“Collins is rabidly anti the welfare state and a nasty piece of work. ”

Calling Judith Collins “a nasty piece of work” is a personal attack.

True to form, Tane, your pissy little piece of propaganda should be called the Double Standard.

The Labour film-maker provided an unwitting example of another Labour achievement (fucking up our education system) with the glaring spelling mistake in the first line!

And as for Dave “Hobgoblin” Dobbyn’s nauseous soundtrack – don’t they realise that “Loyal” has been shortlisted as one of the worst NZ songs ever written?

And Tane, if you can’t stand the heat……….

More personal attacks from the National Party eh?

Reality check time, Tane. Have a look at this. It’s a Labour supporter’s video, listing the many admirable achievements of Labour, going back to the introduction of State housing and so forth. While some of the points they list might be contentious (opposition to conscription in WWI for instance) in the minds of some, there’s no doubt that Labour has a history of Leaders being open about their beliefs and standing up for them openly and honestly, and sometimes achieving great things in the process.

So how does this hagiographic portrayal end?

“There’s more to Labour than Helen Clark”

Given the source, it says volumes more about the credibility of the ‘leader’ you desperately defend than any National supporter’s “attack” video ever could, don’t you think?

Labour’s cause may not be lost – but this government’s certainly is.

How you can accuse National of engaging in personal attacks on the basis of this youtube video is astonishing. The words spoken are Labours, the footage is primarily of Labour. Admittedly it is put in a specific context but it hardly constitutes a personal attack.

If you want to see what a personal attack looks like, check the singing at the Labour Conference, Check phrases like “rich prick” and “slippery john”.

This is a type of personal attack known as “poisoning the well”. This sort of “reasoning” involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This “argument” has the following form:

1. Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented.
2. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.

This sort of “reasoning” is obviously fallacious. The person making such an attack is hoping that the unfavorable information will bias listeners against the person in question and hence that they will reject any claims he might make. However, merely presenting unfavorable information about a person (even if it is true) hardly counts as evidence against the claims he/she might make. This is especially clear when Poisoning the Well is looked at as a form of ad Homimem in which the attack is made prior to the person even making the claim or claims.

This is exactly what we are seeing from the Labour Benches today. It is disgusting, boorish and childish and the public of NZ deserve better.

“While cockroaches do not have lungs and thus do not actively breathe in the vertebrate lung manner, in some very large species the body musculature may contract rhythmically to forcibly move air out and in the spiracles; this may be considered a form of breathing.”

Proof positive I believe!

Ah, that’s because it usually takes this approach, Tutae:

“John Key can’t talk about climate change credibly when he’s a rich prick slippery baby-eater,” said Miss Clark.

Labour can’t critique policy because they don’t usually have time after getting all the personal attacks in first.

Helen is not queen of the May but us certainley queen of the queers

I can suggest something sadder than your suggestions: grown people who go to blog sites that they feel threatened by to deliberately troll because they are working from an ethically redundant mind-set. You have to ask, “Couldn’t his/her bosses have given him something a little more ‘meaningful’ to do with his/her time?” But DPF has nailed it – the best way to destroy a troll is to ignore it, especially when it is apparent that to respond merely feeds its already overblown ego.
Hey! It wasn’t so long ago that certain characters the left were celebrating the ‘they are better at this kind of stuff than us.’ when a tory lamented the gutter-tactics employed against their opponants. As Helen would say: “What has changed,?” Well, perhaps what has changed is that those who were laughing so hard a few months ago find themselves in an actual minority of opinion, and it is hurtin’ big time. For Tane whose blog ran various ‘personal attacks’ against Key for so long to try to scale the moral higher ground is a bit like watching a red-bummed baboon scaling a greasy pole. The higher he climbs, the uglier it looks to everyone underneath him.

That these are the idiots who are supposed to be running the country

Or the fact that we have let them.

New Zealanders need to have the same backbone exhibited by our Anzac soldiers
and stand up for our beautiful country

AT THE NEXT ELECTION

These people have made fools out of us all for too long.

Actually, you can help it. You could try being honest and having some standards, rather than simply singing the “Labour Good, National Bad” mantra everytime you post.