About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

August 3, 2005 7:54pm by David Farrar

Today’s Tom Scott cartoon

Oh this is biting. I’ve copied today’s Tom Scott below:

Share this:

Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading…

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment39

Uncategorised
Labour

Related Stories

Tom Scott hits the mark
Today’s Tom Scott
Another Tom Scott cartoon

Comments (39)

Login to comment or vote

Jake Quinn

wasn
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 8:53pm
Jake Quinn

or perhaps im missing the point
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 9:14pm
nigel6888

yes Jake you are.

Every year since the FRA the government sets aside a provision for new initiatives. In part this is a contingency for emergencies (eg., the Tsunami) or for growth in policies, decisions between budgets etc (normally somewhere between 20-100 m per year).

Its other role is to set a cap on Ministerial and stakeholder expectations to encourage good fiscal management.

NZs reputation in financial markets – aka your interest rates on your mortgage – depend on the Government being seen to be good fiscal managers.

Most Governments are very reluctant to stuff around as a consequence.

This years provision of $633m a year is large in comparison to previous years. But, in the last 2 weeks it has pretty much been spent.

That IS most unusual. So lets hope there were no anticipated between Government decisions needed, or that there are no emergencies?

This is why it is a big deal – the provision WAS larger than normal, but was it supposed to be a slushfund? That isnt how the Minister of Finance described it.

and if there was room for a slush fund, why was there no room for tax cuts?
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 9:43pm
nigel6888

suggestions for nationals next set of billboards:

Labours Greatest Hits – the integrity hit parade:

Ruth Dyson – jush one little drinkie for the road (hic)

H Clark – artist (by definition?)

Lianne Dalzell – only little lies

Dover Samuels – a new meaning for a Government leak?

David Tennis ball benson-pope

Trevor – want a heineken (or a rural school) with that? mallard

Pete kyoto Hodgson – the man with the burning cheque?

Margaret – what constitutional reform without a mandate – Wilson?

margaret – using parliamentary funds for party political purposes is entirely reasonable – wilson?

George 111 Hawkins?

Phil – hand in hand with terrorists – Goff? That has to be the best photo to bung on a billboard

Steve – lets ALL be beneficiaries – Maharey?

Mark – whatever you say boss – Burton?

ideas for a slogan – “helen knows best”

earned a quiet smoke down the RSA? – helen knows best

gay marriage? – helen knows best

parental responsibility? – helen knows best

thought you were only living together? – helen knows best

thought you had a special relationship with the foreshore? – helen knows best

saving the world through kyoto? – helen knows best

private prisons? – helen knows best

choice in health care? – helen knows best

choice of school? – helen knows best

XX new taxes in 6 years? helen knows best

where did all that money go? – don’t ask, helen knows best

Tax cuts or hiphop tours? – helen knows best

ignored by America but feted by Hamas? – helen knows best?

better health care or more bureacrats – helen knows best?

etc

Oh and on the nuclear issue – stop pissing about announce the date of the bloody referendum, make it a pledge and move on.
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 10:11pm
tim barclay

Of course Cullen has got some money in the kittly for little vote buying initiatives down to the election. The student one turned out to be just a bit bigger than they thought but the harvest in votes has probably impressed them. I think Tom is getting a bit strong here, they are pretty bad but linking them to Adolf is a bit stiff.
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 10:14pm
Sally

Boy the memories are short around here. Or maybe its just that some of you don’t even care about the day-to-day integrity of your own positions.

To all those who criticised bloodyidiot for comparing Brash to Bush because they agree on some policies: I now call on you to denounce the comparison of Cullen to Hitler because they’ve allegedly both told a political fib.

The following bloggers/commenters are complete hypocrites and have no credibility at all unless they condemn this comparison: Aaron Bhatnagar; Antarctic Lemur; DPF; gazzadelsud; and Craig Ranapia (this is only a partial list). All of those people heavily criticised “George W Brash” in the thread on this blog entitled More Positive Campaigning.

For my part, since I did not condemn bloodyidiot (although I never said I actually liked it), I do not condemn Mr Scott. I do not agree with him, but I do not condemn the comparison.

But those who blogged about their outrage at “George W Brash” now have no option but to condemn this particular long-bow. Waiting…
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 11:07pm
Graeme Edgeler

I was commenting earlier today that Tom Scott was taking a particularly virulent line of late…
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 11:17pm
David Farrar

Sally – the problem is none of us have compared Cullen to Hitler – Tom Scott did.

And in fact as people well know satire is satire, not a serious comparison. Trying to compare a harsh cartoon by an independent cartoonist with a specific serious campaign site put together by “anonymous” Labour and Green supporters is pushing the barrow.

I’m quite happy to say that I do not believe Michael Cullen intends to invade Poland or do anything else in that vein. And I don’t think anyone thinks Tom Scott was seriously suggesting it.
0 0
Report
August 3, 2005 11:51pm
Sally

Nice try DPF, but this was oh so predictable.

1. You say:”…none of us have compared Cullen to Hitler – Tom Scott did.” Wow, that’s astounding. I never said that any of you compared Cullen to Hitler. I simply noted that you were initially pretty impressed with that cartoon while your initial reaction to bloodyidiot was to talk about “the sheer vitriol that blinds people” and leads them to make unrealistic comparisons of political leaders. That doesn’t seem at all consistent to me.

2. To say that this is satire so no harm done, while the other thing was a dangerous “campaign” to “demonise” Brash is just nonsense. Tom Scott’s cartoons are widely read by partisans and non-partisans alike, by those who know about politics and those who don’t. Bloodyidiot was an obscure lefty website that would only ever be viewed by political junkie net nerds who had already made up their minds – like us. The silly (albeit satirical) comparison between Cullen and Hitler is far more likely to reach and affect low-information undecided voters than the obscure ravings of bloodyidiot.

3. You say: “I’m quite happy to say that I do not believe Michael Cullen intends to invade Poland or do anything else in that vein. And I don’t think anyone thinks Tom Scott was seriously suggesting it.” Well I don’t think anybody seriously thought bloodyidiot was suggesting Brash would bring back the death penalty, drill for oil in Alaska, pass a “New Zealand Patriot Act, or start to talk all-dumb-like” either, but that didn’t stop right wing bloggers like yourself going off the deep end anyway.

4. You accused people from an obscure corner of cyber-ether of being “blinded by sheer vitriol” in making a silly comparison. You need to now accuse Tom Scott, a prominent (if satirical) political commentator in the MSM of the same.

5. Good for Graeme who had picked up on this on his own.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 12:19am
nick

It
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 2:17am
Murray

Nick your explanation is very good but pointless I fear.

Anyone who can’t grasp the concept is ether too dim to communicate beyond grunts or is being willfully dim to contrive being offended to avoid accepting valid criticisms of Saint Helen’s reign.

This is Tom Scott remeber, not noted for extreem conservatism really. When he’s putting the boot this close to an election something is up.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 2:39am
Craig Ranapia

Sally:

God, so I run around comparing people to Hitler now? I’m well on the record with my dim opinion of such equations, but once more, don’t let the truth get in the way of a good rant.

I’d note that Tom Scott actually puts his name on his work; the Bloody Idiot tossers do not. Which has pretty much been my objection from the beginning.

BTW, have been rather busy cooking for my partner’s 60th birthday on Saturday night. Didn’t sit down and look at the Dom Post until 11pm and the Scott cartoon joined the 99.9% of things I don’t comment on. So no partisan conspiracy, Sally. Sorry to disappoint you.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 7:28am
Graham watson

Cartoon or not, it is however a little tasteless.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 8:49am
dim

Here’s a fun thought experiment. Try and imagine the squeals of outrage we’d be hearing from DPF (‘my ancestors were exterminated by that man!’) and disciples had Mr Scott compared Hitler with, say, Don Brash for breaking his promise about releasing Nationals tax policy.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:03am
vanzyl

Craig Tom is great mates with David Lange (hear speak about visiting David after the latest operation. )
This is not Nats trying dirty tactics. I don’t know what Tom’s political leanings are, but I have seen some cutting cartoons of the Nat members as well.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:04am
Mike Collins

I agree with Graham. I saw that and thought it was distasteful. What Hitler went on to do will always be a black mark in our worlds history.

To equate Cullen with him is not fair both to Cullen and Hitlers victims. It’s just not in the same league and we shouldn’t pretend it is.

Shame on Tom Scott.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:06am
Pete

Since we are all so excited about msm cartoons today, how about these four all in the last 2 days:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=466&ObjectID=10339004
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3365139a6242,00.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,0a6242,00.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3366374a6242,00.html
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:08am
Kent

Comparing anyone to Hitler (including but not limited to GWB, Mugabe or [especially boggling] Cullen) is vile and disrespectful and is the least good argument anyone could ever suggest. This goes the same making comparisons to to Jesus Christ, or even comparing yourself to Nelson Mandela (looking at *you*, Michael Jackson).
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:21am
Peter

David said: “And in fact as people well know satire is satire, not a serious comparison. Trying to compare a harsh cartoon by an independent cartoonist with a specific serious campaign site put together by “anonymous” Labour and Green supporters is pushing the barrow.”

Mmm sure David, I cant belive the “right” on this one. You guys have had such a problem with one crappy satire site but i guess this is why you were first to condemn “Labour Scandals”, Sir Humphreys, et al right?
Face it, your being a hypocrite.
Why is satire done by a cartoonist, different then when it is done by an anonymous web contributor.
And surely if Antarctic lemur can do it anonymously, then so can bloody idiot.
And so what, if it was as you say “anonymous” Labour and Green supporters?
What you have no party affiliations? Neither do the majority of bloggers? I mean if you didn
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:31am
David Farrar

People are so good at getting it wrong.

I never complained about the bloodyidiot site. In fact I got publicity for it and encouraged as many people as possible to see it. I thought it was so badly done and misdirected that it actually ended up winning support for Brash.

I did make the point that I have been amazed by how much people are targetting Don Brash personally – in a way not seen since 1975. To me that is a credit as to how effective Don has been.

And as for the Nazi comparisons (which yes I generally do dislike) I think there is a difference between a serious comparison and what Scott did. Those people who compare Bush to Hitler honestly do believe Bush is as bad as Hitler, and that if not stopped he will become a dictator. Bu such comparisons they do undermine what happened. However a one off cartoon which is actually comparing “big lies” is not going to make a single person think this means the Holocaust was not so bad.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:54am
Lucyna

What’s Sir Humphreys’s supposed to be condemned for? We are not funded or paid by anyone to do what we do. Seem to be annoying quite a few lefties, though.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 10:18am
Sally

I come bearing both bouquets and brickbats:

First, the bouquets. Kudos to Graham Watson, Mike Collins, Graeme Edgeler, and Craig Ranapia (you heard right, Craig), for being often right-leaning but having the courage nonetheless to be consistent in their views. If you condemn this kind of stuff coming from the left, you should also condemn it when it a lefty happens to be the target. Well done.

And now the brickbats. If nick, Murray, and others are happy to write off this cartoon as a harmless gag, then they must surely have also written off the obscure online moniker “George W Brash” as the same. If they didn’t, then brickbats to them. A suspended-sentence of brickbats also to Aaron B and others who I know have been posting on blogs this morning but have stayed in the shadows here.

And a larger brickbat for DPF. DPF’s story is now that he “never complained” about the site, even though his post started with “This is so lame” and went on to say the people behind it were “blinded by sheer vitriol”. DPF (aided and abetted) beats up an amateurish five page website into this terrible smear on Don Brash, and pulls the wool over his own eyes when a similarly silly (probably worse) comparison tagreting Cullen comes out in the MSM. What an incredible flexibility his principles seem to have.

To build on dim’s excellent thought experiment, imagine if a cartoon came out comparing Brash and Bush. Bush says “Let’s invade Iraq”; Brash says “I would’ve invaded Iraq”. Bush says “I’ll do anything to lower taxes”; Brash says “Me too.” Imagine that had been yesterday’s Tom Scott. I’m convinced that DPF and co would have screamed and protested, noting darkly Mr Scott’s “personal links” with former Prime Minister David Lange, and perhaps wondering whether “Tom Scott” was actually a pseudonym for Steve Maharey all along. IMO, there is no way they would have written it off as a gag.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 10:25am
ZenTiger

Peter, you misunderstand the situation.

Whenever the left bring out opinions and policies, the right will fisk, criticise and refute.

And vice versa.

If the opinion is delivered in a cartoon, a comment, a press release or a speech in parliament it will be subjected to a rebuttal.

And vice versa.

Your complaint appears to be that we *should not* fisk this satire, and expose the weakness in the argument. You think we *should* say nothing, or perhaps a “Oh, very funny, can I kiss your boots?”

Wrong. We will point out the problems with the opinions represented, however they are portrayed. Get used to it. It’s called freedom of speech.

Your whole argument is based on whining that “you were being criticised and others are not”. As you have noted, Sir Humphrey’s get criticised constantly. Most of the time, the comments are unfounded, the slurs are generalised, exaggerated or untrue. Sometimes they are true. We don’t whine about it. We reply. LOUDLY.

We take the time to explain how the use of Hitler or Stalin is different between situations. That’s not hypocritical. You also have the same right of reply. Don’t waste it.

Readers get to decide whose point of view they accept. The bloody idiot site was fisked and exposed for the bloody idiocy it provided. Stop crying about it. Explain why you think its satire was top notch. So far, no-one has been convinced. Most of the argument has been to say “other sites are worse or hypocritical” Gee, that would explain why the satire was top notch. Not.

I am sure Tom Scott will receive a lot of flak for talking about “big lies”. I’m sure a lot of misguided fools and bloody idiots will say “how dare you mention the holocaust in connection with Cullen”. Maybe he’ll do a cartoon about that.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 10:30am
Michael(right)

The difference between the cartoon and the George W Brash site is that this cartoon merely points out Michael Cullens lie.
It’s not the comparison to either Bush or Hitler per se that pisses me off. It’s the implication that the bloodyidiot site made. This cartoon makes no such implication, in fact you could say it’s a dramatic absurdity to compare Cullen to Hitler, that’s why it’s so funny!
If the purpose of the cartoon was to imply that Cullens policys were written in Munich to further the interests of the Nazis then I would probably say it was dumb. Just like what you hippies are doing to Brash. Poorly.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 10:34am
gazzadelsud

well i’ve just seen this, and see i am important enough to be name checked (thanks Sally)

well i think it was a stupid and offensive comparison, happy now?

Actually I think tom scott is a silly little pinko with a glorious past behind him. His strike rate of good cartoons is now about 1 in 10. This one is a particularly silly one.

That said, even 1 in 10 hits isnt bad when you have to churn them out 6 days a week, so maybe i should give the old bugger the benefit of the doubt.

This particular cartoon was neither witty, appropriate, nor clever.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 10:43am
rightkiwi

The cartoon is also incorrect. I don’t think Cullen was lying when he said all that stuff – he really does believe in extreme thrift (as a result of his deprived childhood combined with insight into the rich via his scholarship to Christ’s College).

What has happened is that Clark has taken control of the purse-strings for the election campaign, rolling Cullen in the short run.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 10:54am
Peter F

Zentiger, I think you are the one who misunderstand the situation.

I said the bloodyidiot site was
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 10:58am
Sally

…and now a bouquet also to gazzadelsud. Kudos for your intellectual consistency.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 11:06am
ZenTiger

Thanks for clarifying that Peter.

What, Trevor Mallard pulled a big lie?? Shock horror. I knew it. Did he get into trouble for it? Or are most of the population buying into it I wonder? Did Helen Clark get into trouble for saying EXACTLY THE SAME THING two weeks earlier (its in Hansard) and then did she get into trouble when she quietly distanced herself from the Mallard accusations? But I digress.

When you say “You didn
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 11:31am
Ed Snack

Hey, get this leftoids, it is a CARTOON. It is done by someone ostensibly of the left, it uses dramatic irony, absurd comparisons to make a point, cartoons do that. The point being that Cullen’s (and the Labour Party’s) statements on the surplus have been grossly misleading and designed to deliberately to deceive, and this cartoon, for all the comments denigrating it, makes that point very effectively.

Anonymous websites trying to extend a lie already told by Mallard & Clark are not the same, it is an extension of the dishonesty, not satire. Though oddly enough, it actually came very close to satirising itself. The people who setup that website remain anonymous because they know that when (rather than if) their affiliations get out it will be even more damaging
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 1:05pm
Rob Hosking

Personally I just thought it was a weak cartoon. There’s not a lot of wit in comparing something you don’t like to Hitler.

When I was adjudicating debating at university many years ago we used to automatically deduct 10 points if any speaker compared the opposing team’s arguments to Hitler/Nazi Germany. It was just so lame, obvious and hackneyed.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 1:45pm
ZenTiger

Maybe Tom Scott would have offended less people if the big fibs of the last hundred years did not include Hitler’s fib? To replace the gap he could have listed different big fibs perhaps. Now what were they?

1. I was not aware I was in a speeding car
2. I hadn’t read the Doone transcript before misquoting to SST reporters
3. I was just joking about the art forgery thing
4. I will ensure the Berrymans get justice (if you elect me)
5. We were just about to act on Te Wananga

etc
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 2:08pm
Dim

And now that I think about it, I don’t recall ever hearing this quote from Hitler before – doesn’t sound like something he’d say, especially in 1937. Did he ever even say it?
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 3:44pm
gazzadelsud

yes, i think he did. i think it was about Austria and Czechoslovakia (sp).
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 4:37pm
TheProphet

I hope all you boys that have got the big tick from Sally are very pleased with yourselves.

Allah protect us.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 8:46pm
gazzadelsud

well no actually Mr Prophet – i don’t really care about what she thinks.

However i don’t think comparing people to hitler is very clever- i think it invokes Godwins law myself. It denigrates the argument, and distracts from the point being made.

This doesnt mean i endorse Cullens sudden attack of fiscal irresponsibility.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:18pm
Dave

Mike Collins suggests that its not fair to equate Cullen to Hittle and that it isn’t fair to Hitlers Victims.

Well personally I think its a bloody good comparision and perhaps we should stop worrying a moment about events that occured nearly half a century ago and worry about the events of today and remember the victims of Michael Cullens lies…….The NEW ZEALAND TAX PAYER.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:38pm
David

Mike Collins suggests that its not fair to equate Cullen to Hittle and that it isn’t fair to Hitlers Victims.

Well personally I think its a bloody good comparision and perhaps we should stop worrying a moment about events that occured nearly half a century ago and worry about the events of today and remember the victims of Michael Cullens lies…….The NEW ZEALAND TAX PAYER.
0 0
Report
August 4, 2005 9:44pm
Craig Ranapia

Gazz:

Indeed. I don’t think Scott was literally comparing Cullen to Hitler – he was making a satirical point about what politicians say and what they do a very short time later. Hitler peobably came as most of the last year has been full of high profile WWII commemmorations.

But it’s quite reasonable to say that inference could have been drawn by a rational person, and Scott could have picked a multitude of other examples to make his case without invoking Godwin’s Law.
0 0
Report
August 5, 2005 6:03pm

« Cathy’s Date

Treaty Deadlines »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 13K other subscribers

Highlights

Target achieved II
Good progress on attendance
Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments

Top Stories

General Debate 03 June 2026
Another British policing scandal
General Debate 04 June 2026
A win for democracy
Meet the Greens - ACC
Democrat says lock up the Jews
$600k on a website for a building!
Abolishing HR
General Debate 02 June 2026
Of course GP wait times will skyrocket under Labour

Recent Posts

Abolishing HR 4 June 2026
General Debate 04 June 2026 4 June 2026
Meet the Greens – ACC 4 June 2026
Democrat says lock up the Jews 3 June 2026
Another British policing scandal 3 June 2026
General Debate 03 June 2026 3 June 2026
A win for democracy 3 June 2026
$600k on a website for a building! 2 June 2026
Set housing outcomes not outputs 2 June 2026
General Debate 02 June 2026 2 June 2026
Of course GP wait times will skyrocket under Labour 2 June 2026
Which language should be used first? 1 June 2026

Recent Comments

General Debate 04 June 2026
Ghost
General Debate 04 June 2026
pdm
General Debate 04 June 2026
David Garrett
General Debate 04 June 2026
rouppe
General Debate 04 June 2026
kowtow
Abolishing HR
Don Beckett
Meet the Greens – ACC
PaulL
Democrat says lock up the Jews
PaulL
Abolishing HR
David Garrett
General Debate 04 June 2026
kowtow
Abolishing HR
Paulus
General Debate 04 June 2026
kowtow
General Debate 04 June 2026
imalwaysright
General Debate 04 June 2026
Ross Bayer
General Debate 04 June 2026
BananaLlama

Links

"The principal view of human laws is, or ought always to be, to explain, protect, and enforce such rights as are absolute, which in themselves are few and simple."
Not PC
We Are a Country That Decided Housing Was The Economy
No Minister
My Opening Statement for the UATX Caplan-Jones Immigration Rematch
Utopia
Woman of the day
Hompaddock
Open Mike 04/06/2026
The Standard
Playing with numbers.
Kiwipolitico
A lot of fuss about a simple Bill – its purpose (to make English an official language) is spelled out in 22 words
Point of Order
A crime
No Right Turn
Another non-tariff barrier
Offsetting Behaviour
Rugby Premiership Predictions for Round 18
Stats Chat
Budget 2026
NZCPR
UK Conversion Therapy Ban, Digital ID, Rallies, Elections
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
A central banker’s fiction
Croaking Cassandra
THE WORKING FROM HOME RACKET BY PUBLIC SERVANTS
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Get Vaccinated Tomorrow Or Shut Your Pie Hole
Cactus Kate
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker

[email protected]

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2026 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d