debate 10 November 2007”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
November 10th, 2007 at 10:21 am
Question. What are the first things communists ban when they come to power?
Answer. Dissension and religion.
This corrupt Liabour govt has shown its true colours, first you outlaw free speech (EFB) and then outlaw religion (Sunday Schools)
While I am not a religious person I take offense at the filthy socialists telling me that I cannot send my kids to Sunday schools if I so wished.
Where the hell are the Nat’s at a time like this?, bring back Banksie.
November 10th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Big bruv: What about your child’s freedom to grow up without having their thought structure defined by a religious moral? I don’t follow Catholicism any more, but I could do without the hardwired Catholic guilt I can’t seem to shake. I also could have done without being woken in the night on Christian Camp to receive a scary lecture about the ‘Mark of the Beast.’ And cowering in my bed for fear of the devil, who, I was sure, was tempting me. The issue of person freedom as pertains to religion is pretty complex. It depends a lot on how much responsibility you feel one should take for the ability of their child to think independently, and I certainly feel that some measure should be made to protect children from their parent’s decisions about who and what they should be. What those measures should be, however, is anyone’s guess.
As pertaining to yesterday:
Wow, I’m impressed! Firstly – the Kwan? How awesome! I’m going to do some more reading on that subject, to be sure.
Secondly, the notion that there is no essence, there are many personal views. This is, I would say, pretty true – although I would mediate it by saying I think there are “essences,” in the sense that I tend to follow the notion that objectivity is build rather than actual, at least in human society. What david wrote, for example, the idea that socialism et al. are collective terms would seem to me to be representative of this – essence is a descriptive rather than prescriptive idea, perhaps, which is about communicating a set of ideas at once (ideology/ideologies too are descriptive.) david, what you’ve done is phenomenology – you have approached the being (‘on’) of capitalism as lived experience (‘phenomenon,’) by discussing your personal relationship with capitalism. I like this way of thinking, because, if we are going to talk about the idea that there are many personal views it makes sense to talk about our personal views, to view the place we study from as part of a visible relationship rather than invisible (meaning that we take into account the physical feelings of our body, our psychoanalytic, our background et cetera. Of course, eventually the lived experience can be studied as ‘on,’ at which point the differentiation between phenomenology and ontology becomes indistinct… but never mind.) In this way, I think we can try to find “essences” without essentialising. Okay, so, with this in mind, I think we can agree that IF such a thing as an “essence” can be found, it would be ultimately changeable and unfixed. Like light, it would move in both particles and waves. Where I get interested is the fact that we need to have one system of national government.
This would seem to encapsulate the route concerns of philosophy in the sense that it engages the notions of the Many and the One, (as a set of four – One in One, One in Many, Many in Many and Many in One) and the dialogue between these two places. I’m curious as to the effect a further introduction of Manyness or Multiplicity into government might have – abolishing party votes, for instance. I’m also curious about the idea of doing away with list MPs. I can see some downsides, especially the probability that if each MP were individually elected, there would be a lot of issues with personality politics, plus a lot else, including the fact that a lot of people couldn’t give a crap who was in power, so if it were more considered, they might not vote. I’m into the idea of an electorate MP vote only, and then treasurer and minister of defence and sundry elected separately. Having said this, MMP with no party voting, only conscience voting might be an interesting place to start. Thoughts?
Oh, and Redbaiter – do you actually think that a lack of paragraphs is characteristic of writing by socialists? Can you give me some examples (aside from me, of course)? I just read something that indicated politics and separation started in the brain, so I’d be curious. (PS: Have I got it right this time?)
Again, I won’t be around today, but I’ll check back in a day or so.
November 10th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
National’s Vision For New Zealand
The National Party seeks a safe, prosperous and successful New Zealand that creates opportunities for all New Zealanders to reach their personal goals and dreams.
We believe this will be achieved by building a society based on the following values:
• Loyalty to our country, its democratic principles and our Sovereign
as Head of State
• National and personal security
• Equal citizenship and equal opportunity
• Individual freedom and choice
• Personal responsibility
• Competitive enterprise and rewards for achievement
• Limited government
• Strong families and caring communities
• Sustainable development of our environment
A great vision but we have no credibility if we have to get there by lying,http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=643
Yes I know the Labour party does but the truth will always out
I want our party to have integrity
And as stated on another post we should start rebuilding now
Because the Ghost of Hager is hovering over our current front bench
November 10th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
sorry link http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=643
November 10th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Santa Claws you are over-reaching now. It is obvious that you have devised a clever ruse of pretending to be a National Party supporter with a conscience, or perhaps a loyal, but concerned advocate for the National Party cause, but you have to tone it down a bit or people will suspect that are just a sophisticated threadjacker.
Like I said before, though I can only smile at your candour.
)
Keep it up, I need the laughs.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
I’ sorry Lee that you think like that.
But I know its a crime to link to the Standard but
“Key fabricated a quote, and misled the House.”
This is undeniable So by how does this help us by taking the focus off Labours tax U turn and giving Labour the chance to exploit Mr Key’ being economical with the truth.
I can’t tone down having a conscience and wanting to be part of an honest and credible party
I do NOT WANT the Labour party to have another term
But Lee, a fundamental change is required if we are going to stop them
I am not thread jacking in as I purposefully posted this in the general debate thread
November 10th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Santa Claws – can’t you recognise another Standard beat-up? Why do they never accuse Helen Clark of misleading the House whenever, when asked about her confidence in a particular Minister she says “yes, because he/she is a hard-working and conscientious Minister” when the Ministers’ performance makes that answer a blatant untruth?
November 10th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Like I said, keep it up, I need the laughs.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
So, for General Debate, How many of these do yo think visit kiwiblog?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_sock_puppet
A sockpuppet, also commonly known as an alt, is an online identity used for purposes of deception within an Internet community. In its earliest usage, a sockpuppet was a false identity through which a member of an Internet community speaks while pretending not to, like a puppeteer manipulating a hand puppet.[1]
In current usage, the perception of the term has been extended beyond second identities of people who already post in a forum to include other uses of misleading online identities. For example, a NY Times article claims that “sock-puppeting” is defined as “the act of creating a fake online identity to praise, defend or create the illusion of support for one’s self, allies or company.”[2]
The key difference between a sockpuppet and a regular pseudonym is the pretence that the puppet is a third party who is not affiliated with the puppeteer.
The term was first employed on Usenet in reference to Earl Curley, who had used various pseudonyms to defend his character and arguments and to denigrate his opponents.[
November 10th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
The trouble is Lee
Is who to Vote for National is not. t seems going to get its shit together
Rodney
Wniston
or Peter
I despair……..
Inventory I checked the link Clarke has been quoted out of context
Just because labour lie and cheat doesn’t mean we should follow suite.
If we do doesn’t it follow , we become as bad as them ?
Or am I just politically naive ?
In my business dealings I expect nay demand honesty as so in my personal relationships . Why wouldn’t I want my political representatives to exhibit the same qualities ?
I’m sorry that makes you laugh Lee
November 10th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Bravo Santa Claws! I appreciate your preference for principles over partisanship.
What John Key has done here in misquoting Helen Clark is dispicable and intellectually bankrupt. Surely – this is a sign of absolute desperation. They weren’t able to find a decent quote so they search around for something they can hack to pieces instead.
Nasty piece of work that John Key.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
So now I am a sock puppet
I think you would find the most New Zealanders would agree with my values
November 10th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Santa:
Bravo!
“I think you would find the most New Zealanders would agree with my values”
That certainly would explain our present predicament.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Talking about most New Zealanders.
Hence the way the Labour Party know what is best for your child they know what is best for Mum and Dad.
We have a current Government that is very very bereft of normal Dads and Mums like most of us.
They have leant thru Uni what we have learnt through normal family life and we must respect the fact that their theories are vastly superior to our puny experience.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Iiotboy on the political blogosphere I seem to be in a majority of one.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Inventory2 – this is no beat up by any stretch of the imagination.
Key quoted Clark thus:
“Tax cuts are a path to inequality. They are the promises of a visionless and intellectually bankrupt people.”
Clark actually said:
“Tax cuts are a path to inequality **and underdevelopment in **today’s** circumstances**. They are the promises of vision-less and intellectually bankrupt people”
November 10th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Not for long Santa – those others will come around eventually. It just takes time to get it through their thick skulls. Well done on being the first to speak out.
November 10th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
It is true. The quote is innaccurate. What a stupid own-goal.
It is (yet) another shameful example of how inept Key’s organisation is.
If I were him I would sack the researcher who put this in front of him. It reminds me of a comment I made earlier that National appears interested in the idea of winning, but not committed to it.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
What I want the lefties to answer me is why The Hamilton by-elections (which is the determiner for the generasl election) saw all socialist
candidates turfed and the same for France.
How, may I ask is that a reflection of socialist success and confidence from the electorate going into the 2008 elections.
Your confidence is indeed a deep seated mystery and one I would like explained in explicit detail. you certainly have the opportunity to enlighten.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Just goes to show how succinct Clark’s reply was:
“That would be true of every tax cut the National Party has ever offered.”
November 10th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Just goes to show how succinct Clark’s reply was:
“That would be true of every tax cut the National Party has ever offered.”
But would just prove what a piece of brilliance Labour’s intention to offer tax-cuts is!
Yet again, Key has walked right into Helen’s trap!
yeah, ok…
But all the same, without attempting to condone Key’s incompetence, I would have actually used the original quote in entirety, and then asked something along the lines of
‘Is this more proof that even when addressing her Party Faithful, the Prime Minister still has enough basic cunning to leave herself a get-out clause just in case it might be politically expedient to change later?”
But that is why I am not leader of the Nats, I guess.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Isn’t there just an outside chance that Sunday Schools now have problems [start of this thread] because Parliament passed yet another piece of stupid legislation without thinking it through, as they are paid to do – it has happened before: that something unworkable has been passed – and with the EFB I am hoping it will happen again.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
‘Is this more proof that even when addressing her Party Faithful, the Prime Minister still has enough basic cunning to leave herself a get-out clause just in case it might be politically expedient to change later?”
well, she definitely can’t use the time worn excuse of “the books aren’t as healthy as first thought”
“There was a glitch in the system,” won’t help this time either.
Imagine if a quarter of the student debt was somehow receipted. The govt would be in dire straits expliaining why it can’t afford to run the country WITH OUR MONEY.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
“..because Parliament passed yet another piece of stupid legislation without thinking it through,”
Remember though,,
These laws aren’t passed as relevant or common sense, they are passed according to agendas placed on the govts laps by only they know who.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Another rather interesting twist in the “terror raids” fiasco: NRT/idiot-sevant puts it so well, so please excuse the cut and paste.
“On Morning Report [audio] this morning, Police Commissioner Howard Broad was asked the obvious question: why didn’t he try and prosecute the Urewera 17 under the Crimes Act, for something like conspiracy to murder? His answer is revealing:
Those options were not available to us… The offences under other legislation had not been committed. So conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to do those other sorts of things, those offences had not been [committed?] at all.
(Emphasis added)
So, despite the lurid claims leaked to the media about plots to kill political figures, there was no conspiracy to do so. Given the low bar for conspiracy – essentially it requires proving an agreement between the parties (which need not be explicit) to carry out a crime – what this means is that the police had, at best, a few dumbarses mouthing off, with no plan, agreement, or intent to do anything.”
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2007/11/no-conspiracy.html
November 10th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Exactly Lee there was no need to quote out of context.
All that happens is the dishonesty comes back to bite you.
If the National Party learned anything about “the hollow man ”
It should have been the principle of lying and deception have no place in the National Party.
If instead we concentrated on core values such as individual freedom , choice and personal responsibility we would surely be in a better position then we are now
We need to be open about who we are and what we stand for
How can you argue with that?
November 10th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Roger Nome,,,,,,,,,,,
What I want the lefties to answer me is why The Hamilton by-elections (which is the determiner for the generasl election) saw all socialist
candidates turfed and the same for France.
How, may I ask is that a reflection of socialist success and confidence from the electorate going into the 2008 elections.
Your confidence is indeed a deep seated mystery and one I would like explained in explicit detail. you certainly have the opportunity to enlighten.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
Hinamanu – National probably needs Winston to get over the 5% threshold to win – and then he has to favor going with National over Labour. This is an unlikely scenario.
Otherwise they need to get over 47% of the vote. Another unlikely scenario.
So while i’m not writing the tories off, it’s my opinion that the left block is odds on to win. i.e.
http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=634
November 10th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
“We need to be open about who we are and what we stand for
How can you argue with that?”
This is working on an assumption that ‘we’ (hypothetically) are essentially decent people, with decent values.
However, there is an area of our psychology that confuses the concept of ‘integrity’ with the concept of ‘being good’. Integrity is another way of saying my values are consistent with themselves.
This is why people can visit the blog with some seriously questionable views or ideas, and claim they are doing it from a position of integrity, when in fact, they have succeeded in fabrication a logical view of the world which serves ony to be reinforced by the things they see.
Then they find the means to ‘prove’ their integrity by ‘sourcing’ it from others who share the same world view. As if it makes it ‘right’.
Nasty example – paedophilia = is just intergenerational love; , more relevant – ‘Labour good,=National bad’.
A ‘sock-puppet’ can say exactly the same thing, and still be honest to themselves and everyone else.
So, in brief, I can’t argue with that. It suggests a subjective view of integrity from your end, which I can’t honestly relate to.
sorry.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Winstons soul has been sold to Labour.
I believe the Maori Party vote will swing with National.
The support for Maori will be phenomenol next year.
But I believe National holds one more ace up their sleeve.
Rodney.
His popularity is unprecented. His television appearances and PR campaign has been full on and he has successfully connected.
I can’t remember the last time anyone criticised him and more of his vocal outrage at the EFB will be registered with the voters.
I just hope he isn’t pressured to stop by National.
In the case of the EFB, National and Labour are part time lovers.
Second time they have seen eye to eye on a major policy initiative.
Albeit John Keys did it behind his shocked parties back. Though I doubt the seniority were ignorant.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Roger Nome,
Your supposition about the Nats needing 47% to govern is far too simplistic as their are a number of possible scenario’s that could came into play like currently where Labour has a tenuous hold due to the number of parties it has to keep on side. But they should hold on till the election without having to go to the polls early.
Re Peters neither the Nats or Labour are really not keen to do a deal with him. Both parties would I’m sure rather see him out of Parliament altogether.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
“I believe the Maori Party vote will swing with National.”
90% of Maori either vote for Labour or the Maori Party. The Maori party Has voted 80% of the time wit the greens, 60% of the time with Labour and 40% of the time with National – conclusion = the Maori Party is more left-wing with Labour. So For the Maori part to go with National would be a huge betrayl of their constituency, and by doing so they would be supporting a government that’s further away from thier political principals then Labour. It just doesn’t seem very likely.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
“Re Peters neither the Nats or Labour are really not keen to do a deal with him. Both parties would I’m sure rather see him out of Parliament altogether.”
Both parties would rather deal with him than a Maori-Green block with the power of 13-14 seats.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Lee ,I was using the word integrity in the same way as John key when he asked
Does she stand by the statement in the Speech from the Throne in 1999 that her Government would “restore public confidence in the political integrity of Parliament and the electoral process”?
So we are talking about political integrity Lee
don’t indulge in semantics
November 10th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
“But they should hold on till the election without having to go to the polls early.”
This is exactly the area where Labour looks ingeneously honest.
If there was a call for a snap election their credibilty would be in tatters.
Fortunately for them, and even righties would have to admit, there is no real need for albour to call a snap election. That holds their integrity in place and keeps them at a viable and competitive edge.
I must say, if it wasn’t for the EFB, the next election would be a hard fought and honest campaign from both sides.
The EFB proves its not. But is the electorate sophisticated enough to collate the EFB with the sudden change of heart over tax cuts.
National, in all honesty, cannot be accused of any of this. Even if they are guilty of committing moral cowardice in their silence.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
“committing moral cowardice in their silence.”
Nice line hinamanu – I agree 100 %
November 10th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
“I must say, if it wasn’t for the EFB, the next election would be a hard fought and honest campaign from both sides.The EFB proves its not.”
How the hell would you know? It hasn’t even come out of SC yet.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
“…So For the Maori part to go with National would be a huge betrayl of their constituency,”
The huge betrayal was labour and the seabed and foreshore act.
This is a huge reason the Maori party was instigated and why Turiana left Labour. She was also silenced by Clark over freedom of speech issues.
Men may be forgiving to each other,, women are NOT.
A woman scorned etc.
It has been National who have been historically involved in Maori and treaty issues, not Labour. Maori will vote Maori party in droves and Ruatoki will still be fresh in memories next November.
The more Helen Clark bleats on about terroism, the more she is reminding Maori they are treated as terroists.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
“How the hell would you know? It hasn’t even come out of SC yet.”
Human nature Roger,, these things leave bitter tastes.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
“Human nature Roger,, these things leave bitter tastes.”
The NZ public is forgiving though – if Labour comes out with the goods, i don’t beleive it will be an issue.
“The huge betrayal was labour and the seabed and foreshore act.”
True – the Maori Party do dislike Labour – but they dislike National even more. Anyway, if it came down to it I’m sure labour would be willing to overturn the SB and F Act to get a coalition deal with the Maori party.
November 10th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
“if it came down to it I’m sure labour would be willing to overturn the SB and F Act to get a coalition deal with the Maori party.”
That’s a fascinating analogy. Judging by Labours of heart lately, it even sounds realistic.
I do happen to remember Jenny Shipley was more acepted on Marae than Helen who was reduced to tears. I personally hope it was because Maori remembered Nationals input for Maori over Labours.
Hard to say though, they’re both so fickle. (Maori & Labour)
But Maori are single issue voters. If your analogy pans out, the Maori Party will tick up the victory and probably return to the fold. Very easy to see in realistic terms.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
“But Maori are single issue voters. If your analogy pans out, the Maori Party will tick up the victory and probably return to the fold.”
Then there’s also the possibility that the Maori Party campaign and bargain with the Greens (they’re very ideologically similar) – which complicates things further – i.e. if they bargain together and hold the balance of power they could get some very big concessions from either National or Labour. Althought at the end of the day they would probably choose labour, they would make them pay heavily in policy concessions for any agreement.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
“True – the Maori Party do dislike Labour – but they dislike National even more.”
roger do you ever engage your nome brain before you speak , as Maori and National would make a good team ? No bullshit from Auntie Helen’s mob . Fox hole friends are hard to find .
November 10th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
“as Maori and National would make a good team?”
Thanks for your input D4J – you make such a compelling argument, I’m not sure how to respond, except to say I think National and Labour would make just as good a team as Peter Burns and poor little James Sleep.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
should have been ….
I think National and the Maori Party would make just as good a team as Peter Burns and poor little James Sleep.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
haha out smarted again Mr Mason , do you play chess ??
November 10th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
“Althought at the end of the day they would probably choose labour, they would make them pay heavily in policy concessions for any agreement.”
Which is why Labour will only take them if they feel their election race is on a very perilous downslide. If Maori are wise they would take any concessions they can get.
Guess what, I doubt Turia has the common sense. She’s an utter rebel.
Fortunately Pita is sane and educated.
I really believe Labour look down their noses at the Maori party and even worse despise them.
btw,,
What happened to this James Sleep fellow??
November 10th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
“do you play chess ??”
No D4J, but I would hardly describe your “the Tories and Maori activists are ideal bedfellows” argument as checkmate. Even in D4J land that’s got to sound a little weird? Or maybe not?
November 10th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
In D4J land roger, anything that is common sense and for the good of ALL kiwis then it is welcomed with open arms mr nome .
November 10th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
all sounds good, except for James Sleep.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
“In D4J land roger, anything that is common sense and for the good of ALL kiwis”
Last I heard, common sense in D4J land enjoys a similar status to the “unicorn” in the real world. You talk about it, but you’ll never find it.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
At the risk of engaging in conflict with you hinamanu , but what the f##k are you talking about James Sleep, as far as I am concerned ; let sleeping dogs lie ?
November 10th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
roger you are the biggest idiot on here , bar none .
November 10th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Roger,,
why does Cacofanix want sleeping dogs to lie. Very out of the ordinary for him.
He certainly doesn’t let any one else rest.
And he blames me, when it has been you who has been bringing up James sleep, continually I should add.
Why is Cacofanix deflecting onto me
November 10th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
“roger you are the biggest idiot on here , bar none.”
Well what can I say? Coming from you dad, that’s a crushing blow
I can see I’m going to have to take a good hard look at myself as I have been shown to be a lick spittle idiot by none other than dad4justice?!
November 10th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Since when has this blog become a linking service for the Standard? I’ve just come back in from gardening and just about every comment from Roger is a link to the Standard!
It’s depressing seeing what he’s managed to turn Kiwiblog into.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Judging by the last couple of posts, DPF’s “general debate” is a brilliant innovation. Keeps the nattering whiners preoccupied on one thread while adults can debate elsewhere.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Location I should suspect, otherwise it would be the Herald.
which is the reason I couldn’t fully immerse into Wellington.
No herald, or very random if there was.
The place borders on the phillistine.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
“why does Cacofanix want sleeping dogs to lie.”
That’s right Peter Burns – You can’t hide from your past as it will always catch up with you. Time to face up to the facts. Did you or did you not threaten James Sleep with physical violence!
November 10th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
“Keeps the nattering whiners preoccupied on one thread while adults can debate elsewhere.”
Well POC,
I see you’ve been seduced into here.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
“Judging by the last couple of posts, DPF’s “general debate” is a brilliant innovation. Keeps the nattering whiners preoccupied on one thread while adults can debate elsewhere.”
I would like to challenge that simplistic binary view POC- one may be a “nattering whiner” and a debating adult at the same time!
November 10th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
Please hinamanu, the suspense is killing me, what does is the meaning of Cacofanix ?
November 10th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
“Did you or did you not threaten James Sleep with physical violence! ”
Mr Phillip John Mason, I am sure if I had, I would have faced court action . You are one sick unit , hell I am glad you live in Dunedin .
November 10th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Refer to Asterix the Gaul.
No one knows if you’re John, D4J or Tane, so I’ll just call you by your nature.
Fits perfectly, covers all persona’s and makes your true identity irrelevant.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
roger nome said “I would like to challenge that simplistic binary view POC- one may be a “nattering whiner” and a debating adult at the same time!”
Which begs the question – if roger, Tane, Sam Dixon, Sonic (anyone seen Jimmy lately?) and idiotboy were all here and debating together – would that constitute a mass debate?
November 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
hinamanu , my name is Peter Burns and I only post under my name d4j .
I tire of you . What makes you tick ? DON”T ANSWER THAT . I don’t care but stop with the bullshit eh bro !!
November 10th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
“Mr Phillip John Mason, I am sure if I had, I would have faced court action”
Really? But you have threatened me wit physical violence here numerous times yet you have (luckily) escaped prosecution. Nope, sorry D4J your argument doesn’t stack up. So what’s you next lie/excuse you sniveling coward?
November 10th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
“if roger, Tane, Sam Dixon, Sonic (anyone seen Jimmy lately?) and idiotboy were all here and debating together – would that constitute a mass debate?”
IV2 – you really have to get some new lines bro.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
I’ve also posted this link on the thread about Cunliffe, but here goes!
One of the highlights of the Dom-Post each week is the Saturday editorial, which is always strongly satirical. Can anyone guess who the star was today? Hint – it’s titled “The Minister takes charge”!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4267760a6483.html
Enjoy – it’s a classic!
November 10th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
“What makes you tick ?”
No one knows.
I’m a published author and currently passing a media arts degree.
I’m a complete puzzle to schaolers and lay people. People who have known me for years are amazed. One day it just looked like I woke up and took the world by storm.
But I was never asleep.
If you keep making high shrilled whining noises that resemble a tone deaf out of key Gaulish bard, except the comparison.
Don’t you think??
November 10th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Phillip John Mason , Without prejudice : I invite you to take any Court action you deem appropriate for my comments .
Can you and James Sleep please stop sending me mass emails calling me a pedophile . You are a very twisted person and I look forward from the paper work from your barrister .
November 10th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
“So what’s you next lie/excuse you sniveling coward?”
Actually, his last comment didn’t exactly sound too snivelling or cowardly.
November 10th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
“Can you and James Sleep please stop sending me mass emails calling me a pedophile . You are a very twisted person and I look forward from the paper work from your barrister.”
D4J – I have never sent you such an email – stop lying.
I have offered to make amends with you in the past D4J, but you have replied with abuse. Can I offer you a truce again? No hard feelings Mr Burns?
November 10th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
please say yes D4J?
November 10th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
SO,,
James Sleep must be available for comment. He could end this intrigue once and for all.
He must step up to base.
November 10th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Good night all! Night at the boozer awaits.
November 10th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
well,,
that wasn’t very helpful Roger.
tell this James Sleep to front up and either exonerate or condemn
cacofanix.
November 10th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
D4J said:
Cacafonix was a bard in the Asterix series. He sang rather badly and no less loudly. This usually led to him being either ignored or, worse, pile-driven waist deep with day-old fish. He inevitably spent the closing evening of the tail tied up to a tree while the rest of the Gaulish village celebrated their latest victory against the Romans.
November 10th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Hinamanu:
I do vaguely recall the thread in question. D4J and James Sleep were winding each other up. But it was probably more than a year ago now.
November 10th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Thanks KrazyKiwi – brings back some great childhood memories
November 10th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
so in other words cacofanix was having an argument with a 14 y o boy.
and he complains about me not using his tag let alone his real name.
But I must say, I was impressed by his lawyer talk, roger backed off very swiftly wif a change of attitude.
November 10th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
The other thing about Cacofanix is despite all his faults his fellow villagers liked him and his singing scared the Romans witless.
So cheer up D4J it’s not all bad!
November 10th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
I like the idea of being a bard , yes that will do . Roger doesn’t like me talking about lawyers and things like Court – lol – its all done by mirrors Mr Bardface and I do hate f##king Romans !! ol mate .
November 10th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
“I like the idea of being a bard , yes that will do ”
change your tag to cacofanix then,, go on.
November 10th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Hinamanu:
That’s an unlikely prospect. I think Phillip John/Roger Nome has come to enjoy his love-hate relationship with D4J. “Cacofanix” would greatly dent D4J’s style. And besides, D4J would have to restructure his whole life, starting with his blog
November 10th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
I’m glad for one thing,
I can dent his style.
As long as he insults and derides the name ‘Cacofanix’ shall remain
November 10th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Hinamanu:
Do you have any Kiwiblog characters lined up to be Asterix and Obelix then?
And perhaps we need a Tintin character since “tin foil hat” has become an overused cliche by certain predictable folk. Never quite understood its origins.
November 10th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
I actually saw Obelix.
He turned up to suport Gaul at the world cup.
Fortunately for Italy, they had already lost or there would have been trouble.
Remeber, theres a common thread wif the two stories,
Snowy and Dogmatix.
I guess phillipjohn/rogernome are the Thompson Twins.
Red is probably the insufferable Captain Haddock,, cursing, cursing.
November 10th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
You don’t see a perfect match for Phillip John/Roger Nome as Professor Calculus?
November 10th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
“As long as he insults and derides the name ‘Cacofanix’ shall remain”
Why I should I give a f##k what you call me bro , what a wanker !!
November 10th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
What no moderators giving me static ? YET . Half you cowards wouldn’t debate with me face to face , you keyboard cowards , goodbye I am dining out with family and friends .
November 10th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
stix and stones cacofinix
play your lyre, play on
pluck your self.
November 10th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
That was freaky,, Cacofinix always packs a sad like that,,, and wonders off alone.
November 10th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
“You don’t see a perfect match for Phillip John/Roger Nome as Professor Calculus?”
Was thinkin along those lines , but still not sure if roger can be afforded the respect of a professor.
You sem to think so, but then again , aren’t you a lefty as well POS
November 10th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
You’re right – perhaps it’s premature to confer academic titles on Phillip John/Roger Nome.
Me? (Looks to the left)
A lefty? (Looks to the right)
You clearly haven’t been reading my posts closely enough…
November 10th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
Interesting…
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/11/general_debate_09_november_2007.html#comment-364634
November 10th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
So tell me POC,,
What are your thoughts on these lefties unreasonable confidence in an outright Labour win next year. I find it extraordinary and unlogical.
Unfortunately, they won’t have Scotty to beam them up. They’re seriously living in another dimension though,,
Don’t you think ??
November 10th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Hinamanu:
It’s worth remembering that Labour ousted National on the back of a “time for change” campaign. What goes round comes round. Or maybe not – what grates me is the lefties who want Labour infinitum and refuse to acknowledge chinks in the well-worn armour.
November 10th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Quite right, esp when those chinks aren’t for the good of the country.
The govt is definitely insecure, hence the change in tact on tax cuts.
So blatant and crude. can’t be seen any other way.
At the end of the day, haven’t our intelligences simply been insulted.
Perhaps more to the point, don’t they take our eyes off the EFB
Labour still hasn’t declared how much lolly they’re going to throw at us yet.
Slowly, in dribs and drabs they’ll suck us in like children to the child catcher. Then slam down the bars.
November 10th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Hinamanu:
The tax cuts is an interesting point. I specifically raised this with Phillip John/Roger Nome the other day, though not sure on which thread. My recollection of the conversation is something like this. His first response was that tax cuts under Labour wouldn’t be inflationery. Then I asked him to explain why. His next point was that we shouldn’t presume that tax cuts under Labour would be inflationery, because it would depend on how the marginal tax thresholds were structured, and Labour hasn’t announced this. I then suggested that we probably shouldn’t pre-judge National’s tax cut plans either. But he rejected this out of hand: National only stands for tax cuts for the rich. So it’s a circular argument, you see.
November 10th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
hey himoo – got a real name creep ?
November 10th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Oh , sorry hinamanu , silly me, what is your real name ? reasonable request .
November 10th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Hey hinamanu creep , got a real name bro ?
November 10th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
POC and Hinimanu
Only one party to go to tonight – a dance party. Woo Hoo!!
I would not take too much notice of the small group of lefties that climb into this blog defending Labour. Let’s face it, they’re obviously too hard-wired to even inhabit Public Address, which with Russell Brown setting the tone, manages only sotto voice critiques of Labour at the best of times.
I think that slavish devotion also explains the approach they take on this blog site. They’re projecting their fanaticism onto DPF – and the rest of us. Kiwiblog must be part of the National party’s devious plan for domination of NZ: indeed we’re just a local chapter of the VRWC!
They just naturally assume that we’re mirror images of themselves, You could never imagine the likes of Robinsod, Tane or Gnome to have ever voted ACT/Nat or ever doing so in future.
As a result they just think that most of the people kicking the shit out of Labour on this blog have never voted anything other than ACT or National all or most of their lives. Don’t know about you but several ‘right-wing’ commentators here sound as if they’ve voted Labour in the past. I certainly did in 1999 (yes, I know, I know).
So as I keep saying – just ignore them. In the meantime I have to get my dancing shoes on! Hopefully (putting aside kids and work) I’ll have a chance to have a discussion with people like you two, Pascal and some others over the next few days.
November 10th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Tom Hunter:
You seem like a well-reasoned gentleman. Have a great night out, don’t bust-a-move too many, and hopefully we’ll have plenty to discuss next week!
November 10th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
“Don’t know about you but several ‘right-wing’ commentators here sound as if they’ve voted Labour in the past.”
That’s what those fuckwits (the KBB mob) don’t realise. Most of us have moved on from any kind of flirtation with leftist politics, probably as soon as we found ourselves in any management situation, or if we became business owners, or even began working in heavily unionised industries (where one is soon made aware of the absolute thuggery that underpins socialist control of so much of the union movement).
All of these events soon lead to a major readjustment in terms of political reality, and a sudden understanding what utter bullshit leftism is.
What we don’t need now, is knuckle draggers who have yet to reach this stage in life (Nome and the other fuckwits) coming here and laying arguments on us that we’ve heard so many times before. Arguments that were just as delusional way back then as they are today, coming from half educated commie dipshits like Sam Dixon and his mates.
I personally think of Kiwiblog as a place to discuss strategies to defeat leftism. An opportunity to mull over ways to reverse the trend over several decades where the left have made unparalleled progress in imposing their stinking totalitarian system upon us. That’s why I can’t be bothered with the likes of Robinsod Nome etc.
What have they got to say that is interesting or relevant? I’ll answer that. Nothing. They’re just static on the dial, yabbering one dimensional bores who should stay on their own damn sites rather than clutter Kiwiblog with their tired old one track troglodytic crap.
November 10th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
Redbaiter:
Speaking of unions, you may find this interview about a certain Joe McDonald revealing: http://www.alp.org.au/media/0607/dsihs210.php
Note that interview occurred on 21 June.
McDonald remained a member of the Australian Labor Party until 26 October, only to be dismissed on dubious grounds: http://www.theage.com.au/news/federalelection2007news/joe-mcdonald-expelled-from-alp/2007/10/26/1192941312131.html
November 10th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
What do you guys think about this:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4269092a11.html
November 10th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
Hey infused, just imagine if the same amount of enthusiastic animal protest action in the name of save the whale rights could be transformed into a collective strategy to defeat the Labour government, who are hell bent on eroding the rights of the average New Zealander ?
Do we care more about animals than people ? Child abuse stats indicate a positive in shame on the world stage , sad 4 the kids , well done Labour .
November 10th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Infused:
The money quote from your referenced article:
Hope they’ve got a stable food supply. They’ll be there for a long time.
And this gem:
Hope they’ve got a decent sized dragnet. The company website (http://www.varc.co.nz) shows considerable regulatory oversight:
(1) All research, testing or teaching involving live animals in New Zealand must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act 1999 and be approved by an Animal Ethics Committee.
(2) The VARC Animal Ethics Committee includes three independent members and a member appointed by the RNZSPCA.
(3) All research and testing carried out by VARC is approved by the Animal Ethics Committee under the Code of Ethical Conduct For The Review of Protocols and Projects certified by MAF.
(4) As the body which certifies VARC to conduct its work, MAF is responsible for conducting regular and ongoing Audits of VARC’s research and facilities to ensure compliance with the Animal Welfare Act 1999.
(5) Above VARC’s own Animals Ethics Committee sits the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC), an independent ministerial body which advises the Minister of Agriculture on issues relating to the use of animals in research and provides information and advice to the Animal Ethics Committee.
Goodness… has this protest group *ahem* bitten off more than they can chew?
November 10th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
Dog tucker infused !!
November 10th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Ah yes… animal rights activism! anything to keep our news away from the democracendocomy being performed by stealthy political surgery.
November 10th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Just to clarify, I don’t support these people at all. The guy was on 60 minutes awhile ago. Seems pretty genunie. The fact that no dogs have been destroyed is pretty good.
November 10th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
Infused:
Well, considering that Goldenthal had the decency to turn up to a protest in his honour, he’s got more spunk than most. But that’ll only enbolden those would shut his business down.
November 11th, 2007 at 1:46 am
Just imagine how far we could get if we concentrated all this activism towards another worthy cause: Getting Dad4Justice strapped onboard a rocket to the Sun!
November 11th, 2007 at 1:49 am
“Speaking of unions, you may find this interview about a certain Joe McDonald revealing:”
Thanks for the link POC. Yeah, my experience of unions typified the lies and hypocrisy that are the hallmarks of leftism, where the propaganda is that they are democratic institutions and the reality is that in the main they are tightly controlled by gangs of dictatorial and violent communist thugs who crush dissenting voices with threats and intimidation.
For another example of unbelievable hypocrisy, we have the knuckle draggers at KBB whining about their treatment on right wing blogs, claiming that “some of left’s opponents aren’t interested in fighting fair.”
This from a bunch of cheats and losers who are known (on KBB) to have actually re-worded posts from non-leftists so that they actually say something entirely different to what the writer intended. Now how dishonest and despicable is this?
How can these cheating unprincipled scum ever have the nerve to then go on to claim about the way they are treated elsewhere? Only a leftist would be capable of such astonishing self deceit. Only an utter knuckle dragging half educated low IQ dumbfuck commie robot could be so incapable of realizing the stark hypocrisy of their position.
November 11th, 2007 at 1:55 am
Actually, I need to correct that final paragraph. Of course the left realize their hypocrisy. They are just not shamed by it the way a moral person would be.
November 11th, 2007 at 1:57 am
So lefties are half educated low IQ dumbfuck commie robots? Hmmm I’m a lefty, I have a post graduate degree, an IQ exceeding 120, am not a commie but do support socialist policies and a robot? Well interestingly I did do my degree in mechatronics but any intelligent person would be able to see that that does not make one a robot.
November 11th, 2007 at 2:04 am
You conservatives have so many skeletons in the closet. Ted Haggard: Drug use and plutocracy (engaging in homosexuality after being so opposed), George W. Bush: Alcoholism and drug use, Anne Coutler: antisemitism.
November 11th, 2007 at 2:05 am
*hypocracy
November 11th, 2007 at 6:21 am
“I have a post graduate degree, an IQ exceeding 120″
Maybe I suggest the planet dumbo would be a better place for you, as a deranged neon tugger ? I think this lady meant to say her IQ was 12 , oh well it takes all , liars and labour go hand in hand down bullshit alley, while joe average packs up shop and settles across the ditch . New Zealand is the laughing stock of the Western World . Is it any wonder George laughed at Lemon Face ?
November 11th, 2007 at 8:47 am
roger nome: “Anyway, if it came down to it I’m sure labour would be willing to overturn the SB and F Act to get a coalition deal with the Maori party.”
If that is true, Labour should declare that now – not after the election.
November 11th, 2007 at 9:05 am
There is no hope for you D4J. Short of a major breakthrough in pharmaceuticals.
November 11th, 2007 at 10:39 am
D4J @ 7:51 pm : hey himoo – got a real name creep ?
D4J @ 7:53 pm : Oh , sorry hinamanu , silly me, what is your real name ? reasonable request .
D4J @ 7:55 pm : Hey hinamanu creep , got a real name bro ?
It is only in the mind of a seriously disturbed person that you can go from insult/dislike to apologising/like and then back to insult/dislike in the space of 4 minutes.
Holy crap. If anything has ever scared me it is that.
November 11th, 2007 at 10:43 am
RedBaiter: Most of us have moved on from any kind of flirtation with leftist politics, probably as soon as we found ourselves in any management situation, or if we became business owners, or even began working in heavily unionised industries
*Raises a hand* And I voted Labour a number of years ago. However, once I got married, had a child and so forth I realized that the best care for my family was not under a Labour government and that their socially destroying policies were doing more harm than good.
People can argue averages all they want now, but the reality is that for myself and all of my colleagues with children is that they’re worse off under Labour.
November 11th, 2007 at 10:52 am
neontiger:
Congratulations on your degree and 120 IQ, perhaps one day you will use both and realise that outdated socialism is exactly that -outdated.
November 11th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Good to see that the Nats would rather stay
in opposition than to hand the foreshore over
to we hori.
Of course Labour will gladly hand the foreshore over in return for power.
Still, it is better to feel that one has done the
right thing, and stay on the opposition benches for the Nats.
November 11th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
<p>Must have been good parties DPF went to last night – most unusual for him not to have posted by lunchtime! Perhaps the Farrar Powers of Recovery are not what they once were!</p>
[DPF: Got woken up by a phone call and told them off for calling me at 9 am. Was surprised to learn it was 12.30 pm! Was a good night]
November 11th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Age catching up with you David dear boy?
[DPF: Ha - more the vodka]
November 11th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
With all of us goh, truth to tell!
November 11th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
Hurrah for the King of Spain, he told Chavez to SHUTUP!!
http://stuff.co.nz/4269638a12.html
Looks like the Spainards don’t have much time for this socialist dipshit.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:48 am
@kehua:
Since when was care and compassion for your fellow man outdated? Capitalism breeds greed and greed is not a good thing in any sense. Further question: If it is so outdated then why is the overwhelming majority of academia on the left of the spectrum? You can’t conclude they are stupid, I’m sorry you just can’t.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:51 am
Lindsay Addie: The Spaniard King is also a socialist.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:10 am
Neontiger:
I don’t mean to sound sarcastic, but do you mean to say that throughout history there have never been any wealthy socialist rulers? Or is your point that socialism promotes a caring and loving society, whereas capitalism doesn’t?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:26 am
If America is anything to go by then capitalism is certainly not.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:30 am
That wasn’t my question, Neontiger, and you know it. Can you try answering my question again?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:33 am
Of course there have been wealthy socialist rulers. I never praised Stalin or Mao. But look at capitalism, look at Bush and the sad state of elections in the USA where if you don’t have money you can’t even launch a campaign.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:36 am
You can’t go around saying capitalism is perfect while ignoring it’s severe excesses and shortcomings. It’s not a perfect system, not even an acceptable system and it won’t make everyone rich as a free market ideologue might suggest. A system that requires losers to function is not what I would call a caring or a loving system.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:42 am
I think you’re mixing up arguments: capitalism and democracy.
As to democracy, it’s quite likely that geographic scope accounts for any campaign funding obstacle in the US. It costs money to get your message across to the masses. In any event, you’re taking a restricted view of the US (focusing on its electoral system) to substantiate an argument about capitalism?
As to capitalism, if it’s bad, as you claim, then I’d expect to see you identify an alternative system that works better in practice. And I really don’t see socialism as offering any better outcomes, at least in historical terms, than capitalism.
November 12th, 2007 at 8:24 am
neontiger,
I don’t give a rat’s arse about the King’s politics, I say good on him for telling that dipshit to shutup.
November 12th, 2007 at 10:59 am
“You can’t go around saying capitalism is perfect while ignoring it’s severe excesses and shortcomings. ”
Typical leftist scaremongering bullshit. Dream up some peril that is out there and that gummint (leftist gummint of course) must protect us from. We must have more and more and more and more gummint or the troll under the bridge will get us, or global warming will get us, or capitalism will get us, or the rich will get us ad fucken infinitum… Off their rocker most leftists, psychologically insecure misfits suffering from neuroses implanted in their brain when they were little uns, and that scared them so badly, they’ve never got over it..
November 12th, 2007 at 11:12 am
“D4J @ 7:51 pm : hey himoo – got a real name creep ?
D4J @ 7:53 pm : Oh , sorry hinamanu , silly me, what is your real name ? “reasonable request .
D4J @ 7:55 pm : Hey hinamanu creep , got a real name bro ?
It is only in the mind of a seriously disturbed person that you can go from insult/dislike to apologising/like and then back to insult/dislike in the space of 4 minutes.
Holy crap. If anything has ever scared me it is that.”
I am now vindicated of my justified scathing of the enemy of intelligence
and decorum, namely Cacofinix and am confident I have added to his demerit points of which he himself has no leverage over myself.
He told me I should go back to my knitting. Imaginative and eloquent vitriol I don’t think. If he was 5 I would’ve been impressed.
Then again…….