This entry was posted
on Sunday, August 9th, 2009 at 8:00 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
South Africa 17, Australia 18. Fumbles and bum passes. It’s not just the All Blacks that have the disease. Do they just pratice kicking the ball these days?
Just like the Blues Brotehrs, he was “On a mission from god”.
It’s awkward to say openly, but now-departed President Bush is a religious crackpot, an ex-drunk of small intellect who “got saved.” He never should have been entrusted with the power to start wars.
For six years, Americans really haven’t known why he launched the unnecessary Iraq attack. Official pretexts turned out to be baseless. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction after all, and wasn’t in league with terrorists, as the White House alleged. Collapse of his asserted reasons led to speculation about hidden motives: Was the invasion loosed to gain control of Iraq’s oil—or to protect Israel—or to complete Bush’s father’s vendetta against the late dictator Saddam Hussein? Nobody ever found an answer.
Now, added to the other suspicions, comes the goofy possibility that abstruse, supernatural, idiotic, laughable Bible prophecies were a factor. This casts an ominous pall over the needless war that has killed more than four thousand young Americans and cost U.S. taxpayers perhaps $1 trillion.
Having said all that,
My mob might have kicked their way to victory last night (remember Foxy)
But the Aussies are getting better and better.
It is goodnight to the ABs maybe forever, unless you un=Clarkify your team.
“Judge me on my results, no piss off ‘ll decide when to go” Henry might just have done to the ABs what
Helen did to NZ, except you gave your rugby John Key to Australia.
Yeah, out of character move from Giteau. But by the look and sound of things the Aussies had done a lot of practice on attacking and defending high kicks. They got pinged once but got away with it at other times deliberately running to and loitering in the line of kick chasers.
PM warned over smacking referendum
By GRAHAME ARMSTRONG – Sunday Star Times
Last updated 05:00 09/08/2009
HITTING KIDS: John Key has said the law will not be changed back unless it can be shown that good parents are being prosecuted for light smacking.
ACT Party leader Rodney Hide has warned Prime Minister John Key of a public backlash if the government ignores the result of the controversial smacking referendum.
Snubbing the referendum result sends a message that politicians know what’s best for the people and that the government is running a “nanny state”, Hide wrote in a letter delivered to Key’s office on Friday.
The referendum question asks: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand.” The postal ballot, which is voluntary, opened on July 31 and closes on August 21. As of Thursday, chief electoral officer Robert Penden said 570,300 people had voted.
Those who believe parents should be allowed to smack their children have campaigned strongly for a “no” vote. They want to repeal the 2007 law that removed the defence of reasonable force in child-assault cases.
Key, however, has said the law will not be changed back unless it can be shown that good parents are being prosecuted for light smacking.
He described the referendum question as “pretty weird” and a case of “yes means no and no means yes”.
“It could have been written by Dr Seuss,” Key said.
The referendum has also been controversial for its $9 million cost.
In the letter to Key, Hide, who said he had been shocked by the number of parents who had been unfairly treated under the new law, urged the prime minister to act on the result of the referendum, a sign that the “no” campaign believe they will score a decisive victory.
Hide told Key the law change two years ago had driven a wedge between parent and child and although some people might disapprove of the way others behaved, it did not give them the right to make the others criminals, “unless their behaviour is demonstrably causing harm”.
Hide said one of the reasons Labour lost the last election was because people were sick of being told how to live their lives by politicians and “it would be a tragedy if, six months into your government, a nanny state tendency emerged once again in ignoring the clear wish of the people… ”
“The referendum gives an opportunity for the public to speak. Their views must be respected.”
But the “yes” campaign says the government and parliament should wait for a review of the new law, due to be completed this year, before it responds to the referendum.
Spokeswoman for the Yes Coalition, Deborah Morris-Travers, said the new law had drawn a line in the sand to say that children should be able to live free of violence. She likened the current debate on smacking to protests years ago against the introduction of child-safe seats in cars.
This is from the latest Police report on the section 59 reform:
“Findings of the 4th review are in line with previous reviews and show that there has been minimal impact on police activity since enactment.”
During the relevant period police attended 279 child assault events, 39 involving ‘minor acts of physical discipline” and 8 involving smacking. No prosecutions were made for ‘smacking’ events during the period. Police prosecuted 4 of the “minor acts of physical discipline” events. One resulted in a discharge without conviction and the other three cases were at the time of writing the report yet to be heard.
What a bunch of sad misinformed bastards you lefties are. When the poll says 75% of the adult population do not want to be criminalized when raising their own families then Its time the Govt. took notice.
When the police are only seeking to cover their useless arses with bullshit pr why would anyone believe them?
Wiki at 10.43 cheered Bain’s departure for Britain.
I’ll add my cheer to that, and a fervent wish Bain stays out of NZ for ever.
Stuff is carrying a report from Karam that Bain will seek compensation. What a cheek.
NZ taxpayers should be seeking compensation from the jury, some of whom slept during the trial, and others of whom partied with Bain at the end. What a bloody disgrace the second Bain trial was.
“..In tracking the mileage on this trip to perdition, many of us relied on the work of historian Robert Paxton..
.. who is probably the world’s pre-eminent scholar on the subject of how countries turn fascist.
In a 1998 paper published in The Journal of Modern History, Paxton argued that the best way to recognize emerging fascist movements isn’t by their rhetoric, their politics, or their aesthetics.
Rather, he said, mature democracies turn fascist by a recognizable process..
.. a set of five stages that may be the most important family resemblance that links all the whole motley collection of 20th Century fascisms together.
According to our reading of Paxton’s stages, we weren’t there yet.
There were certain signs — one in particular — we were keeping an eye out for, and we just weren’t seeing it.
And now we are.
In fact, if you know what you’re looking for, it’s suddenly everywhere.
It’s odd that I haven’t been asked for quite a while; ..
.. but if you asked me today, I’d tell you that if we’re not there right now..
.. we’ve certainly taken that last turn into the parking lot ..
It was getting scary finding myself in agreement with the second of Matt McCartens articles in a month.
that was until I saw, whilst justifiably berating English…..not a mention of the ‘entitlements’ and gross extravagances of Chris Carter http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10589527
Finally, the me-first, screw-everyone-else crowd’s ugliest traits are there for all to behold..”
You are a armed robber, talk about screw every-one else, me first…
You are a dole bludger…. ditto above
Fool
“..you just continuously lie/make shit up/twist what is already there..”
You do nothing but lie, oh no thats right you moan and bullshit and moan as well.
Fool
his only answers/excuses was to compare mp’s salaries+ expenses..with how much holmes earns..(!)
You dont understand what you talk about. The word here of importance is earn. EARN. Look it up fuckwit.
Fool
“..and that oh!..he will not be telling us how much mp’s are spending on taxpayer-funded private holidays..(!)
(have we got ‘news’ for him..?..eh..?..)”
What the hell has this got to do with you. You dont pay taxes. You are not a taxpayer or even a useful member of the human race. You have no interest in this.
You talk to people about being ugly and vile… you tried to steal using weapons against un-armed defenseless women and men.
The only thing is that you were to thick to pull it off, ended in jail.
Yep slime-ball, NZ has a lot to learn from you.
You are the funniest little weed I have met. You stand in shit up to your nose (your usual habitat, and claim to have the high ground.
I wonder what other crimes a slime-ball that would threaten woman with a weapon would get up to …. gave you a thrill, a kick? The women screaming and cowering.
A bit different from the usual slap they gave you around the ears was it?
What other excesses of violence was there, you know crimes of hate and brutality. Only with a weapon in your hands though, without it a four year old could have given you a clout that would put you on your arse.
“They are after our children. Then they destroy those people, their lives and their families. “They add nothing to our society other than misery. If people decide they are not going to accept them, they will eventually die out. But it will not happen unless people stop tolerating them.”
Gangs have nothing to add to society! Exactly. Squash gangs. THey won’t go without a fight, but good.
They’ll go down fighting, but go down they will. Killing kids gives them no more licence in society.
it will never happen. As they say in Texas, “She’s all hat and no cattle”.
Maybe if she stopped playinmg to the gallery with her stupidity about the supposed “boy racer problem”, something existing laws can deal with, and set her legislative sights on gangs, then just maybe I’d take her seriously.
Sadly it looks like another little Maori kiddie is dead at the hands of her family, will we hear anything from the apartheid party or the Greens about this?
bruv, tragic – again. IMO welfare is the cause – not skin colour. I believe there is a correlative relationship between the deaths and ethnicity, but a causative one between welfare and the deaths. Actually in my experience Maori and PI families who are working and not state dependent have a richness of family life that leaves many (most?) Caucasian families looking embarrassingly negligent.
Labeling this as an issue of ethnicity just plays into the left’s wringing, PC hands.
I take your point, however the longer we refuse to admit that this is happening to Maori kiddies far to often the more we play into the hands of the left and the apartheid party who want it swept under the carpet.
Yes, welfare is a huge element in this and other tragedies however we cannot and should not overlook the elephant in the room simply because it means admitting to a few unpleasant truths, while welfare is an element it is simply wrong to say that it is the cause.
There are thousands of people bringing up kids who are not on welfare and thousands of them do not kill their children yet time and time again we come back to another poor little Maori baby killed by one of her/his own family.
It is well past the time for being PC and “culturally sensitive”, unless we are prepared to name and shame parents BEFORE these deaths occur then nothing will be done about it.
bruv, yes pretty much agree about the need to confront truths head on. There is a risk assessment formula for determining where we should be focusing the ‘fence at the top of the cliff’ resources. Factors like single parent, non-biological father living at home address, welfare dependency, family history of drug abuse and/or crime all compile into something that should help us stop the deaths. But the limp liberals seem to have convinced previously rational NZers that this approach is racist. And so the killing continues, and the balance live on to vote left. Incredibly sad.
Open letter to Sue Bradford from Larry Baldock Referendum Petition Organiser
9 August, 2009
Sue,
I watched the forum on Maori Television Friday night with you, Dr Hone Kaa and Bob McCoskrie. How I wished I was there to respond to the drivel you continue to repeat in defence of your anti-smacking law. “Adults can’t hit each other so adults shouldn’t be able to hit children,” is probably the main argument you and your supporters use to justify your law that is now criminalising good parents all over this country.
Let me tell you why you are wrong and why your argument is flawed from the very beginning.
Firstly, some adults can hit others without breaking the law. They are called police and we give them this authority because we know that in some circumstances someone must use reasonable force to correct the unacceptable behaviour of some adults in our society. If I were to throw a wobbly and begin to refuse to submit to the laws of this country, and act in a threatening manner to persons or property, the police could hit me with a baton, taser me with 50,000 volts of electricity, handcuff me, and backed by the justice system, even enforce my timeout in a correctional institution if necessary for a number of years.
It is probably widely known in NZ that you have disliked this authority that is entrusted to our police ever since your early protesting days when you sought to assault some of our good men in uniform. Truth be known you probably would like this authority to use reasonable force for the purpose of correction to be taken away from the police as well as from parents, but most of us in this country are comfortable leaving such power in their hands.
So let me say it again, it is not true that it is always against the law for an adult to use force against another adult if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances. Sounds very much like the old sec 59 doesn’t it!
Your second error is made when you constantly bleat on about how children should be treated the same as adults in law because this neglects that fact that sec 21 & 22 of the crimes Act has always treated children differently by giving them specific exemptions from prosecution for any criminal activity they may commit.
We do this for two reasons. Firstly, because they are not mature enough mentally and emotionally to be held accountable to adult laws. Your line of argument for equality would demand that when a two year old at Preschool lashes out and hits another two year old the police should be called to arrest them for assault, then prosecute and jail them like adults. That of course would be ridiculous.
And secondly this exemption was given for children because it was widely accepted by society that they should not have their behaviour corrected by the police, but rather by their parents who would be in a much better position to do so.
Now, as a consequence of your ill-considered law that has removed any legal authority for parents to ‘use force for the purpose of correction,’ we have empowered children and disempowered the parents that society reasonably expects to be responsible for their children’s correction and training for adulthood.
Thirdly, this argument of yours is stupid because it does not recognise the difference in relationship between a husband and wife as two mature adults, and the relationship between adult parents and their children. This constant referral to an old law that permitted a husband to correct his wife adds nothing to the real debate about parental correction. Of course these laws of inequality between men and women should have been changed and it is a shame it took so long.
Women’s suffrage was also slow in coming and the recognition of the equal right of women to vote was an important victory. Your argument for equality between adults and children though, could lead to a suspicion that you might think that 3 and 4 year old children should vote as well. Perhaps this is a little close to the truth as I have read how the ‘yes vote’ campaigners have been calling for the opinions of children to be heard in the anti-smacking debate already.
A husband is not responsible to make his wife go to school, a wife is not responsible to make her husband eat healthy vegetables, take a bath, etc (though some may argue they have to anyway) therefore the pleas you make for equal rights cannot be logically argued.
Actually as most of us parents know, children have far more rights than we do because they get food, clothing and shelter all free of charge without having to lift a finger to work for it or pay for it. And as parents we would say this is right and good, as we willingly become their slaves 24/7, because they are the most precious gifts we are ever entrusted with.
Their value and worth are priceless. But with the awesome responsibility parents carry for the welfare of their children, they should be trusted in the same way as our police are entrusted with the authority to use reasonable force for the purpose of correction when needed, without the interference of the state.
Sue, when my wife and I were traversing the country collecting signatures from thousands of good Kiwis from all walks of life, do you know what they were most upset about?
They wanted to know when it was that you earned the right to become the ‘mother of the nation.’ What possesses you to think that you know more about raising children than the hundreds of thousands who have raised healthy, well adjusted, law abiding citizens in this country. Though they have been smacked and corrected they have not grown up violent and
disrespectful, and this argument you make about smacking creating violent adults is not supported by any sensible research that distinguishes between reasonable force and a beating and abuse.
In this wonderful free country of ours you are of course entitled to your views, and you can parent your kids and give advice to them on how they raise your grandchildren as much as you like, but don’t try and tell me my mother was a child abuser when she corrected me as a child.
You know Sue, we have clashed a few times in debates on different topics over the past few years. I have never yet heard a proposition from you that really stood the test of common sense and proper scrutiny. How I would love to debate the anti-smacking issue with you again before all the votes are cast. Perhaps there may be some media organisation that could serve the public of NZ by setting up such a contest.
A contest between just you and me. You, as the author of the anti-smacking law and dedicated supporter, and me, the organiser of the referendum petition and dedicated opponent.
You said you would be willing to meet for a debate with me anywhere anytime. Let’s do it. The taxpayer will cover your travel; I’ll take care of my own.
“adolf..how come you were all ‘nice’ to dpfs’ sole-parent guest commentator..?
you hate sole parents on a benefit..”
maybe, just maybe…(and this is only a guess) is because ……………….she is actually trying to get off the DPB and get a job, whilst Philuliar on the other hand is not just happy to steal our hard earned taxes every week, he rubs our noses in it day after day with his bragging about how much dope he buys with it……………….now as I said, it’s just a guess????
FFS even the Public Servants go back to work in the morning, they don’t pay tax (numbers on paper) but they do a job.
They pay you our money (tax)
All tax comes from the private sector, so the real taxpayers pay Public Servants to pay bludgers like you Phool
I see the integrity of “No Minister” has just taken a dive with the fuckwit Bryan Spondre now a contributor there.
This is the same Bryan Spondre who publicly listed the IP addresses of posters who had annoyed him while he was the jack booted self important “blog producer” at Chris Trotter’s blog.
If you value your privacy, stay away from No Minister.
Understatement of the year. I don’t know what has possessed the owners of No Minister to take on a person of such low regard. Shame, I have always tried to support them (for reasons that go back a fair way), but there is no way I can ever allow No Minister any trust while that brain addled vindictive jack booted dumbfuck is posting there.
August 9th, 2009 at 8:13 am
South Africa 17, Australia 18. Fumbles and bum passes. It’s not just the All Blacks that have the disease. Do they just pratice kicking the ball these days?
August 9th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Why did Shrub go to war with Iraq?
Just like the Blues Brotehrs, he was “On a mission from god”.
It’s awkward to say openly, but now-departed President Bush is a religious crackpot, an ex-drunk of small intellect who “got saved.” He never should have been entrusted with the power to start wars.
For six years, Americans really haven’t known why he launched the unnecessary Iraq attack. Official pretexts turned out to be baseless. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction after all, and wasn’t in league with terrorists, as the White House alleged. Collapse of his asserted reasons led to speculation about hidden motives: Was the invasion loosed to gain control of Iraq’s oil—or to protect Israel—or to complete Bush’s father’s vendetta against the late dictator Saddam Hussein? Nobody ever found an answer.
Now, added to the other suspicions, comes the goofy possibility that abstruse, supernatural, idiotic, laughable Bible prophecies were a factor. This casts an ominous pall over the needless war that has killed more than four thousand young Americans and cost U.S. taxpayers perhaps $1 trillion.
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=haught_29_5
August 9th, 2009 at 8:27 am
Iraq also cost the US a lot of credibility. And made some corporations a lot of money.
August 9th, 2009 at 8:35 am
Interesting score Cerium- certainly not the game I watched
August 9th, 2009 at 8:36 am
That was the error count Patrick.
August 9th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Still no takers for the wager about a no show for the AB’s at the RWC 2011?
England’s issue is having to wait 4 years between each final.
And it was a try. Bloody French 4th official. Typical.
August 9th, 2009 at 8:49 am
Englands issue is having a team base who are sticking charlie up their noses every weekend.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:01 am
I’ve never known matt giteau for a dirty player but his cheap shot last night may see him gone for a few tests
August 9th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Having said all that,
My mob might have kicked their way to victory last night (remember Foxy)
But the Aussies are getting better and better.
It is goodnight to the ABs maybe forever, unless you un=Clarkify your team.
“Judge me on my results, no piss off ‘ll decide when to go” Henry might just have done to the ABs what
Helen did to NZ, except you gave your rugby John Key to Australia.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Yeah, out of character move from Giteau. But by the look and sound of things the Aussies had done a lot of practice on attacking and defending high kicks. They got pinged once but got away with it at other times deliberately running to and loitering in the line of kick chasers.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:29 am
When’s Bill Dipton English going to pay back the money he rorted for the last 20 years?
Thieving scumbag unentiltled beneficiary.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:40 am
Wow
I never thought I would say these words but I agree with Billy.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:42 am
PM warned over smacking referendum
By GRAHAME ARMSTRONG – Sunday Star Times
Last updated 05:00 09/08/2009
HITTING KIDS: John Key has said the law will not be changed back unless it can be shown that good parents are being prosecuted for light smacking.
ACT Party leader Rodney Hide has warned Prime Minister John Key of a public backlash if the government ignores the result of the controversial smacking referendum.
Snubbing the referendum result sends a message that politicians know what’s best for the people and that the government is running a “nanny state”, Hide wrote in a letter delivered to Key’s office on Friday.
The referendum question asks: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand.” The postal ballot, which is voluntary, opened on July 31 and closes on August 21. As of Thursday, chief electoral officer Robert Penden said 570,300 people had voted.
Those who believe parents should be allowed to smack their children have campaigned strongly for a “no” vote. They want to repeal the 2007 law that removed the defence of reasonable force in child-assault cases.
Key, however, has said the law will not be changed back unless it can be shown that good parents are being prosecuted for light smacking.
He described the referendum question as “pretty weird” and a case of “yes means no and no means yes”.
“It could have been written by Dr Seuss,” Key said.
The referendum has also been controversial for its $9 million cost.
In the letter to Key, Hide, who said he had been shocked by the number of parents who had been unfairly treated under the new law, urged the prime minister to act on the result of the referendum, a sign that the “no” campaign believe they will score a decisive victory.
Hide told Key the law change two years ago had driven a wedge between parent and child and although some people might disapprove of the way others behaved, it did not give them the right to make the others criminals, “unless their behaviour is demonstrably causing harm”.
Hide said one of the reasons Labour lost the last election was because people were sick of being told how to live their lives by politicians and “it would be a tragedy if, six months into your government, a nanny state tendency emerged once again in ignoring the clear wish of the people… ”
“The referendum gives an opportunity for the public to speak. Their views must be respected.”
But the “yes” campaign says the government and parliament should wait for a review of the new law, due to be completed this year, before it responds to the referendum.
Spokeswoman for the Yes Coalition, Deborah Morris-Travers, said the new law had drawn a line in the sand to say that children should be able to live free of violence. She likened the current debate on smacking to protests years ago against the introduction of child-safe seats in cars.
August 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Key should tell Hide to stick to his local government matters. Hide is trying to use this for his own political purposes.
August 9th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Hide is talking a load of c&*p.
This is from the latest Police report on the section 59 reform:
“Findings of the 4th review are in line with previous reviews and show that there has been minimal impact on police activity since enactment.”
During the relevant period police attended 279 child assault events, 39 involving ‘minor acts of physical discipline” and 8 involving smacking. No prosecutions were made for ‘smacking’ events during the period. Police prosecuted 4 of the “minor acts of physical discipline” events. One resulted in a discharge without conviction and the other three cases were at the time of writing the report yet to be heard.
The report is at http://www.police.govt.nz/sites/default/files/s59_4th_review_web_report%5B1%5D.pdf
Rodney is seeking to curry favour with the extremist 5% of the population who believe the rubbish about a feminazi take over of society.
August 9th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Hide said one of the reasons Labour lost the last election was because people were sick of being told how to live their lives by politicians …
Is he referring to the ratepayers of Auckland?
August 9th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Well, well, well,
David Bains gone to Britain.
Don’t know how well he’ll do there, but he sure needs a huge rest from this place.
Bet he got a bit of a sneeer from the border control in NZ as he left
But there’s nothing they can do about it
Yeeehaaaaaa!!!!!
August 9th, 2009 at 10:53 am
What a bunch of sad misinformed bastards you lefties are. When the poll says 75% of the adult population do not want to be criminalized when raising their own families then Its time the Govt. took notice.
When the police are only seeking to cover their useless arses with bullshit pr why would anyone believe them?
August 9th, 2009 at 11:13 am
billyborker (676) Vote: 1 13 Says:
August 9th, 2009 at 9:29 am
When’s Bill Dipton English going to pay back the money he rorted for the last 20 years?
Thieving scumbag unentiltled beneficiary.
He has a long line of Ministers from the last Labour in front of him.
August 9th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Wiki at 10.43 cheered Bain’s departure for Britain.
I’ll add my cheer to that, and a fervent wish Bain stays out of NZ for ever.
Stuff is carrying a report from Karam that Bain will seek compensation. What a cheek.
NZ taxpayers should be seeking compensation from the jury, some of whom slept during the trial, and others of whom partied with Bain at the end. What a bloody disgrace the second Bain trial was.
No taxpayer money for Bain and Karam!
August 9th, 2009 at 11:31 am
@Jack5 Agree. NZ streets just became 0.3% safer
August 9th, 2009 at 11:49 am
this is an interesting/thought-provoking read..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/is-the-us-on-the-brink-of-fascism/
(excerpt:)
“..In tracking the mileage on this trip to perdition, many of us relied on the work of historian Robert Paxton..
.. who is probably the world’s pre-eminent scholar on the subject of how countries turn fascist.
In a 1998 paper published in The Journal of Modern History, Paxton argued that the best way to recognize emerging fascist movements isn’t by their rhetoric, their politics, or their aesthetics.
Rather, he said, mature democracies turn fascist by a recognizable process..
.. a set of five stages that may be the most important family resemblance that links all the whole motley collection of 20th Century fascisms together.
According to our reading of Paxton’s stages, we weren’t there yet.
There were certain signs — one in particular — we were keeping an eye out for, and we just weren’t seeing it.
And now we are.
In fact, if you know what you’re looking for, it’s suddenly everywhere.
It’s odd that I haven’t been asked for quite a while; ..
.. but if you asked me today, I’d tell you that if we’re not there right now..
.. we’ve certainly taken that last turn into the parking lot ..
.. and are now looking for a space..”
phil@whoar.co.nz
August 9th, 2009 at 11:55 am
It was getting scary finding myself in agreement with the second of Matt McCartens articles in a month.
that was until I saw, whilst justifiably berating English…..not a mention of the ‘entitlements’ and gross extravagances of Chris Carter
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10589527
August 9th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
any of this crowd here..?..d’yareckon..?
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/the-me-first-screw-everyone-else-crowdnothing-will-keep-the-rich-from-whining-about-how-tough-easy-street-is/
“.. I know I should be mortified by the lobbyist-organized mobs of angry Brooks Brothers mannequins ..
.. who are now making headlines by shutting down congressional town hall meetings.
I know I should be despondent during this .. the Khaki Pants Offensive in the Great American Healthcare and Tax War.
And yet, I’m euphorically repeating one word over and over again with a big grin on my face.
Finally.
Finally, there’s no pretense.
Finally, the me-first, screw-everyone-else crowd’s ugliest traits are there for all to behold..”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
why do you just make up lies..?..starr..?
you said:..
“..not a mention of the ‘entitlements’ and gross extravagances of Chris Carter..”
mccarten said:..
“..Every party is guilty of it. This week the senior leaders of every Parliamentary party should have been in the defendant’s dock with Field..”
what the fuck did you seem not to understand about that..?
you just continuously lie/make shit up/twist what is already there..
you are one of the worst rightwing trolls..
and this outright lie/bullshit..
..is just the most recent example of your perfidy..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
oh, the false accuser is back
c’mon you lying piece of excrement, front up? Where’s your evidence?
“starr..are you seriously asking that..?
you are one of the worst offenders..”
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/08/general_debate_8_august_2009.html#comment-594290
front up Phool
August 9th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
….and cant you read phool- Show me where in McCartens article that Chris Carters name is mentioned?
August 9th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
you know very well (and readers can see) the spin you were putting was that he was only moaning about righties..
..and therefor was biased/unreliable..
“..you just continuously lie/make shit up/twist what is already there..”
q.e.d..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
front up phool
you made an accusation now front up
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/08/general_debate_8_august_2009.html#comment-594290
August 9th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
that you’re a lying/dissembling prick..?
see yr 11.55 am..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
no, that you accused me of making vile comments toward your children.
Youre playing the victim card – like so many of you lefties do so well
August 9th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
yeah..nothing ever ‘vile’ from you..eh..?
and if you think i am going to trawl through yr past efforts..?
..to find the ‘worst’..
..you really do need a pill..and a wee lie down..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
yeah thought not. Just more wild baseless allegations thrown around with all the care of a frenzied drug induced armed robbery ..eh?
August 9th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
goodnight irene..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
the armchair warriors in national..(c.f. simon ‘super-si)’ power)..
..are going to sign us up for this tomorrow..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/general-sir-david-richards-afghanistan-will-take-40-years/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
I cannot wait for David Bain to have a crack at compensation, there is no way in hell that the bastard should get one red cent.
August 9th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
and did anyone see lockwood smith on q&a..?..excusing/covering-up for the troughing politician culture..?
whoar..!
was he out of touch with what 90% of people out here think..?
(as in..a pox on all their houses..!..)
..or what..?
his only answers/excuses was to compare mp’s salaries+ expenses..with how much holmes earns..(!)
..and that oh!..he will not be telling us how much mp’s are spending on taxpayer-funded private holidays..(!)
(have we got ‘news’ for him..?..eh..?..)
the reason he gave..was that it ‘would be too hard on their families’..(w.t.f..!..)
..and he maintained his famous ‘there ! there !-grin/smile..
but by the end of the interview..his face was in a state of pure rictus..
..(and ..later..holmes was almost rubbing his hands in glee…at the mp’s rorts..yet/still to come to light..
..as they will..as they will..)
..this story has legs that stretch all the way to the next election..
..and yagottaluv the ‘defense-phrase-du-jour’..
..’we aren’t as bad as england..nobody has had any moats cleaned..)
no..mp’s just spend a quarter of a mill..
..swanning off to ..view moats..
..dragging all these facts out will be like pulling wisdom teeth..
..and the screams will be loud and long..
..but out they must come..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
The Aussies have the same problem with pollies.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/poor-poor-pitiful-me-battle-cry-of-pollies-as-they-climb-the-greasy-pole-20090807-ecwd.html?page=-1
August 9th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Sunday afternoon shooting fish in a barrel…..
Fool
“Finally, there’s no pretense.
Finally, the me-first, screw-everyone-else crowd’s ugliest traits are there for all to behold..”
You are a armed robber, talk about screw every-one else, me first…
You are a dole bludger…. ditto above
Fool
“..you just continuously lie/make shit up/twist what is already there..”
You do nothing but lie, oh no thats right you moan and bullshit and moan as well.
Fool
his only answers/excuses was to compare mp’s salaries+ expenses..with how much holmes earns..(!)
You dont understand what you talk about. The word here of importance is earn. EARN. Look it up fuckwit.
Fool
“..and that oh!..he will not be telling us how much mp’s are spending on taxpayer-funded private holidays..(!)
(have we got ‘news’ for him..?..eh..?..)”
What the hell has this got to do with you. You dont pay taxes. You are not a taxpayer or even a useful member of the human race. You have no interest in this.
You talk to people about being ugly and vile… you tried to steal using weapons against un-armed defenseless women and men.
The only thing is that you were to thick to pull it off, ended in jail.
Yep slime-ball, NZ has a lot to learn from you.
You are the funniest little weed I have met. You stand in shit up to your nose (your usual habitat, and claim to have the high ground.
I wonder what other crimes a slime-ball that would threaten woman with a weapon would get up to …. gave you a thrill, a kick? The women screaming and cowering.
A bit different from the usual slap they gave you around the ears was it?
What other excesses of violence was there, you know crimes of hate and brutality. Only with a weapon in your hands though, without it a four year old could have given you a clout that would put you on your arse.
August 9th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Mickeypoos, Bonkers, Delirium and Phool all on a Sunday. How wonderful.
August 9th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
I look forward to the day this lady is our PM!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10589613
August 9th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Like a pustulant inflamed abscess, oozing it’s evil gangrenous never ending broth onto the floor, drip by drip
by drip?
by drip!
by drip..
by drip)
by drip, eh
phooooooaaaaarrrrggggghhhhhhhhhhh
August 9th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
“They are after our children. Then they destroy those people, their lives and their families. “They add nothing to our society other than misery. If people decide they are not going to accept them, they will eventually die out. But it will not happen unless people stop tolerating them.”
Gangs have nothing to add to society! Exactly. Squash gangs. THey won’t go without a fight, but good.
They’ll go down fighting, but go down they will. Killing kids gives them no more licence in society.
August 9th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
mattyroo (102) Vote: 3 0 Says:
August 9th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
I look forward to the day this lady is our PM!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10589613
it will never happen. As they say in Texas, “She’s all hat and no cattle”.
Maybe if she stopped playinmg to the gallery with her stupidity about the supposed “boy racer problem”, something existing laws can deal with, and set her legislative sights on gangs, then just maybe I’d take her seriously.
As they say in Oz, “All trousers and no dick”.
August 9th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Sadly it looks like another little Maori kiddie is dead at the hands of her family, will we hear anything from the apartheid party or the Greens about this?
August 9th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
bruv, tragic – again. IMO welfare is the cause – not skin colour. I believe there is a correlative relationship between the deaths and ethnicity, but a causative one between welfare and the deaths. Actually in my experience Maori and PI families who are working and not state dependent have a richness of family life that leaves many (most?) Caucasian families looking embarrassingly negligent.
Labeling this as an issue of ethnicity just plays into the left’s wringing, PC hands.
August 9th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
getstaffed
I take your point, however the longer we refuse to admit that this is happening to Maori kiddies far to often the more we play into the hands of the left and the apartheid party who want it swept under the carpet.
Yes, welfare is a huge element in this and other tragedies however we cannot and should not overlook the elephant in the room simply because it means admitting to a few unpleasant truths, while welfare is an element it is simply wrong to say that it is the cause.
There are thousands of people bringing up kids who are not on welfare and thousands of them do not kill their children yet time and time again we come back to another poor little Maori baby killed by one of her/his own family.
It is well past the time for being PC and “culturally sensitive”, unless we are prepared to name and shame parents BEFORE these deaths occur then nothing will be done about it.
August 9th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
bruv, yes pretty much agree about the need to confront truths head on. There is a risk assessment formula for determining where we should be focusing the ‘fence at the top of the cliff’ resources. Factors like single parent, non-biological father living at home address, welfare dependency, family history of drug abuse and/or crime all compile into something that should help us stop the deaths. But the limp liberals seem to have convinced previously rational NZers that this approach is racist. And so the killing continues, and the balance live on to vote left. Incredibly sad.
August 9th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
adolf..how come you were all ‘nice’ to dpfs’ sole-parent guest commentator..?
you hate sole parents on a benefit..
do i need to copy/paste some of yr previous offerings/thoughts..?
..have you forgotten..?
and are you sure nobody slipped you an ‘e’..?
..’cos’ that degree of caring/sharing/empathy is seldom found in one such as yrself..
..without the wave of the magic ‘e’-wand..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
http://www.nzcpr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=124&sid=46f52d52caa9ec8435341f91c97aa1ec&p=23540#p23540
Open letter to Sue Bradford from Larry Baldock Referendum Petition Organiser
9 August, 2009
Sue,
I watched the forum on Maori Television Friday night with you, Dr Hone Kaa and Bob McCoskrie. How I wished I was there to respond to the drivel you continue to repeat in defence of your anti-smacking law. “Adults can’t hit each other so adults shouldn’t be able to hit children,” is probably the main argument you and your supporters use to justify your law that is now criminalising good parents all over this country.
Let me tell you why you are wrong and why your argument is flawed from the very beginning.
Firstly, some adults can hit others without breaking the law. They are called police and we give them this authority because we know that in some circumstances someone must use reasonable force to correct the unacceptable behaviour of some adults in our society. If I were to throw a wobbly and begin to refuse to submit to the laws of this country, and act in a threatening manner to persons or property, the police could hit me with a baton, taser me with 50,000 volts of electricity, handcuff me, and backed by the justice system, even enforce my timeout in a correctional institution if necessary for a number of years.
It is probably widely known in NZ that you have disliked this authority that is entrusted to our police ever since your early protesting days when you sought to assault some of our good men in uniform. Truth be known you probably would like this authority to use reasonable force for the purpose of correction to be taken away from the police as well as from parents, but most of us in this country are comfortable leaving such power in their hands.
So let me say it again, it is not true that it is always against the law for an adult to use force against another adult if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances. Sounds very much like the old sec 59 doesn’t it!
Your second error is made when you constantly bleat on about how children should be treated the same as adults in law because this neglects that fact that sec 21 & 22 of the crimes Act has always treated children differently by giving them specific exemptions from prosecution for any criminal activity they may commit.
We do this for two reasons. Firstly, because they are not mature enough mentally and emotionally to be held accountable to adult laws. Your line of argument for equality would demand that when a two year old at Preschool lashes out and hits another two year old the police should be called to arrest them for assault, then prosecute and jail them like adults. That of course would be ridiculous.
And secondly this exemption was given for children because it was widely accepted by society that they should not have their behaviour corrected by the police, but rather by their parents who would be in a much better position to do so.
Now, as a consequence of your ill-considered law that has removed any legal authority for parents to ‘use force for the purpose of correction,’ we have empowered children and disempowered the parents that society reasonably expects to be responsible for their children’s correction and training for adulthood.
Thirdly, this argument of yours is stupid because it does not recognise the difference in relationship between a husband and wife as two mature adults, and the relationship between adult parents and their children. This constant referral to an old law that permitted a husband to correct his wife adds nothing to the real debate about parental correction. Of course these laws of inequality between men and women should have been changed and it is a shame it took so long.
Women’s suffrage was also slow in coming and the recognition of the equal right of women to vote was an important victory. Your argument for equality between adults and children though, could lead to a suspicion that you might think that 3 and 4 year old children should vote as well. Perhaps this is a little close to the truth as I have read how the ‘yes vote’ campaigners have been calling for the opinions of children to be heard in the anti-smacking debate already.
A husband is not responsible to make his wife go to school, a wife is not responsible to make her husband eat healthy vegetables, take a bath, etc (though some may argue they have to anyway) therefore the pleas you make for equal rights cannot be logically argued.
Actually as most of us parents know, children have far more rights than we do because they get food, clothing and shelter all free of charge without having to lift a finger to work for it or pay for it. And as parents we would say this is right and good, as we willingly become their slaves 24/7, because they are the most precious gifts we are ever entrusted with.
Their value and worth are priceless. But with the awesome responsibility parents carry for the welfare of their children, they should be trusted in the same way as our police are entrusted with the authority to use reasonable force for the purpose of correction when needed, without the interference of the state.
Sue, when my wife and I were traversing the country collecting signatures from thousands of good Kiwis from all walks of life, do you know what they were most upset about?
They wanted to know when it was that you earned the right to become the ‘mother of the nation.’ What possesses you to think that you know more about raising children than the hundreds of thousands who have raised healthy, well adjusted, law abiding citizens in this country. Though they have been smacked and corrected they have not grown up violent and
disrespectful, and this argument you make about smacking creating violent adults is not supported by any sensible research that distinguishes between reasonable force and a beating and abuse.
In this wonderful free country of ours you are of course entitled to your views, and you can parent your kids and give advice to them on how they raise your grandchildren as much as you like, but don’t try and tell me my mother was a child abuser when she corrected me as a child.
You know Sue, we have clashed a few times in debates on different topics over the past few years. I have never yet heard a proposition from you that really stood the test of common sense and proper scrutiny. How I would love to debate the anti-smacking issue with you again before all the votes are cast. Perhaps there may be some media organisation that could serve the public of NZ by setting up such a contest.
A contest between just you and me. You, as the author of the anti-smacking law and dedicated supporter, and me, the organiser of the referendum petition and dedicated opponent.
You said you would be willing to meet for a debate with me anywhere anytime. Let’s do it. The taxpayer will cover your travel; I’ll take care of my own.
Regards,
Larry Baldock
August 9th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
good way to piss 9 mill up against the wall there..baldcock..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
“adolf..how come you were all ‘nice’ to dpfs’ sole-parent guest commentator..?
you hate sole parents on a benefit..”
maybe, just maybe…(and this is only a guess) is because ……………….she is actually trying to get off the DPB and get a job, whilst Philuliar on the other hand is not just happy to steal our hard earned taxes every week, he rubs our noses in it day after day with his bragging about how much dope he buys with it……………….now as I said, it’s just a guess????
August 9th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
still makng stuff up..eh starr..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
no, she is really trying to get off the DPB!
August 9th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Viking2
Has Sue seen the Tui billboard? the rest of us have
“SUE BRADFORD IS NOT A SLAPPER”
August 9th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Oh yeah, Phool tell us your hourly rate compared to what you get verses time working
August 9th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
FFS even the Public Servants go back to work in the morning, they don’t pay tax (numbers on paper) but they do a job.
They pay you our money (tax)
All tax comes from the private sector, so the real taxpayers pay Public Servants to pay bludgers like you Phool
August 9th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
I see the integrity of “No Minister” has just taken a dive with the fuckwit Bryan Spondre now a contributor there.
This is the same Bryan Spondre who publicly listed the IP addresses of posters who had annoyed him while he was the jack booted self important “blog producer” at Chris Trotter’s blog.
If you value your privacy, stay away from No Minister.
August 9th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Who is spondre Red?
Some random guy who works at different blogs? Seems like a bit of a knob to me
August 9th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
” Seems like a bit of a knob to me”
Understatement of the year. I don’t know what has possessed the owners of No Minister to take on a person of such low regard. Shame, I have always tried to support them (for reasons that go back a fair way), but there is no way I can ever allow No Minister any trust while that brain addled vindictive jack booted dumbfuck is posting there.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
LOL – “vindictive jack booted dumbfuck”.
Glass houses Red.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Check these links for an example of the dipshit in full flight. Laughable boob.
http://www.policy.net.nz/blog/2008/09/24/current-ips-on-banned/
http://www.policy.net.nz/blog/2008/09/17/no-minister-banned/
August 9th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
haha. what a tosser
August 10th, 2009 at 6:07 am
I have some friends who wish to emmigrate to NZ.
They don’t have the necessary points to come in of their own accord.
So which Labour Party MP is now in charge of ‘Paid Immigration’, now that Mr Field has gone off the radar?
Can’t believe that Labour would give up such a lucrative business.