Why is Labour so hypocritical on transparency?

July 8th, 2008 at 9:34 am by David Farrar

Labour’s over transparency was reinforced this week with another anonymous attack site launched. It is a sad fact of life that the party which claims the was needed to bring transparency to campaigning has a long history of establishing anonymous attack sites against its opponents.

First of all in the 2005 election there was the site. This site launched attack after attack on Don Brash and other opponents of Labour. They kept their identities a closely guarded secret but after the election a member of the PM’s Office revealed at the NZUSA Christmas Party that the site was organized out of the PM’s Office.

Then in 2007 burst into life. They would have you believe it is a totally independent collection of activists who just happen to not like National. The reality is somewhat different.

It is understood that the Standard was conceived of by the PM’s Office, specifically by Rob Salmond, who was working there after the 2005 election. Salmond wrote a chapter “The Battle of the Blog” for the Victoria University publication on the 2005 election and is a long time Labour activist. He was known to work in the Beehive after the 2005 election, even though he did not appear on staff lists and he has confirmed he did work for the PM’s Office.

He is credited as having come up with the concept for The Standard, to counter centre right blogs. He also proposed the creation of a special role in the PMs Office for online communications – a role subsequently filled by Chris Elder. The source for this information is Elder himself who has told several people of Salmond’s role in setting up his job and creating or proposing The Standard. This does not mean the PM’s Office personally registered the site, but that it wasn’t just the idea of some independent activists.

The Standard says they are all independent bloggers. However the following e-mail has been forwarded onto me:

From: xxxxxxx xxxxxxx
Date: 11 June 2008 12:24:42 PM
To: labourmembersofparliament@parliament.govt.nz
Cc: pm@ministers.govt.nz, mike.williams@labour.org.nz
Subject: The Standard Blog

Dear all

I have a serious issue to raise with you all. It has come to my attention that two Ministerial staffers – Chris Elder and Andrew Kirton, both political employees – are blogging anonymously at the Labour-hosted, anti-John Key blog the Standard, www.thestandard.org.nz.

Given that a large number of these posts (most notably those by Chris Elder or all_your_base, a communications staffer on the ninth floor) occur during office hours, do you all believe it is appropriate that political employees are spending their time blogging anonymously? Is this approved behaviour?

Kind regards

xxxxxxx xxxxxx

After I was forwarded a copy of the e-mail by a parliamentary staffer, I asked the e-mailer the basis of the information, the e-mailer replied “A young Labour person I know who is also a blogger”

It has in fact long been speculated that Elder blogged as All-your-base as this was allegedly a favourite saying of his (referring to the tag line of a famous hacking group). He has denied being involved with The Standard, and it is of course impossible to prove or disprove without computer logs.

But it is likely that two of the bloggers are Beehive communications employees, and a third is the Labour Party Head Office Communications Manager. A fourth and maybe a fifth are employed by the EPMU – Labour’s largest affiliated union. This would be seen very differently by most members of the public than the official line of “a collective who saw a gap in the New Zealand political blogosphere and decided that we should have a go at filling it. We write here in our personal capacities and the opinions that are expressed on the blog are individual.”

If they were public over their identities, then people could judge for themselves how much of a personal capacity they are in.

The issue is not that they blog, but the total lack of transparency over what they do. The Green Party has some of its parliamentary employees (and MPs) blog at Frog Blog. But they are open about this, and accept responsibility for what they publish. The Greens deserve praise for their commitment to transparency, which is at total contrast to Labour.

It is certainly true that there are other bloggers at The Standard who do not work for Labour. But nevertheless how can one argue for transparency in campaigning yet argue that the PM can have a Communications Advisor blogging anonymously on a site proposed by her office as part of a communications strategy?

Some of the material on The Standard, such as a pdf document, reveals in its properties that it was created on a Ministerial Services computer. Other material links it to the EPMU.

The final link is the new No8wire website launched this week. The Standard reported this is the same team which did the KeepLeftNZ site in 2005 – in other words it is probably also run out of the PM’s Office. The site even makes it clear that the material appearing on the site is contributed by multiple persons – it is not an individual effort.

In an ultimate fit of hypocrisy they have registered the site in the .org top level domain as this allows anonymous domain name registrants. They also claim to be exempt from the Electoral Finance Act as it is hosted overseas and managed by a NZers who lives overseas.

Their lack of transparency clearly breaches the spirit of the Electoral Finance Act, and quite possibly also the statute itself. I will be lodging official complaints over the site and asking electoral authorities to fully investigate it.

As leftwing blogger Idiot/Savant notes at No Right Turn:

The problem is that both of the exemptions they cite look decidedly dodgy – it all looks a bit slick and well funded to be “non-commercial”, while their declaration that they are “ready to ensure the election of an LPG Government” blows their appeal to the media exemption out of the water. Many people, I think, will be concerned whether those videos are really being produced outside New Zealand – and National will no doubt seek to counter them by claiming they are really being hatched in the Beehive. By allowing that, they’re undermining their cause, and the credibility of fair controls to prevent the rich from buying elections.

Even having the official editor and hosting overseas may not put them beyond the reach of the law. If material for the site is produced by people in NZ, then they are arguably promoting election advertisements, and risk being in breach of the law.

The overseas NZer is widely believed to be the same Rob Salmond who set up The Standard, previously a staffer or contractor in the Beehive. A quick look at the site shows it to have professionally edited graphics and obviously considerable resource behind it. They have already ripped off an anti David Cameron video from 2006 and used it as an anti John Key video.

This is not a personal blog. It is beyond doubt supported by and resourced by the parliamentary Labour Party and/or their affiliated unions. The fact they have one anonymous ex staffer or contractor on the other side of the world uploading the material for them, doesn’t change that reality. It is a “hollow” attempt to avoid the most basic requirements of transparency, let alone their own Electoral Finance Act.

The Internet is a medium where people should be able to express their opinions, and have a whack at parties they don’t agree with. But political parties should stand behind their own work. Why doesn’t Labour do as the Greens do, and take responsibility for their work?

One suspects it is because they want to be able to attack their opponents without taking responsibility for such attacks. The exact thing they claim to be against.

These anonymous attacks are not an isolated incident, such as a parliamentary staffer submitting a one off idea to a blog. Labour’s entire involvement since 2005 has been lacking in the transparency they claim to champion. It is a hypocrisy that rankles with those who do stand behind their own names.

The purpose of this post is not to challenge the right of The Standard and/or to run material attacking John Key. I happen to think it is mostly counter-productive anyway as it is so lacking in subtlety. But the purpose is to ask for Labour to stop hiding behind anonymous proxies and to take responsibility for their own work.

Again, this is not an isolated incident. Their entire online history of the last three years has been to hide behind anonymous attack sites.They do it time and time again.

I know something about the challenges of online advocacy from Parliament. I was a parliamentary staffer for eight years. From 1996 to 2004 I posted tens of thousands of times to the Usenet Internet newsgroups on political issues. Every single time I did so under my own name. The first nine months of my blogging was as a parliamentary staffer, and again that was always under my own name. I have no issue with parliamentary staffers blogging – I welcome it – they can offer more to the debate than most people with their access to information. But they should be open about who they are.

As a final note, some will ask for the proof that Labour has been involved with these three sites. Well obviously direct proof is near impossible unless one does a Nicky Hager and gets hold of e-mails or has video recordings of people at work.

However the information about the identities of the people involved in these sites come from multiple people in multiple settings, collected over time. I have no reason to doubt its veracity. It would also be very simple for the facts to be established – for example Helen Clark could state in Parliament that no Ministerial staff members do blog or has blogged at The Standard and that no Beehive (or Labour Research Unit) staffer is producing material for 08wire or The Standard. Her word, if given in Parliament, would be accepted. Somehow I doubt she will.

UPDATE: Rob Salmond has posted a comment admitting he worked last year for the PMs Office and is behind 08wire and that he does not produce all the material himself but receives it from others. He of course refutes some of my assertions – specifically any involvement setting up The Standard, and I have responded to his comments. What is not denied is that material for all three anonymous sites is produced by parliamentary staffers.

Whale Oil also posts on the issue.

Tags: , , , ,

165 Responses to “Why is Labour so hypocritical on transparency?”

  1. infused (616 comments) says:

    ooo shit is going to fly now…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    Good post David. Thank you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. colinm (65 comments) says:

    “The purpose of this post is not to challenge the right of The Standard and/or 08wire to run material attacking John Key. I happen to think it is mostly counter-productive anyway as it is so lacking in subtlety. But the purpose is to ask for Labour to stop hiding behind anonymous proxies and to take responsibility for their own work.”

    My bet is that this paragraph will be completely ignored on this thread. The whole thing will degenerate into a “it’s all VRWC lies I tell you!”.

    We shall see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    Great work DPF, one can just imagine how our pinko media would be all over this story if any blog was funded and staffed by the Nat’s.

    The Standard is staffed and funded by the tax payer, they deserve to be outed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    Boy they are getting real touchy at the standard. All I posted was that Nicky Hagar should reveal his insider National party source, and I got banned.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Maybe they just have a thing aginst the name Murray.

    Apprently they banned me for a year after my Beehive sockpuppetry post. So one of my readers tells. I wouldn’t know, I’ve never read that sad little labour party hack site and their banning is really a bit like banning penguins from the Bahamas.

    Maybe we should get t-shirts – Proud to be banned by the stranded.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Chicken Little (793 comments) says:

    We can only hope that someone reading this post, who is completely unconnected with any political party, has the skills to circumvent their security to gain total proof and release it publicly before the election.

    If they are lying about who they are they deserve exactly what they get.

    My tax dollars paying for these losers really pisses me off.

    I’m also a little suspect about KBB slipping quietly off into the sunset. Did someone get too close?

    I agree DPF that they do more damage than good with their strategy of attack politics but doing it on what is ultimately our dime is just not cricket.

    Bit of sunshine will do them good.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,684 comments) says:

    David, you really are a mean bugger when you’ve got a guts ache.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    Perhaps DPF should just take the same approach with the left wing trolls as the standard takes with anybody who does not agree with dear corrupt sexually confused leader, in other words just ban the bastards.

    He could start with Philu.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    Oo-ah.

    big bruv, “The Standard is staffed and funded by the tax payer,”. Would be pretty hard to avoid being staffed by taxpayers no?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. NeilM (370 comments) says:

    DPF, I vote Labour despite blogs like The Standard and don’t vote National despite your blog. Bv)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    I’ve collected a fun little list of alt-names for The Standard :-

    The Average (anon)
    The Substandard (anon)
    The Slanderard (getstaffed)
    The Standardnistas (bobux)
    The Stranded (Murray)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Scott (1,614 comments) says:

    Very interesting post David.

    One wonders whether the mainstream media would pick it up?? Or would they only pick up the story if National does it? I mean they ran the story about John Keys’s DVD breaching copyright for music used on the DVD. I would think that Labour running and financing out of the Prime Minister’s office a covert anti — national attack site would be big news??

    It seems that the government is determined to stay in power. They are not overly interested in letting a little thing like their own electoral finance legislation get in the way of them winning another election.

    [DPF: The funny thing is that I was talking to a journalist last night about this, and their reaction in relation to The Standard was "But everyone knows Labour runs The Standard, so what is the news in that"]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    But everyone knows Labour runs The Standard, so what is the news in that

    Useless ‘journalist’. Can’t they tell the different between ‘Labour Party’ and ‘the Government at taxpayers expense’ ?!?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. labrator (1,691 comments) says:

    Some how this and the EFA just don’t seem to go hand in hand. What is 08wire’s secret conspiracy? What do they have to hide? Why on their youtube channel do they have to say they’re in the United States? Why did they register their domain with a foreign company when there are plenty of NZ domain registration companies? Why did they pick a “.org” domain and not a “.org.nz”? Sounds like the filthy work of secret organisations and big money, I smell the Exclusive Communists at work…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Gooner (995 comments) says:

    DPF – Crosby Textor wrote this post didn’t they. Come clean.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. PaulL (5,776 comments) says:

    stephen: I don’t believe that PhilU’s blog is staffed by taxpayers. So, no, not too hard :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    staffed ‘The VDS’ (Very Double Standard) courtesy of yours truly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. pseudonymous (69 comments) says:

    So “everyone knows Labour runs the bewildered”.
    Who the hell is everyone? Some “in the know” journalists. Surely one of their roles is to inform the public.
    This sort of attitude really pisses me off and is further proof that these “journalists” are about as useful as a cup of cold sick.
    I’ve voted in every election since 1969, twice for the current encumbents (1984 and 1987) and I have NEVER seen such filthy and underhand manouverings before.
    I can here the sound of shredders.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. libertyscott (355 comments) says:

    Not PC some time ago labelled as as the SubStandard on his blog, it was obvious early on that it was mediocrity ad nauseum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Hey, nice novel DPF. In times of War and Peace, propaganda is necessary for a good elite-serving opposition party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Grendel (875 comments) says:

    i know someone who works at parliament and knows where their offices are :).

    The info i have from him is that they are employed by labour yet paid for by parlimentary services. which does not seem entirely kosher (not that thats ever stopped labour).

    Its a truly odd thing, that despite everyone knowing, they have not actually been outed, like somehow people just ignore it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Rob Salmond (260 comments) says:

    David,

    I read your post this morning with interest. I only wish you had checked your facts before posting this set of untruths. I now respond, under penalty of perjury, to your specific claims about me:

    “It is understood that the Standard was conceived of by the PM’s Office, specifically by Rob Salmond, who was working there after the 2005 election”

    I had absolutely nothing to do with setting up The Standard. The first I knew of The Standard was when it went online. I have commented on The Standard, but never posted on it.

    “He also proposed the creation of a special role in the PMs Office for online communications – a role subsequently filled by Chris Elder.”

    It is true that I did perform this role in the PM’s office for a few months during 2007. But I cannot take credit for “proposing” the role. Online communications has been an important part of all political parties’ activities, including both National and Labour, for about 8-10 years, as you well know.

    “The overseas NZer [behind 08wire] is widely believed to be the same Rob Salmond who set up The Standard, previously a staffer or contractor in the Beehive.”

    As I said, I did not set up The Standard. I am, however, involved with 08wire. I have made no real secret of this – the email I sent to sympathetic blogs and journalists containing our launch materials went out under my own name – check with your journalist friends or left-leaning bloggers to confirm if you like.

    “it is probably also run out of the PM’s Office.”

    I am the sole funder of the site – the costs are USD8 per year on the domain and USD4 per month on the hosting (well under EFA limits). The only cost in producing our material is time. I receive no money from any source for this website. I am the only person with posting rights on the site – all material comes through me. I am the editor and publisher, even if other people are writing some of the material. 08wire.org is not run out of the Prime Minister’s office – it is run out of a house in Michigan.

    “In an ultimate fit of hypocrisy they have registered the site in the .org top level domain”

    As I am resident of the US running a not-for-profit website, .org is the absolutely most appropriate TLD to use. You should know this.

    “Their lack of transparency clearly breaches the spirit of the Electoral Finance Act, and quite possibly also the statute itself. I will be lodging official complaints over the site and asking electoral authorities to fully investigate it.”

    I look forward to receiving the documents. The address for service is 712 Mount Pleasant Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48103, USA.

    Having responded to your claims, I make three brief comments and a request:

    1. The EFA clearly has an exemption for blogs. You supported that exemption, and so do I. 08wire.org is a blog, and is therefore entitled to this exemption. Why you are so up in arms about a blog using the blog exemption is beyond me.
    2. You say “A quick look at the site shows it to have professionally edited graphics and obviously considerable resource behind it.” Thank you for the compliments on the quality of our material. I do enjoy doing this kind of stuff, even if I am paid to write academic things instead.
    3. You really need to fact check better (so does Cameron Slater).

    I request that you update your post page to reflect my corrections.

    Regards,
    Rob Salmond

    [DPF: Thank you for admitting you are behind 08wire despite going to such length to hide your identity. I think the public deserve to know a very recent employee of Helen Clark's is running the site.

    You have totally ignored where the material for the site is coming from. On it you say there will be multiple people producing it. You know who these people are are, so why not tell us how many work for the taxpaper?

    You are being disinegenous about the anonymous registration details. One can register in .org and still register in your own name (as 99% of people do). However .org allows you to hide your identity (unlike .nz) and you deliberately chose to do so. How does such lack of transparency fit with the law championed by Helen Clark during the time you worked for her?

    And the blog exemption is for individual non-commercial blogs. If parliamentary staff members as part of their jobs are producing material for your blog, and all you do is upload it, I think that is very different to an individual producing their own material.

    Why not just be honest and upfront and reveal who is producing all your material? The fact you pay the domain fee is a red herring. Is the PM's Office providing you with some/most or all of your material?

    Maybe you could comment on who was producing KeepLeftNZ last election? Looks the same lack of transparency.

    For a party that goes on about transparency, you never seem to practice it.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. WebWrat (516 comments) says:

    No one likes liars and cheats gnome who ever they are.
    Maybe one day when you grow up and get a real job, you will learn to appreciate that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “The Standard says they are all independent bloggers”

    um yeah, I know several of them DPF, and none of them work for the Labour Party. This is nothing more than a cheap smear campaign on your behalf. Shame on you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,684 comments) says:

    Its the Mugarmy Army at work.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. slightlyrighty (2,448 comments) says:

    pseudonymous has a good point. Political Journos seem intent on preserving the access to parliament and as a result, do not put the sort of scrutiny on politicians that would, by default, give rise to the transparency that we all seek.

    It seems that the political journalists closest to the corridors of power have forgotten that their role is to inform us, and not parrot political spin from any side. I am sure that certain journalists are in possession of information that would be very politically damaging but will not be run because it is not in the best interest of the journalist to find himself or herself ostracised from the political “inner circle”. I think the public deserve better.

    I am sure that there are some journos who would be aware of Helen Clark’s possible plans post November. I have heard rumblings from sources that there is a high profile London based role that she has expressed interest in, yet this information, which must be in the hands of some journalists, remains very much under the radar.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. slightlyrighty (2,448 comments) says:

    Roger, you may know several of them, but do you know ALL of them?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    So far the Standard has lied about

    1. Who hosts the site (the debate continues)
    2. Who staffs the site
    3. Who funds the site
    4. Their “independent” bloggers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Bok (740 comments) says:

    Roger you are the one person that has been proved time and again to be a liar. So we just cannot believe you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “you are the one person that has been proved time and again to be a liar.”

    You can’t provide one instance to support that claim. Liar.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    Not ONE instance Roger, three thousand, five hundred and eighty seven instances.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. WebWrat (516 comments) says:

    The best way to fix the Lame Stream Media is to do (or not) what I do … don’t buy any newspapers.
    I don’t know why people waste money on what is so obviously biased bull shit.
    Go to the library and get a good science fiction novel to read.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. llew (1,532 comments) says:

    Heh… this the same person handing emails to Hagar?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Brian Smaller (3,915 comments) says:

    In answer to the title in this post, it is because they are corrupt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    I know someone who works at parliament and knows where their offices are :) The info i have from him is that they are employed by labour yet paid for by parlimentary services. which does not seem entirely kosher (not that thats ever stopped labour).

    If this were National there’d be hell to pay courtesy of the MSM. Where are the headlines? Where is the outrage at underhand political campaigning at the taxpayers expense?

    If you are a MSM journalist then, with a few exceptions, hang your head in shame. Your efforts fall way short of editorial independence, and look more like disgraceful, partisan political allegiance.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    DPF:

    “It is understood that the Standard was conceived of by the PM’s Office”

    What you assert isn’t supported by your own “evidence”. i.e, an individual who worked for Labour at one time may have thought of the idea. That’s not the same thing as “the Labour Party came up with the idea”.

    SR:

    “you may know several of them, but do you know ALL of them?”

    Not all of them, but I know that the main contributors aren’t employed by Labour. Not sure about a couple of the minor contributors though. But then again were talking people who make one post every couple of weeks – not so interesting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. WebWrat (516 comments) says:

    Better yet … start a movement to boycott all the Liarbore propaganda rags.
    Then we will see what is more important …. sucking up/pandering to Liarbore or satisfiying the needs of truth seeking customers.
    The only reason the LSM get away with it is because all you people buy their bull shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Danyl Mclauchlan (1,049 comments) says:

    If this were National there’d be hell to pay courtesy of the MSM. Where are the headlines? Where is the outrage at underhand political campaigning at the taxpayers expense?

    While we all know what the Standard is, nobody else in New Zealand does. Based on Tumeke’s blogosphere rankings they get about 800 visits a day. Based on their comments section this mostly consists of fellow Labour party members agreeing with them and National Party supporters disagreeing with them and getting banned. Its just not that newsworthy to the general public – especially in the absence of any hard evidence that the posts are written by PS or Ministerial staff during work time. (I agree that they almost certainly are – but there’s no actual proof).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Grant (383 comments) says:

    “um yeah, I know several of them DPF, and none of them work for the Labour Party. This is nothing more than a cheap smear campaign on your behalf. Shame on you.”
    Do you mean none of the ones you know work for the labour party nome? Or are you being clever here? I didn’t know ministerial staffers were employed by the labour party.
    G

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    Its just not that newsworthy

    Danyl, I respectfully disagree. It’s not the effectiveness of the Standard’s blog efforts that at issue for me. It’s the use of public money for underhand political campaigning. And as for proof – yes 100% actual proof would be nice, but the absence of verifiable evidence didn’t stop Hagar and the MSM beating up Brash

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. dime (8,785 comments) says:

    im with bruv, treat roger and sonic how they treat people at the standard… ban them :)

    the standard once banned every member of a sports forum just because they didnt like me haha

    anyway, back to the issue, labours behaviour is a disgrace as usual. lets hope the media get stuck into them.

    maybe investigate magazine can research these blogs for us.

    are there any right wing hackers out there? lol

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    They dont work for Labour, they work for the Unions, and the Unions are simulataneously separate from the Labour party and intimately linked throughout their shared history. Obviously.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “It’s the use of public money for underhand political campaigning.”

    You’ll be shocked to find out that Natioanal is using public money to pay racist smear-campaign merchants C/T then?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Danyl Mclauchlan (1,049 comments) says:

    Hager did have several years worth Brash’s email, as well as numerous other documents. That constitutes pretty good proof.

    DPF has an anonymous email with an unverified allegation in it. There’s a pretty huge difference.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    Look, Dim is right, this just isnt news.

    Labour is lying and cheating.

    National at over 50% in the polls shows that most people already know this.

    Nome knows it. The Stantards know it. But they have such a strong desire for absolute power that they just dont care. They are being so hypocritical that it makes you puke, but they will never change because they really aren’t good people.

    (And this is all you deserve Nome, after you claimed that employers in New Zealand would like to introduce slave labour conditions for their workers.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    getstaffed, you think the MSM is biased, and so too do the Left it seems…this would seem to indicate…something.

    pseudonymous DOES have a good point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    DPF:

    “For a party that goes on about transparency, you never seem to practice it.”

    There you go again, asserting that Rob Salmond, who lives in the USA, and worked for Labour for a short time last year, is “The Labour Party”. They aren’t the same thing. Get it through your head.

    [DPF: But who is producing all the material that Rob will be uploading for them? he admits it is not himself.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    then of course there is that ‘transparent’ john key..

    ..and the ‘transparancy’ of national..

    ..as detailed in ‘the hollow men’..

    eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Hoolian (220 comments) says:

    Great post, Farrar. Your analysis is always very good, very thoroughly researched on these points.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    dpf..could it be said your closeness to natty hq..is closer than the standardites to labour hq..?

    just wondering..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “very thoroughly researched on these points.”

    um, as Rob has pointed out, most of the things Farrar asserts in his post are false. On what planet is that “thoroughly researched”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    I think I may have left this comment at The Standurrrd a few months ago:

    “There you go again, asserting that DPF, who runs a private company, and worked for National party for a time many years ago, is the National Party. They aren’t the same thing. Get it through your head.”

    The difference is, DPF is just asking for the same level of transparancy as he practices, whereas The Standerred is demanding a level of transparancy far beyond what they practice themselves and for Kiwiblog to eventually be shut down.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    “What is not denied is that material for all three anonymous sites is produced by parliamentary staffers.”

    Over.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    oh yes thanks for that that philu, I almost forgot to ask.

    DPF, whilst we’re on the topic of transpareny, can you confirm or deny allegations made by Winston Peters, James Sleep and many others who claim to know that your business is primarily operated out of National Party HQ? If this is true, why haven’t you disclosed this? It would be in the public interest to know that you have a de-facto commercial relationship with the National Party wouldn’t it?

    [DPF: My business operates from the commercial premises in Thorndon I have a six year lease on]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Rob Salmond (260 comments) says:

    “DPF: Thank you for admitting you are behind 08wire despite going to such length to hide your identity.”

    As I said in my earlier comment, I told the media (umprompted) that I am involved with 08wire on Monday. How that is “great length to hide my identity?”

    “You have totally ignored where the material for the site is coming from. On it you say there will be multiple people producing it. You know who these people are are, so why not tell us how many work for the taxpaper?”

    Because the EFA exemption for blogs, which you supported, gives me the right not to.

    “You are being disinegenous about the anonymous registration details. One can register in .org and still register in your own name (as 99% of people do). However .org allows you to hide your identity (unlike .nz) and you deliberately chose to do so. How does such lack of transparency fit with the law championed by Helen Clark during the time you worked for her?”

    See above about my voluntary transparency.

    “And the blog exemption is for individual non-commercial blogs. If parliamentary staff members as part of their jobs are producing material for your blog, and all you do is upload it, I think that is very different to an individual producing their own material.”

    Of the material on the site so far, 90% is the product of my efforts and my efforts alone. This is a non-commercial blog – you don’t appreciate what non-commercial means. It means nobody is paid to produce the content as part of their jobs, and that nobody profits from the site. I can confirm that 08wire meets those tests. I note that Kiwiblog does not.

    “Maybe you could comment on who was producing KeepLeftNZ last election? Looks the same lack of transparency.”

    Our launch video says that 08wire is brought to you by the same people who produced KeepLeftNZ. I’m part of 08wire, and it follows that I was part of KeepleftNZ. Will I “out” others? No.

    “For a party that goes on about transparency, you never seem to practice it.”

    I am not “the Labour Party” – I am “a New Zealander in the US” I remember you claiming on this blog how you valued the right’s tendency to view people as individuals and not part of groups. It seems you only believe that when convenient.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    PaulL, you got me!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    No comment yet about The Stundard using Labour party hardware for several “months” and then lying about it ever since.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Chicken Little (793 comments) says:

    Any comment on the actual post phule?

    Or just more B.S Nome styles?

    And speaking of Nome – Frankly mate I wouldn’t believe one single word that you type here, your lack of credibility has been proven over and over again.

    Assuming that Mr Salmond is the person that posts on The VDS as R0b he seems to have a very insider understanding of whats going on in the Labour Party for someone who lives in the US.

    I say BUSTED.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. unaha-closp (1,034 comments) says:

    roger nome (3589) –8 Says:

    July 8th, 2008 at 10:37 am
    Hey, nice novel DPF. In times of War and Peace, propaganda is necessary for a good elite-serving opposition party.

    Rogernome explains why the the Standard was set up, as a propoganda organ of a party expecting to become the opposition.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Kimble, DPF was a loyal National Party Staffer for many years, and even worked for an extended period in Jenny Shipley’s office. That’s pretty much as National Party as you can get without being an MP.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. dime (8,785 comments) says:

    gotta love the left… point out something they have done wrong and they will point out that a ring wing party did something similar once.. apparently that means its ok? 2 wrongs make a right?

    i think the nation would go into shock if labour made a mistake/did something wrong/lied/cheated/stole (the usual), then stood up and said

    “yea we made a mistake” or “yea i did that and it was wrong, sorry”

    its the arrogance that will get them booted this year and its their arrogance that keeps them from seeing that. i guess if you spend your days associating only with radical lefties, you build a false sense of security? a lot of – nah we are ok. we will win the election. we know best… all that type of crap.

    the vocal minority socialising only with the vocal minority leads to arrogant fools.. and thank god for that! we need someone to dig us out of this recession!

    of course the standard reply to that is “its you righties that get together and hatch secret plots” lol when in reality, its us righties that spend our free time on our boats, at our holiday homes, having fun, loving life :P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    “This is a non-commercial blog – you don’t appreciate what non-commercial means. It means nobody is paid to produce the content as part of their jobs, and that nobody profits from the site.”

    Graeme, I think this one is set up for you. I think the “profit” requirement is bunk and I that R0b only uses it as a swear word.

    “I am not “the Labour Party” – I am “a New Zealander in the US” I remember you claiming on this blog how you valued the right’s tendency to view people as individuals and not part of groups.”

    Obviously DPF meant you as a supporter of the Labour Party. You are really struggling, r0b, if THIS is what you are resorting to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Chris Diack (723 comments) says:

    I can’t see what all the fuss is about really.

    Who cares about whom is publishing what on the internet? Parliamentary parties use parliamentary parties to advance their political interests… again so what.

    Again who cares about Australian political consultants who travel the anglo american world looking for work because there isn’t enough work in any one country to sustain a business.

    The fetish about transparency and disclosure is simply another method of chilling the political contest.

    I love Dr Salmond’s EFA statement – a sort of intellectual brag that his blog might become the subject controversy here. Oddly he claims he posts under threat of perjury here; a bit strange for his blog is published as he points out in the nation that values free speech highly more so that New Zealand under Labour.

    It was always a conceit – Labour’s attempt to regulate the internet – all Dr Salmond is doing is what everyone else will end up doing if the EFA regime remains in place.

    I just love the “Team LPG” “cooking with gas” stuff…… so well …. American…. so…….. macho … a sort of political swagger … so ….. big oil. It’s the sort of OTT stuff that Clark herself avoided … that plainness and straightforwardness did well for her.

    And at any rate I thought we were headed for a post petroleum, carbon neutral world under Labour? The Green “peak oil” Party surely won’t be happy.

    Perhaps the LPG analogy is appropriate: Labour … reduced to liquid and contained in a cylinder under extreme pressure. Only to be released to be totally combusted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    “Kimble, DPF was a loyal National Party Staffer for many years, and even worked for an extended period in Jenny Shipley’s office. That’s pretty much as National Party as you can get without being an MP.”

    Whoop de fucking doo, Nome, he isnt the National Party. You are splitting hairs out of desperation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. NeilM (370 comments) says:

    I’m with Danyl, it’s just more partisan hackery that’s of no relevance to most voters. No doubt there’ll be even more obsessing over Crosby/Textor but meanwhile the public angst over increased energy prices and side with the truckers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    I haven’t seen Nome react like this before:

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Kimble:

    “Obviously DPF meant you as a supporter of the Labour Party.”

    That’s not clear. His exact words were “For a party that goes on about transparency”. Rob isn’t part of the party.

    “I think the “profit” requirement is bunk”

    Think you’re wrong again there. It’s true that the act exempts non-commercial blogs. But if you’re selling space on your blog I would think that’s commercial activity no? Though I must admit that I’m not sure on the exact wording of the Act.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. llew (1,532 comments) says:

    and even worked for an extended period in Jenny Shipley’s office. That’s pretty much as National Party as you can get without being an MP.

    Gotta call you on this one – of the only two people I know who have been National party staffers, for extended periods of time with Upton, English & then Shipley, neither has been a member of the National perty & neither has probably voted National ever. (could be wrong on that last one, but I doubt it).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. unaha-closp (1,034 comments) says:

    Chris,

    I can’t see what all the fuss is about really.

    It provides some useful context to allegations of C/T dirty tricks, which have gained traction in the more respectable leftosphere – frogblog, no right turn and public address. The most significant allegations revolve around creating dissatification through the use of deniable sources and here is presented an organ of Labour (that it denies) attempting to sabotage the opposition.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. labrator (1,691 comments) says:

    I am resident of the US running a not-for-profit website

    You don’t even live here, why go to so much bother? And it seems like a lot of bother!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    Roger nome “and none of them work for the Labour Party.” I think that David is saying that they work for us, ie. the taxpayer & the EPMU not the Labour party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “he isnt the National Party”

    I haven’t opined that he is, just that his links with the National Party are much more significant that Rob’s links with the Labour Party. I think we can all agree on that.

    [DPF: I think we can also agree that I have disclosed from day one my identity and links so people can judge them in context. The average person going to 08wire would have no idea it is produced by someone who worked for Helen Clark just last year]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    lew- Farrar was a “young Nat” and has admitted to being a National Party activist prior to joining the leader’s office. The man is about due for a “life time service” award from the National Party I’d say.

    [DPF: I agree. I'd like a big ceremony, a nice certificate and a trip for two to Rome as part of the award]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    Nome, you are being pathetically pedantic, and that just shows how weak your argument is. I know what DPFs EXACT words were, I was saying that a reasonable person reading it wouldnt take it literally. Of course, you arent a reasonable person, are you?

    “Think you’re wrong again there. It’s true that the act exempts non-commercial. But if you’re selling space on your blog I would think that’s commercial activity no?”

    Nope, and no, I am not going to get trapped into explaining the meaning of a section of a law I disagreed with and have said was fcuked up beyond all worth from the very beginning.

    This is why the EFA is such a mess and a waste of time. If the architects of the Act are able to set up an arms-length John Key attack site (or three) to subvert the intention of the Act, what use is it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    ” I think that David is saying that they work for us, ie. the taxpayer”

    None of the Standard people I know work in the leaders office either.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    labrator, the concept of being part of a ‘nation’ probably has something to do with it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Grant (383 comments) says:

    Desperate shite roger, very desperate indeed.
    G

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Kimble:

    “I was saying that a reasonable person reading it wouldnt take it literally”

    His use of the word “party” implied that rob represents the “party” – just admit it, you were wrong.

    “Nope, and no, I am not going to get trapped into explaining”

    So you’re not going to explain the reasoning for your opinion, because there is no reasoning behind it, fine.

    “If the architects of the Act are able to set up an arms-length John Key attack site (or three)”

    That’s just the thing. No one has shown that this is the case. Are you ever right?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Paul Williams (868 comments) says:

    Rob said:

    I am not “the Labour Party” – I am “a New Zealander in the US” I remember you claiming on this blog how you valued the right’s tendency to view people as individuals and not part of groups. It seems you only believe that when convenient.

    Rob, just admit you’re part of a VLWC and be done with it hey! I’m sure you’re not really just an academic working in the US who’s got an interest in NZ politics and the wherewithal to blog; we all know it’s a dark art only a very few can manage without a sinecure from the party!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. spector (180 comments) says:

    I think that The Standard has ironically done more to damage Labour than National.

    Everyone knows DPF’s involvement with National and he is always upfront about it, but The Standard in pretending that they are something that they are not only come away looking deceitful. And no one likes a liar.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    Kiwiblog is 10 times more transparant that The Stadnard, no8wire, and keepnzleft. I think we can all agree on that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. pseudonymous (69 comments) says:

    Nome.
    What does it feel like to sit on a chair with a hole in it and having your gonads crushed?
    Oh the rack, the torment, the torture, the misery, it must be purgatory.
    No mortal should have to put up with the agony, the martyrdom, the anguish,suffering and persecution.
    What a masquerade; the cover ups, the veneer slowly peeling away.
    Your rather feeble attempts are akin to self flagellation.
    Ask for a pay rise old son, you deserve it for above and beyond the call of duty!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “Kiwiblog is 10 times more transparant that The Stadnard, no8wire, and keepnzleft.”

    There’s good reason for that. I’ve never seen a blogger from the left threaten to beat up someone on the right. Sadly, I can’t say that the opposite is true.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    “So you’re not going to explain the reasoning for your opinion, because there is no reasoning behind it”

    Its not my fault that Labour couldnt legislate itself out of a wet paper bag. I dont think Kiwiblog is commercial just because it has ad space, and I dont think a profit motive determines what is and isnt commercial. The EFA provides zero guidance on what non-commercial is and it is your lot that is to blame for that legislative abortion.

    “That’s just the thing. No one has shown that this is the case.”

    Because it is impossible to show, and you know it. But that doesnt prevent a reasonable person from combining the information at hand, along with estimation of the character of the various actors, to reach a reasonable conclusion. Which is what DPF has done.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    rogernome: so what are your credentials for claiming to know the provenance of “The Standard” ? For all we know you may be Clinton Smiths other non de plume.

    Working as part of team at interest.co.nz that analyses and reports on ( among other activities) a large amount of information I can speculate that the quality of the data and charts that The Standard posts must be being produced,accessed or edited by paid employees. None of the other NZ political blogs ( even that of our esteemed host Mr Farrar) delivers the quantity of data,charts and analysis The Standard does. Not proof I know, but a strong indication that the “Standardistas” are full time, paid bloggers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    “I’ve never seen someone from a blogger from the left threaten to beat up someone on the right.”

    Then you are blind.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Richard Hurst (714 comments) says:

    This is very, very interesting indeed. I would urge as many people to ‘scoop it’ DPF’s post as possible to help get this story into the mainstream media, write to your local MP about it (especially if their Labour!) and your local paper. It is very worthy of investigation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. burt (7,096 comments) says:

    Richard Hurst

    We need to take it slowly, too much haste will result in Parliament sitting under urgency to pass retrospective EFA amendments and parliamentary service appropriation validations. Move on, nothing to see here….

    The law is confusing and people who wrote it can’t be expected to follow it – status quo is more important – Move on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Kimble:

    I’ve had at least three separate right-wing bloggers threaten to beat me to a pulp. I’ve literally never seen a left wing blogger threaten to lay a finger on anyone. That’s the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. labrator (1,691 comments) says:

    the concept of being part of a ‘nation’ probably has something to do with it.

    To be part of something you generally have to be in it. Cullen told English to go to Aussie because he complained but we’re willing to accept a guy in the USA promoting a party whose rules he’s circumventing and you say it’s to do with the concept of being part of a nation? I call bs. If you want to help you country, come back and contribute, don’t sit a long way away and point fingers at people who are trying to make a difference in a positive manner.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    Fair enough, a diaspora then. 20,000 kiwis are attempting to ‘help’ from afar too http://www.keanewzealand.com/about/index.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    Roger

    You are a liar, I have seen that low life Robinsod threaten at least half a dozen people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. newzblog (4 comments) says:

    I think if Davey believed this whole heatedly he would have no issues in naming the source. As it stands anyone can send an email to anyone claiming this or that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Chris Diack (723 comments) says:

    unaha-closp: “It provides some useful context to allegations of C/T dirty tricks, which have gained traction in the more respectable leftosphere – frogblog, no right turn and public address. The most significant allegations revolve around creating dissatification through the use of deniable sources and here is presented an organ of Labour (that it denies) attempting to sabotage the opposition”

    I don’t think the average voter gives a damn about Crosby Texter nor about Labour’s attempt to “sabotage the opposition” nor about blogs generally nor about whether some current or ex parliamentary flunkies contribute or author a blog either here or out of Michigan. Nor do I think the MSM take on this Government is hugely influenced by blogs – this error is why I suspect there is so much heat about.

    This is all political elites stuff – this scrapping has gone on in one form or another forever.

    Basically Labour has a “cut through” or “phone ringing but no one answering” problem – going feral on Key either attributed or unattributed won’t help them – indeed it reminds most voters about some of the weaknesses of Clark that they don’t like and that until the EFA she kept out of sight. That is why it surprises that she personally is so closely associated with this tactic – it damages Clark’s carefully constructed reputation for drama free pragmatism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “I can speculate that the quality of the data and charts that The Standard posts must be being produced,accessed or edited by paid employees.”

    nah – pretty much all of the data I’ve seen there is available on-line.

    “None of the other NZ political blogs ( even that of our esteemed host Mr Farrar) delivers the quantity of data,charts and analysis The Standard does.”

    Perhaps that’s because they have around 4-5 contributors?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (856 comments) says:

    wonder why phillipjohn has felt the need to comment 15+ times on a thread that is of no particular interest to him?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Grendel (875 comments) says:

    >>I’ve had at least three separate right-wing bloggers threaten to beat me to a pulp.

    And you say the right are not as big on charity as the left? giving you a pummelling seems to me to be a public service

    >> I’ve literally never seen a left wing blogger threaten to lay a finger on anyone. That’s the truth.

    nice choice of language.

    You have never seen a left blogger threaten anyone.

    and i imagine you are being completey literal.

    So the fact that several commenters on various blogs (not the bloggers themselves) whose political leanings may or may not be left wing have threatened people, you did not see them do it, you only read the comments later.

    yep you are right, you have probably never literally seen a left wing blogger threaten anyone. you have definatley litterally read the comments of a commenter on a left wing blog threaten to beat up someone.

    i as a non blogging, non right wing person, would happily beat you to a pulp. there you go, you can now say you have never litterally seen a right wing blogger threaten you on this thread.

    Semantics are fun are they not?

    any enough of stage two the lefty defence (divert, comes after deny and before denigrate), you still have put up no actual counter argument to the fact that the labour party pays people from parlimentary services to spend all day blogging and attacking private bloggers. is that not using US style tactics your lot supposedly despise?

    oh but wait, farrar worked for the national party once.

    loser.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    “I’ve had at least three separate right-wing bloggers threaten to beat me to a pulp.”

    Why don’t you report it to that fantastic police force you were prattling about the other day – see if you can get a better response than Mr Low got?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    “giving you a pummelling seems to me to be a public service”

    See what I mean Kimble? There’s just too many whack-jobs commenting on these blogs. It’s just not safe to be open about who you are if you’re a left-wing blogger.

    [DPF: Oh nonsense, online rhetoric is not the same as real fear for safety. I've had actual death threats made to me over the phone and I don't hide my identity, so your attempt to claim it is fear not lack of transparency is laughable.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    Bruv:

    “You are a liar, I have seen that low life Robinsod threaten at least half a dozen people.”

    I’ve never asserted you hadn’t, only that I hadn’t. Now I expect you to stump up with proof of your claims, which I suspect are bullshit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Adam (552 comments) says:

    Nome, diddums. Harden the fuck up.
    ©Crosby Textor

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. davidp (3,329 comments) says:

    Rob Salmond> 08wire.org is not run out of the Prime Minister’s office – it is run out of a house in Michigan.

    1. So you’ve decided that living overseas is a better option than living in a Labour governed NZ. Which isn’t an unusual point of view… 300,000 NZers have agreed with you since 1999. But you want to inflict ANOTHER 3 years of Helen Clark on us? It’s a bit rich that you’re enjoying low US taxes and no-Kyoto treaty while you campaign to keep our taxes high and our electricity bills increase.

    2. A campaign to influence the NZ election is being organised and run out of the States, for goodness sake. Surely even a 10 year old could tell you that overseas interference isn’t a good look for Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Barnsley Bill (931 comments) says:

    don’t forget my comment as well eger moron.
    other than the fact you drive much of david’s comment traffic with your self loathing whitey onanism i cannot see one good reason for your existence.
    I am picking your banning will coincide with John Key being sworn in as PM. Your one last usefull purpose will be redundant.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    Rogernome: You seem to be ignoring my question: are you actually Clinton Smith AKA Steve Pierson ?

    “pretty much all of the data I’ve seen there is available on-line.” It is but it is a full time job analyzing, writing a post and presenting it in a form that serves their case. Most other NZ political bloggers simply cut and paste from content that has already been written and published by either APN or Fairfax. Do you have a blog or other credentials that qualify you to comment ?

    [DPF: I have met both Clinton and "Roger" and they are different people]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Barnsley Bill (931 comments) says:

    still no post from the ninth floor about their pedigree. I guess an emergency WTF shall we do meeting is still in progress.
    DPF, I hope you threatened eger moron with violence when you met him. You wouldn’t want to shake his belief that we are all out to get him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    [DPF: I think we can also agree that I have disclosed from day one my identity and links so people can judge them in context. The average person going to 08wire would have no idea it is produced by someone who worked for Helen Clark just last year]

    Yes, and that is the whole point isn’t it ? What is wrong with the “The Standard” is not it’s point of view but that it is expressing that point of view without coming clean on who it represents. If it is indeed being paid for by Parliamentary Services then we have a right to know that. I’m not so concerned about EPMU involvement but taxpayers money is my money.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Chicken Little (793 comments) says:

    I guess an emergency WTF shall we do meeting is still in progress.

    ha ha I was just thinking that Bill.

    Sweaty palms and all.

    Look for a concerted response this arvo, including, I suspect, another mass banning event of the already decimated ranks of critics.

    You have to laugh really, doing it this way was always going to end up biting them in the arse eventually.

    Are these really the people that have been running our country for the last 9 years?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    [DPF: I have met both Clinton and "Roger" and they are different people]

    Thanks for the clarification DPF. For a while Clinton Smith/Steve Pierson accused me of being Bernard Hickey, no I just work for Bernard :-)

    [DPF: I thought Bernard was an invented character - a collective of shadowy analysts :-)]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Barnsley Bill (931 comments) says:

    I am not sure what the banning is all about over there. If you completely avoid asking them who they are and who is paying the bills you should not have any trouble.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. unaha-closp (1,034 comments) says:

    Chris,

    I don’t think the average voter gives a damn about Crosby Texter nor about Labour’s attempt to “sabotage the opposition” nor about blogs generally nor about whether some current or ex parliamentary flunkies contribute or author a blog either here or out of Michigan. Nor do I think the MSM take on this Government is hugely influenced by blogs – this error is why I suspect there is so much heat about.

    For sure, I agree with that. But perhaps we are wrong and Labour made skull-duggery allegations may take flight. This post acts to provide an innoculating balance to the possibility.

    This is all political elites stuff – this scrapping has gone on in one form or another forever.

    Political bloodsport in front of a few thousand comment shouting people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. ahod (31 comments) says:

    As a final note, some will ask for the proof that Labour has been involved with these three sites. Well obviously direct proof is near impossible unless one does a Nicky Hager and gets hold of e-mails or has video recordings of people at work.

    One is reminded of Shakespeare’s play, ‘Othello’.

    Farrar can not offer the “ocular proof” which people need for his assertions to be proven. So he seeks the handkerchief.

    DPF is not what he is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    I was wondering about your propensity to link to interest.co.nz every second post on frogblog Bryan…:-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    stephen: Every second post ? My employment contract specifies every post :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Danyl Mclauchlan (1,049 comments) says:

    One is reminded of Shakespeare’s play, ‘Othello’.

    Farrar can not offer the “ocular proof” which people need for his assertions to be proven. So he seeks the handkerchief.

    DPF is not what he is.

    ‘Tis a shrewd doubt, though it be but a dream,
    And this may help to thicken other proofs,
    That do demonstrate thinly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    “I’ve literally never seen a left wing blogger threaten to lay a finger on anyone. That’s the truth.”

    Of course you wouldn’t, because you are blind to it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. burt (7,096 comments) says:

    Remove all sharp knives from the 9th floor!

    This must end in court, nobody should be exempt from the law, especially not the people who wrote it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Barnsley Bill (931 comments) says:

    Burt why claw and fight your way to the top and be in a position to make law if you cannot ignore the law? Nine years at the top has made the Virgin Queen believe she is a deity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    Roger nome ““giving you a pummelling seems to me to be a public service”

    See what I mean Kimble? There’s just too many whack-jobs commenting on these blogs. It’s just not safe to be open about who you are if you’re a left-wing blogger.

    [DPF: Oh nonsense, online rhetoric is not the same as real fear for safety. I've had actual death threats made to me over the phone and I don't hide my identity, so your attempt to claim it is fear not lack of transparency is laughable.]”

    Yep, parliamentarians say things that piss people off all the time. Apart from the aborted “terrorist threats” by the so called Urewera 17 against John Key last year when was the last time a politician had anything worse than an eye full of mud ? The blogosphere would be a much more pleasant & productive place if people had the balls to use their real identities rather than make anonymous comments and insults.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Barnsley Bill (931 comments) says:

    I agree with Bryan’s last paragraph. Every anonymong should out themselves immediately.. Except me of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Kimble (4,095 comments) says:

    “The blogosphere would be a much more pleasant & productive place if people had the balls to use their real identities rather than make anonymous comments and insults.”

    Yeah, perhaps if people had to stand behind what they said online we wouldnt have such absurd and offensive statements like “right wing NZ employers wanted to be able to treat their employees like slaves”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    And many, many others…ah well!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. Bryan Spondre (554 comments) says:

    Barnsley Bill: I see that you are a “Refugee from Auckland traffic.” & a “Trustafarian”. Is that like being a Pastafarian ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. Mal (29 comments) says:

    Oh! the rich irony – that the labour party’s liars are now operating out of the dreaded and hateful USA. Speak about carpet baggers this is to good to be true. Where o where are the MSM on this one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    Melodramatic much Mal?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Graeme Edgeler (3,222 comments) says:

    Apart from the aborted “terrorist threats” by the so called Urewera 17 against John Key last year when was the last time a politician had anything worse than an eye full of mud?

    There was that cop(?) convicted of making death threats against Helen Clark.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. roger nome (4,067 comments) says:

    DPF:

    “I’ve had actual death threats made to me over the phone and I don’t hide my identity”

    Well, perhaps the risk is worth it to you, seeing as you’ve invested so much time, energy and resources in this blog over the last 5 years or so. Your institutional position as the semi-official National Party blogger, and reasonable-sized readership probably adds extra incentive to seek credibility through being open about your identity. Still, you’re deluding yourself to think that your blogging activities don’t put you at risk. As I said, in the blogshphere whackjobs abound.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    Rob Salmond

    So 08wire is run out of the USA, given that you used to work in the office of dear corrupt leader you would well remember the abuse she tossed the way of the Nat’s at the last election when she accused them of obtaining campaign advice from America.
    Why is it acceptable for Labour to have support from the USA but not the National party?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Buggerlugs (1,609 comments) says:

    Would those people who threatened to beat Woger to a pulp please forget about it and do some real work. He’s doing a good enough job beating himself up without needing your help.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. Buggerlugs (1,609 comments) says:

    Woger the last sentence of your 2.38pm comment is a classic QED!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. PaulL (5,776 comments) says:

    Roger, sure you can be anonymous. Your argument that it is OK for right wing to be public because all left wingers are fluffy and nice has been proven untrue by DPF.

    So we are back to the fact that you choose to be anonymous (actually, in your case not all that anonymous), and DPF chooses to be open.

    This was in fact DPF’s original point – supporters of the party who preach transparency are deliberately hiding their identity, and a number of sources are pointing to the fact that the reason for hiding that identity is that they are fronts for the Labour party and Labour party affiliated groups. Which is one of the things that the EFA was supposed to stop.

    So I think you are agreeing with DPF – no?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Barnsley Bill (931 comments) says:

    Bryan, no.
    Although what a strange site you have found..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. davidp (3,329 comments) says:

    The only political violence I can recall in NZ recently has all been directed from the left to the right:

    A Labour Party Cabinet Minister assaulting an MP from an opposition party.

    And a Labour Party official assaulting some peaceful demonstrators with a loud hailer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    “Why is it acceptable for Labour to have support from the USA but not the National party?”

    That was because they were American political consultants.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. ray (62 comments) says:

    Roger nome
    Regarding the non threatening left wing blogers
    Have you ever read any of Robinsod ravings
    I might also add that Robinsod has been caught using other names, rather famously here
    I await your reply

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    Stephen

    “That was because they were American political consultants”

    And what is wrong with that?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Rob, read your explainations.

    Find you to be “slipery” and a labour party sponsored hack with the same fondness for unethical manipulation of the rules to give a false impression.

    Chance of gaining my vote. Not high.

    Thanks for stopping by

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. Barnsley Bill (931 comments) says:

    Robinsod is all right. he sprays for the attention. And is just the yin to d4j’s yang. He has his own blog now which is not too bad. As a new blog it is quiet but worth a look and when he is not flying off on some masturbatory fantasy about other peoples mum’s can be informative.
    http://robinsod.wordpress.com/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    They weren’t very happy that Americans (i believe they were Republican consultants) were participating in NZ’s political process, I believe.

    edit: i’m not sure, they could have been actual american politicians, rather than consultants. THAT would be a very bad look. They did get Brash to meet with the guy who worked on a whole bunch of US campaigns at his place in Queenstown, i know that much. The details escape me. Research is needed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    But labour is happy to have the American bagmen fund them… interesting.

    Labour party policy being written in Obamas bus?

    Careful he has a habiting of tossing his friends under that bus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. Michaels (1,317 comments) says:

    I rarely bother going to the stranded, so much negativity that goes on there. However, just now I did and there was yet again a theme happening.
    See on kiwiblog or wobh, you get a mix of things to read about, not unlike a newspaper really.
    So go and have a look at the stranded. Page one, there are 21 posts. Of those 21 posts 18 are attacking National. Even their last one, the week at the stranded bags National. There are 2 clips on there as well that I didn’t bother looking at, but they to probably bag National so that would be 20 from 21 posts bagging National.
    Now my point being is this…. they are just another website privately funded just like DPF’s and Whales.
    Anyone hear a Tui and that there Kowhai tree??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. Inventory2 (9,791 comments) says:

    Joining this late, but to getstaffed, I do believe that I was the first one to call them The Average (which they were at the time) – n ow they are just the bitter and twisted, but I’m too tired to try and come up with a pun for that based around Standard.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Strutta (67 comments) says:

    Michaels,

    I have said before that the standard would be a far better blog if they criticised Labour for some of the more despicable goings on. That they don’t is proof enough for me that they are so reliant on the Labour Party that they dare not.

    P.S. I find it amusing that I am also a Michael S.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    “American bagmen”. Owen Glenn?

    The Standard has several posters, that would explain why there are so many posts. Just so happens that they like attacking Key…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (856 comments) says:

    good point stephen – national’s evil american bagmen turned out to be imaginary, while labour’s got a gong and very nearly a diplomatic posting out of his $500k.

    Seems that most of Labour’s attack lines are really projection.

    Oooh US bagmen – oh yes our ones

    Evil push pollsters – except when we do it

    the wealthy might steal the election – much like we did

    slippery john – compared to the eel-like contortions of one helen elizabeth clark, if that is the comparison, i suggest john key needs to see an osteopath pronto.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. lprent (95 comments) says:

    David: Have you actually looked at the ‘proof’ whale is offering.

    He might be a technical illiterate – but you shouldn’t be. Aren’t you involved in InternetNZ? Do you have a laptop? Does that ever get used for both paid work and voluntary work? Both of my laptops do. For that matter so do my machines at home.

    His ‘proof’ merely says that someone who does stuff at the EPMU also is involved at The Standard. Ever read our About? We’re quite open that union people are involved. He could have inferred that from there. I’d assume that we have people from other unions writing blog posts as well. But it is a bit of a leap from that, to saying that they are paid to blog.

    Guess we’re starting to get under C/T’s skin a bit.

    BTW: Good to see that some of the people I’ve banned for bad behavior at The Standard have found a home here. Shows there is a place for everyone somewhere in the blogosphere.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    Iprent

    You have been exposed once again as the official mouthpiece for the Labour party and the EPMU, you also have paid bloggers, why is it so hard for you to admit that?

    No doubt you are also funded by Labour and in time that will come out as well.

    BTW: You only ban people who disagree with dear corrupt leader or ask you questions about your funding or hosting, so you can drop the crap about bad behaviour, at Kiwiblog DPF believes in free speech, and as we all know that is something that the pinko’s at the Standard are not keen on at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    UPDATED LIST…

    Alt-names for The Standard :-

    The Average (Inventory2)
    The Substandard (anon)
    The Slanderard (getstaffed)
    The Standardnistas (bobux)
    The Stranded (Murray)
    The VDS – Very Double Standard (Lee C)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    getstaffed

    Don’t forget “The Heleban”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    As I said earlier the reaction from the lefties to this post quite incredible, and really gives the game away for them.
    The Standard post allegations and inferences almost every day slandering centre right blog sites. DPF posts one ‘inconvenient truth’ that exposes the core of the Standard and the torrent of response removes any doubt as to who is behind that site.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    Getstaffed
    Given their ownership I thought ‘The Squandered’

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    bruv/patrick: excellent. captured :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. hubbers (204 comments) says:

    Anyone who would like to ask Helen directly who is blogging against National on taxpayer money can email her on pm@ministers.govt.nz

    Please include a postal address if you would like one of her staffers to take off his “impartial blogging hat” and put on his “working for the tax payers of New Zealand hat”.

    If enough of us write they will have very little time to blog this week :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. WebWrat (516 comments) says:

    Rogered: “I’ve had at least three separate right-wing bloggers threaten to beat me to a pulp. I’ve literally never seen a left wing blogger threaten to lay a finger on anyone. That’s the truth.”

    Are you sure they’re not left-wing bloggers gnome? Maybe they want to beat you up for the damage you are doing to Liarbore.

    The Strangled
    The Startled
    The Desporados
    The We’re Fuckin Desperate To Stop This Nat Run blog
    The We’re Nationals Best Asset blog
    The Dog Tuckers
    The Offal Pit

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,787 comments) says:

    Labour really knows how to poop in their own bed.

    Surprise surprise, Labour doesn’t want to sleep in it.

    Too bad! :-P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. Chicken Little (793 comments) says:

    lprent – Did your mother beat you when you were a child? Can’t think of any other reason you’d be such a jumped up wee tosspot.

    I would of come over to the Stranded to ask you but you banned me.

    xxxx

    CL

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. coge (160 comments) says:

    The degree of censorship & banning at that labour supporters blog is both arbitrary & abusive. There are probably only two or three righties commenting these days. They must feel they are on thin ice. A pity, really, as the blog ressembles little more than a mutual wankfest at that point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    That really does explain why the standard gimps go absolutely berko and pseudo ban me/review/censor all my comments, and threaten to ban me for life for having the temerity of arguing the toss with them. They are in fact huluns b’arches.

    I try to post there coge et al however it is impossible to avoid gestapo like tactics from not just the political level stooges but also the very angry admin person.

    Imagine the happiness in their lives. LOL :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. mattyroo (885 comments) says:

    The Standard is hardly worth reading / visiting, so really there is not a lot to debate about here, apart from the fact that the pricks appear to be doing their self gratification from the public tit, and whilst they are supposed to be working for their employer, you and me!

    The onanists over there, are really only “turd polishing” the turd being the labour party. They have very few site visits per day and most of these are from the loyal “polishers”. Any debate is instantly blocked / banned, so there is nothing worthy to read. The simple reason DPF and WOBH are popular is they encourage the debate. Whereas the polishers only try to see themselves staring back at them from the turd, when in reality they are blinded by the steam from the turd….

    You really have to wonder how much polish they can apply to this turd before they realise it is all in vain.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    The “brains trust” at the standard, as they blog from the gentrified heights of the beehive, a cosey unon office and grey lynn, fail to realise they are responsible for laybores falling ratings. No-one likes a bunch of arrogant bullyboys who abuse anyone who disagrees with them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. Pascal (2,015 comments) says:

    I’m curious Roger. It is very well known that you are Philip John Mason, a student at a certain university that I will not name now. Tracking you down would be a very easy thing to do. Yet, like a little monkey, you keep on flinging shit everywhere, insulting people, insulting their families, baiting them in the name of fun and somehow when you manage to goad somebody into a reaction it is their fault.

    You, Philip John, belong to the typical passive aggressive bully class. You have no responsibility. You blame everyone for your own failings. And yet, despite the reactions people have shown to YOUR goading, baiting and insulting of them, their families and their essential humanity you have NOT been tracked down and beaten to a pulp.

    See, most intelligent, mature adults can differentiate between a reaction to your obvious goading and a threat. Your claims, unfortunately, fail.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Oh, a student, studying a worthless commie subject that protects you from working and paying taxes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    does anyone else think that that mattyroo has some faecal ‘issues’..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. big bruv (12,381 comments) says:

    does anyone else think that philu should fuck off..?

    eh..

    Bruv(taxpayer.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Yeah me, but he’ll hang around as long as he gets the attention. That’s his real reason for posting here.

    He’s an adult example of one of those horrible little brats who constantly demand their mummy’s attention. Such attention seeking is a by-product of the narcissim that frequently afflicts leftists. Its why they react to criticism the way they do. Its why critics get booted from the Standard. If there is one thing leftists can’t stand, its having their delusional self image sullied.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.