Comments on: How much astroturf can you buy for $500,000?

By: Oh dear, what a fizzer at The Standard

Oh dear, what a fizzer at The Standard — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:28:29 +0000

[...] pro-child assault lobby spent $500,000 trying to manufacture the biggest march in New Zealand history up Queen St [...]

By: QoT

QoT — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:17:45 +0000

Your strawman is delicious, lukas. The way you delicately seasoned it with a hint of tone argument really rounded out the dish.

By: Policy Parrot

Policy Parrot — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:38:12 +0000

Addicted to Smack?

lol – anti-spam word – “danger”

By: Armchair Critic

Armchair Critic — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:40:07 +0000

Oh, right, that is a bit of an issue.
I wonder, if people are being paid, does that create an obligation to pay tax? And does it create an obligation on the oganizers to comply with the Health and safety in Employment Act? That would leave a few i’s to dot and t’s to cross. Wouldn’t want anyone breaking any laws, now.

By: prism

prism — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:13:22 +0000

Good luck with the wages petition. Smart thinking to utilise the mass gathering for something useful.

The problems I see about the march is it demonstrates that there are people out there with money who will use it to push the country in their chosen direction. There’s nothing new in that eh, we’ve got Shirtcliff and that other big wheel doing this over MMP, but it makes me feel wobbly. Shades of Fiji.
And the other problem is their idea that we should have binding referendums, and because they think so it is as good as having such a system, and they act as if we do and demand their chosen result and then call that democracy. Frankly I don’t want their version of it and wouldn’t trust them to come up with sound decisions about anything, whether smacking or their next target.

By: Cameron

Cameron — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:29:44 +0000

Unite Union volunteers are turning up to the march tomorrow to collect signatures for the $15 minimum wage petition. May as well take advantage of the big crowd of people, even if you disagree with repealing Section 59. If you want to help out, meet up outside the Unite Union offices at 300 Queen Street – it’s just by the ASB on the corner of Wellesley street.

I doubt the vast majority of the crowd will be hardened right-wingers. I think many will be conservative working class people, involved in churches. It is best to break them from the right-wing demagogues, like Family First, by actually helping them with the day to day issues in their lives, poor wages etc.

By: fraser

fraser — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:27:12 +0000

yeah, im kinda of the same opinion.

was more getting at people equating a paid for event with a political movement

By: Geek

Geek — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:25:33 +0000

There is the chance for it to backfire. That chance is seldom taken. MSM will grab that sound bite and play it. What they won’t do is have someone else saying “It didn’t save this child right now, but how many children will be saved in the future by a slow removal of the acceptance of this behavior”.

By: Geek

Geek — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:20:59 +0000

People see student in an article and immediately assume left wing. It’s a shame that other actually read the entire article and then make them look like idiots.

By: felix

felix — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:19:44 +0000

“see the legislation didn’t save this child’.

I can see what you’re saying Geek but I really think it backfires a bit. They would seem to be saying, in making that argument, that the child was still victimised in spite of the repeal but the abuser should be given an out anyway.

It comes out sounding like:

“See? The legislation didn’t save this child. From us.”

By: IrishBill

IrishBill — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:17:10 +0000

That’ll be those left-wing small business owners.

By: Draco T Bastard

Draco T Bastard — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:11:10 +0000

Valid discussion can’t be held unless facts are utilised and discussed. The people supporting this march for “democracy” are making sure that fact doesn’t enter the discussion at all.

By: Geek

Geek — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:05:48 +0000

yes there was the reported riding crop case. Widely reported and if anything that case being so widely reported would more than likely reduce the chances of a jury returning a not guilty verdict as they did int he riding crop case.

Also read my earlier comment. I understand the law is intended to change attitudes thereby reducing child abuse over time. I understand that it won’t have an immediate effect on the numbers. My understanding of this does not change the fact that people will still march these cases out and say “see the legislation didn’t save this child”.

By: Roger Anderson

Roger Anderson — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:01:46 +0000

nice try Greg, your link does not describe a left wing protest. Try harder next time.

By: felix

felix — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:59:10 +0000

That’s why I said “likely”.

Maybe I should have said “possibly”.

Anyhoo this case is exactly why the reasonable force defense was removed. If the marchers think it helps their cause to highlight it then good for them. I disagree.

The real trouble they find themselves in I suppose is that they don’t have any good examples to hold up because to date no-one has been prosecuted for smacking a child.