Exit, stage right

Written By: - Date published: 4:16 pm, July 9th, 2011 - 136 comments
Categories: act - Tags: , , ,

It’s a big call, I know, but I’m pretty sure we’re seeing the end of the ACT party happening right before our eyes.

Let me be clear, I don’t mean the end in a shifted-so-far-from-their-values-it’s-as-if-they-are-gone way and I don’t mean in a taken-over-by-the-National-Party way. I mean gone from Parliament and gone from the political landscape.

And I should know – I’ve had the misfortune to have had far too much to do with ACT and its members in my time. Which is why I was able to announce their mystery fifth MP for them and why I was the only political commentator who knew Calvert would be the one who flipped on Hide.

So when I say ACT is in its death throes there’s a bloody good chance I’ll be right.

The launch of the party’s racist anti-Maori ad campaign only underscores how desperate ACT is to get a poll hit – any kind of a poll hit they can. There was a chance that their new leader could have brought the party around but it’s clear the usual loopy suspects have their hands on the controls – and they’re steering the plane straight into the ground.

Here, for example, is ACT’s number one PR man John Ansell commenting on Kiwiblog today:

It seems to me that there are Four Big Cons being perpetrated in New Zealand, of which the Maorification of Everything is just one.

There’s also:

The John Key Con – the notion that Key cares about his country and will implement core National policy, when the evidence from three years of incompetent management makes it blindingly obvious that he doesn’t, and he won’t.

The Global Warming Con – the notion that we need to pay higher prices for everything and punish our farmers in the name of an unproven theory based on dodgy computer models.

The Teachers Union Con – the notion that the PPTA and NZEI care about children, when their real agenda is to keep the worst teachers teaching those children for life.

There may be more. All of these four would be fertile ground for a party to campaign on. But don’t expect much enthusiasm for telling the truth about St John.

It’s wacky wacky stuff but it’s also exactly the kind of claptrap the leadership of ACT are telling themselves at the moment. Combine that out-of-touch fringe thinking with a leader that is not in the house and some truly awful political marketing such as Ansell’s appallingly wordy and unattractive advertisements and you’ve got yourself a party that’s heading toward polling under two percent.

And a sub two percent showing is bad news for ACT in Epsom. Right now everyone thinks the Nats will run a soft campaign to let ACT in but if ACT is only worth one or two seats then the difficulties of dealing with a small party of nuts might no seem worth the extra vote. In fact if ACT can only guarantee one seat with an Epsom win then the Nats are far better off keeping Epsom themselves.

Then there’s the fact the party’s support base is drying up as the business world shifts away from a free market focus to a more sensible position. It’s telling that at the same time the climate-change denying ACT party runs its backward racist ads, a group of high-flying Kiwi business people are running their own ad-campaign promoting green growth and innovation. Perhaps equally symbolic is the fact it happened in the same week Alisdair Thompson got sacked for similarly Jurassic views.

Not only is the corporate support abandoning ACT but they are also struggling to attract quality candidates. Their latest new face being none other than Cactus Kate. Her blog makes for amusing reading in the same way watching Hilary Calvert in action in the house can bring a giggle but while that weirdly naive unpleasantness both of these ladies of ACT specialise in is fascinating (in a train wreck kind of a way) it’s hardly the kind of thing that attracts votes.

Of course there may yet be some respite for ACT, perhaps ex-Federated Farmers President, Don Nicolson, will join and bring enough farmers’ votes with him to keep them afloat (I can’t understand why Don would do that to himself however – he may be a bit batty but he’s not got the nasty streak that seems to be compulsory in ACT nowadays). Or perhaps National will decide it is in its longer term interests to keep ACT alive as a ginger party to its right (but I wouldn’t bet on it).

Whatever happens it’s going to take a hell of a miracle for ACT to survive past this election. If I were Brash I’d be worried.

136 comments on “Exit, stage right ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. robertguyton 1
    9 July 2011 at 4:46 pm

    It’s a real pleasure to watch them disintegrate. Having Brash in the Ringmaster’s spot just adds to the spectacle. Odgers, Garrett and Hide flip-flapping around in the half-light at the fringes of the Act tent is pure grotesque and sweet Heather, all a-faint on the chaise-lounge brings a touch of the pathetique to the lime-lit scene.

  2. Jum 2
    9 July 2011 at 4:51 pm

    Don Nicolson most certainly would sell New Zealanders as happily as Key has.

    As payback from Key, Brash will become National’s ‘new’ leader, Ruth Richardson his advisor outside cabinet and Judith Collins his deputy and New Zealand will become the 5?th state of USA.

    You may disagree with the names but the political philosophy is exactly right.

  3. Secret Squirrel 3
    9 July 2011 at 5:14 pm

    If I were Brash I’d be worried.

    I think this advertising is a sign he’s already worried, it looks a bit like a desperate throw of the dice he found in an old suit he wore seven and a half years ago.

    From the reaction I’ve seen he may end up being more worried.

  4. rd 4
    9 July 2011 at 5:25 pm

    Nice alternate ACT add at Imperator fish
    http://www.imperatorfish.com/

  5. toad 5
    9 July 2011 at 5:27 pm

    You must have missed another even worse Ansell comment on the same Kiwiblog thread IB – racist, misogynist and totally unhinged.

    He must have forgotten it was the 25th anniversary of homosexual law reform, or he would have chucked in something homophobic as well (although “feminazis” is coming close) to get the trifecta.

    • IrishBill 5.1
      9 July 2011 at 5:43 pm

      Jesus. The guy’s lost it.

      • Secret Squirrel 5.1.1
        9 July 2011 at 5:46 pm

        He’s sounding very angry, not sure if it’s at a lack of media attention or the reaction to the attention they have bought today, or both.

        Not a good state of mind to run a campaign in.

      • toad 5.1.2
        9 July 2011 at 6:02 pm

        Maybe they should rehabilitate Garrett after all, as Brash suggested.  Garrett almost seems sane compared with some of what we are seeing at the moment.  Eagerly awaiting a reaction from Cactus Kate, who at least seems more representative of the old principled (although still nasty) ACT Party.

        • toad 5.1.2.1
          9 July 2011 at 6:51 pm

          Oh, and right on cue, here is Cactus Kate.  Seems punting for a position on the ACT list has brought out the racism in her too.  So much for my hope she would remain a principled economic and social libertarian in the tradition of the ACT Party of old:

          So listen to the land of the long great whinge about the following rather tame advertisement aimed not at Maori but the Harawira’s, Turia’s, Mair’s and Sykes of this world – the Maori radicals

          Same old racist divide and rule shit.

          • Cactus Kate 5.1.2.1.1
            9 July 2011 at 7:19 pm

            With respect Toady perhaps you would like to keep reading below the piece you have quoted…..race politics v class envy politics which Labour rolls out to beat Key.

            When your Masters bring out the detail of the CGT of course I will analyse it further.

            • IrishBill 5.1.2.1.1.1
              9 July 2011 at 7:21 pm

              The fact that you can manage to equate racism with class politics shows just how batshit crazy you are.

              • Cactus Kate …
                9 July 2011 at 7:35 pm

                And how determined you are to not see that what Labour are doing next week is just as divisive. I acknowledge that any race politics is divisive (including the Mana Party style), you seem to not grasp the opposing view. Read my post again you will find where I think the ACT campaign (which of course I have absolutely no say in) should be focused….starting next week when Labour shows its true colours.

                • Reality Bytes …
                  9 July 2011 at 7:45 pm

                  “And how determined you are to not see that what Labour are doing next week is just as divisive.”

                  lolwut? This may come as a surprise, but next week, actually hasn’t happened yet.

                  But hey don’t let that stop your crystal ball gazing, or using such gazing of crystal as self fueled ammunition to support your point of view.

                  • Cactus Kate …
                    9 July 2011 at 7:55 pm

                    Labour have been soft leaking to media all week. You mean there’s no new taxes next week? Super. That would be great……

                    • Reality Bytes …
                      9 July 2011 at 8:44 pm

                      Be funny if they were just messing with National though, and what’s been ‘leaked’ is quite different to the actual announcement. A lot of us are being very trusting in these so called leaks, and also very conclusive in our opinions of these hypothetical policies.

                      Yes it looks like new taxes will be announced, but lets hear them out first before jumping to conclusions about whether their formula is shit or not.

                      I mean even if the Nats steal their idea, doesn’t bother me. Whatever helps this country.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      9 July 2011 at 8:46 pm

                      Taxes aren’t divisive unless they’re not applied equally. Labours CGT is balancing the imbalance that presently exists.

                    • Puddleglum …
                      9 July 2011 at 10:43 pm

                      Cactus Kate, if a new tax being announced is ‘divisive’ then just about every policy that every political party announces is ‘divisive’.

                      Is your thinking somehow linked to the peculiar theory that is often reduced to the slogan ‘politics of envy’?

                      I hope not, because that ‘theory’ does not fit well with what is known from research about the origins of and characteristics of the emotion of ‘envy’. The circumstances in which ‘negative envy’, as opposed to ‘positive envy’, typically emerges – and what it says about our society if, as the ‘theory’s’ proponents claim, we are beset by an epidemic of the ‘politics of envy’ – does not bode well for those on the right of the political spectrum. In short, it would suggest that materialism, as a value, has become epidemic.

                      Now, I wonder why people increasingly ‘aspire’ to such materialism over the past few decades? Something to do with the ego-centric individualism that goes with consumer capitalism, perhaps?

                      Don’t get me started on this topic – for all our sakes.

                    • Reality Bytes …
                      10 July 2011 at 6:50 pm

                      On hindsight, something I found something rather perplexing and amusing, you commented that:

                      “…You mean there’s no new taxes next week? Super. That would be great……”.

                      So…

                      a) You think it would be great if Labour wasn’t proposing increased taxes, but instead endorsed similar tax policies to Nact, therefore you hope Labour will put forward policy neutralising the point of distinction Nact has in terms of tax policy.

                      b) You are seriously concerned they have better alternative policy, and are worried they will provide a challenge to the business as usual low innovation tax policies and strategies of the Nact party.

                      c) I dunno, want to help me out here? I’m actually struggling to understand why you are worried about Labour expressing their tax policy concepts, considering it looks like it’s your team’s election to lose at this stage.

                      Care to enlighten us? 🙂

                • IrishBill …
                  9 July 2011 at 7:53 pm

                  Are you serious? You really think that a policy on capital gains is like racism? Next you’ll be telling me the financial elite are some kind of hard done by minority and you’re like Malcolm X for standing up for them.

                  No wonder your party is on its last legs. You’re incapable of understanding the world normal (voting) people inhabit.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    9 July 2011 at 9:11 pm

                    The wealthy and influential elite are a threatened, descriminated against minority. The Human Rights Act should give them extra protections befitting their status.

                  • Policy Parrot …
                    10 July 2011 at 12:00 am

                    ACT has officially moved to the right of Ayn Rand. Apparently, she would have been too feminist for them…

                    Ansell (in his frame of mind): “Add Atlas Shrugged to the list of books to burn.”

                  • Cactus Kate …
                    10 July 2011 at 12:33 am

                    I am not expecting to turn the entire Standard readership, of course you are now going into spin mode. Race politics is exactly the same as class politics. You are seeking to mobilise your electorate against “evil” people perceived to be richer than your electorate. That is the entire driver of the Capital Gains Tax. I’m not saying that is right or wrong as for the Labour electorate it is a winner. I have posted on such. But don’t pretend Labour are lily white in terms of not playing divisive politics. That’s entirely what you plan to roll out next week.

                    • Ianupnorth …
                      10 July 2011 at 12:34 am

                      You been hanging out with Slater and his server?
                       
                      How did you end up so brainwashed? Seriously, you genuinely come across as intelligent, but then spout some serious drivel. I just don’t get it!

                    • jackal …
                      10 July 2011 at 1:23 am

                      Turn the entire Standard readership? Don’t make me laugh!

                      You couldn’t turn the eggs lame Donald (duck) Brash keeps laying into an omelet. Rotten scrambled eggs anyone?

                      This is your brain, now this is your brain on Act… delusional!

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      10 July 2011 at 2:06 am

                      Race politics is exactly the same as class politics.

                      ?

                      People are suffering in poverty. A lot of them. The vast majority of people in this country live on less than $50K p.a.

                      These people may be invisible to you, or you may consider them irrelevant because they are not in “your electorate” (it’s not that clever a way of classifying people really), or perhaps you consider them ‘unworthy’ in other ways.

                      But in a wealthy country full of resources like NZ it is unnecessary and it is holding us back as a people.

                      Prioritising the accumulation of financial capital in narrow ‘electorates’ ahead of developing the potentially vast human capital of the country as a whole is illogical.

                    • lprent …
                      10 July 2011 at 8:08 am

                      I am not expecting to turn the entire Standard readership, of course you are now going into spin mode

                      I wouldn’t expect that you could. It is rather too diverse judging on what comes though in the comments.

                      But I have to observe that it is kind of funny watching you attributing Irish with being into the Labour party. I think that last election he said he was going to vote for the Workers party – a crowd so obscure that I had no idea who he was talking about (looked it up). Certainly he tends to be somewhat on the critical side when writing about my favorite party.

                      But keep your delusions, I guess that soft web of mythic bullshit is a comfort to you. Certainly seems to be for Act as they complete their shift from being a party of rabid ideology to one of complete rabid bigotry – while asserting they are neither.

                    • RobertM …
                      11 July 2011 at 10:29 pm

                      Your right of course, CGT is a cynical ploy by Goff, to capture the envy vote of those who think like colonial viper, that there is a leisured class of exploiters who live of the fat of the land. In fact compared with Australia the leisured class and the private school boys and girls are a tiny minority and there are few really rich here, and even fewer who actually live in NZ. Envy is presuambly why Fay richwhite live on an offshore island while they visit.
                      Obviously its premature to speak of Capital gains tax before the details are announced, but it is clearly a political strategy. Stimulating the creation of jobs in farming and manufacturing and spin offs has little potential in Aotearoa. Its a strategy to create jobs for dumb white males and the dumb males of every race. Because cactus your right its class not race warfare that being perpetuated against the children and grandchildren of achievers. The modern world is for modern women and the brighter half of men of every race. The potential jobs in NZ are in tourism a 24/7 society- which Rhianna and Lady Ga Ga represent. Americans wander around Auckland and its dim bars allthe time bemused by the lack of action in this society. The barriers to growth are restrictive laws, restrictive licensing and restrictive zoning. If you want growth you don’t let the old dogs, Lianne Dalziel and Sue Bagshaw redesign central Christchurch. Old dogs are a generic term.

                • bbfloyd …
                  10 July 2011 at 11:13 am

                  my word, aren’t you getting yourself worked up kate. i’ve always wondered why your reputation as an intelligent commentator existed. most of what i read from you is barely concealed(when you bother to try) party political drivel.

                  Good to see you’ve finally dropped the pretence of a balanced intellect.

                • pollywog …
                  10 July 2011 at 2:02 pm

                  Aww Kate, don’t you love your widdle Gollywog anymore. Is that why you’re not posting my comments on your site now ?

                  __________________________________________________________

                  Speak to a business owner in the shit and the most important person in their life will be their lawyer. – Cactus Kate

                  I figure it’d be their bank manager

                  Lawyers add value to more business than for example, Treaty troughers. – Cactus Kate

                  Case in point being Ngai Tahu in the Christchurch rebuild and lawyers creaming it in the insurance disputes….oh hang on

                  zzzzzz*yawn*…any excuse to push that racist crap eh

                  Such a sad, bitter and twisted individual you come across as Kate.

                  Yeah yeah, we know…you’re just a misunderstood victim of privilege, of course you’re not racist. You just hate the bludging underclasss, it’s not your fault that most of them are brown.

                  ”[People] are no longer comfortable in expressing racism directly,” White says.

                  ”Instead, they might advocate laws and policies that disadvantage racial minorities.

                  “For example, [they might think]: ‘It’s not that I have a problem with racial minorities, I just don’t like the welfare system.”

                  Moreover, they were likely to pass off the racist comments as being a joke or in good humour.

                  http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/5252660/I-m-not-racist-but

                  so yeah, go on call me Gollywog again cos that was some funny shit…

                  ______________________________________________________________

                  The classic politics of division in New Zealand have been race, – Cactus Kate

                  WRONG…it’s been culture dreesed up to look like ‘race’ for media shock value. Privileged fatcat euro vs marginalised indigenous.

                  you really need to stop pushing this racist crap eh and see shit for what it really is.

                  seriously, if you want to bash beneficiaries, start with Petricevic claiming the poor house and legal aid cos his wife and kids have the millions not him.

                  http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/5261850/Legal-aid-plea-is-sick-investor

                  …but you won’t, cos that’s what side your bread is buttered on.

                  It’s just too easy to brown bash the bloody maaris and blame them for the countries ails when we all know its the brash’s, the key’s, the petricevics and the hotchins which have led NZ down the garden path. The bankers, the financial ‘gurus’ and the tax dodgers are the real bludgers and you know it.

                  and that ain’t politics of class envy Maori espouse. It’s politics of cultural frustration that, despite lip service, it’s still privileged eurocentric fuckers calling the tune everyone has to dance to.

                  but times they are a changin and it’s your lot running scared…
                  ______________________________________________________________

            • Ianupnorth 5.1.2.1.1.2
              9 July 2011 at 8:16 pm

              You couldn’t analyse your way out of a paper bag Kate. For goodness sake, how does someone who clearly has benefited from a high quality education end up as blinkered and bigoted as you?

              • Cactus Kate …
                10 July 2011 at 12:37 am

                Sorry I went to public school, didn’t benefit from what I would call high quality. Anytime you want to debate tax, NZX, securities commission and other business topics though go trawl through my blogposts, happy to debate you rather than have you make random stupid comments on a left-wing blog.

                • Ianupnorth …
                  10 July 2011 at 12:45 am

                  I have read your blog; you make generalisations about certain groups within society (perhaps you cling to Thatchers belief that there is no such thing as society?) – yet you are in no position to make such generalisations as you probably have no lived experience of the realities of many people within this small, poor and under populated country.
                   
                  Also, there are public schools and public schools; you went to Auckland Uni – would you not call that of high quality? Surely a law degree from there is a credible qualification?
                   
                  By responding on a left wing blog you leave yourself open for comment and critique; you have commented that my comment was random and stupid, I asked a genuine question – how did you form your beliefs, I am genuinely interested to know. Were they hand me downs from your family or upbringing? Did your association with Bomber at Uni turn you against the left? Was Thatcher a hero to you, or maybe Reagan or Bush?
                   
                  Please do tell!

                  BTW – my beliefs were formed from being raised in a council house in a deprived village in Scotland; my views are informed by the work of Robert Owen

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Owen

                  and http://www.newlanark.org/robertowen.shtml

                • jackal …
                  10 July 2011 at 1:22 am

                  It’s funny how you want to set the terms of debate Catcus. I noticed that you blocked me on twitter… so much for freedom of speech.

                  You never did answer my question: What are your thoughts on Cameron Browne telling Tania Lim to “Get raped?”

                  Your preference for obfuscation is noted Catcus, and seems akin to Act’s mentality. I guess you really are suitably pathetic!

                  • Roflcopter …
                    10 July 2011 at 8:21 am

                    “It’s funny how you want to set the terms of debate Catcus. I noticed that you blocked me on twitter… so much for freedom of speech.”

                    lolwut? How’s her blocking you kerbing your freedom of speech?

                    She’s not stopping you typing, she doesn’t want to listen to you, you moron.

                    • jackal …
                      10 July 2011 at 11:16 am

                      She doesn’t want to answer the question you mean. If they don’t engage in debate, and actively block people from questioning them, it inhibits freedom of speech. There’s not much point in speaking to somebody who is not willing to listen.

                      I guess that’s how they’ve developed such a warped sense of reality in the first place… Insulation from the real world is an issue that seems particular prevalent in the right wing political spectrum.

                      At least Catcus actually tried to engage people here. I notice that she’s the only Act member to comment on a post about Act’s disintegration… Looks like a forgone conclusion to me.

            • toad 5.1.2.1.1.3
              9 July 2011 at 8:23 pm

              Hey, CK, I’m Green, not Labour, and the Green policy on CGT has been out there for a long time.  Comprehensive, applying to all assets other than the family home.  The only thing to be worked through is the rate – need to allow for CPI increases, but also need to cut the red tape so there is consistency in CGT rate year to year.

              My preference is for a continuing flat rate, rather than an annually varying one.  This would disadvantage people who hold onto assets for 50 years, but advantage those who make their capital gain over a shorter period and sell to move on to something else.

              That approach would help negate one of the criticisms of CGT which is that it will discourage people, particularly property investors, from selling their assets and thereby cause stagnation in the capital market.

            • Colonial Viper 5.1.2.1.1.4
              9 July 2011 at 9:08 pm

              race politics v class envy politics

              You still buy the line that Class War is more to do with “envy”, and less to do with 1 in 5 NZ children living and growing up in poverty?

              Or the fact that over a quarter of young people unemployed, and promises that if they should ever get a job they will be paid even less than they might be now.

              Or that 700,000 NZ born Kiwis have decided that living and working in Australia would be better than at home?

              I guess you might buy the “envy” line, but since the vast majority if New Zealanders struggle along on less than $50K p.a. I don’t think they will.

              • Cactus Kate …
                10 July 2011 at 12:41 am

                That’s the point Viper, I’m not saying this is a bad policy for Labour due to the patheticness of the earning and wealth potential for their electorate. It is a very smart policy for Labour. All increases in taxes are smart for Labour, just as you have to acknowledge for the ACT electorate cutting taxes and slashing government spending is smart (as opposed to the ad today which is a distraction to economic policy).

                You know, Labour was the party that was in power for 9 years and did very little to close those gaps you claim exist?

                • Reality Bytes …
                  10 July 2011 at 1:11 am

                  “All increases in taxes are smart for Labour”

                  An excellent point. In fact I recon increases in taxes are smart for ‘INSERT-PARTY-NAME-HERE’ party’s. Balancing our books without ripping this nations guts out and hobbling our future, is frankly, a fantastic idea. Any party with a serious plan on how to get us out of this quagmire has my consideration and maybe my vote.

                • bbfloyd …
                  10 July 2011 at 12:02 pm

                  “did very little to close those gaps”. party political drivel again kactus? If you want credibility, then desisting in relating obvious falsehood would be a start.

                  Considering the MASSIVE amount of urgent remedial action required just to slow the degradation to the social and economic fabric of nz society, caused directly by policies designed, and implemented by people who should never have been allowed within parliament let alone given the levers of power(richardson, birch, etc), the fact that there was any ACTUAL improvement in the balance of distribution of wealth speaks volumes for the competence, and focus of the clarke years.

                  what have you, and your cabal have to counter that doesn’t involve misinformation, misdirection, and outright lies?

                  bugger all from where we sit..

                • mik e …
                  14 July 2011 at 11:57 am

                  So the the tax working group and the productivity commission set up by your party wanted a CGT but obviously they got spineless in the end when it would affect ACT party supporters.Then we have Roger Kerr saying that all countries with MMP are flat lining a blatant lie [Germany}, then he said we should be like Singapore where the free market rules anther blatant lie [ Singapore yeah sure Singapore has 17.4% growth but 60% of business is Govt owned and the political system is a virtual dictatorship maybe thats what ACT would like.]. Then Roger goes on about smoking I thought this party was about user pays no Roger wants everybody to have the right to smoke , but every body else has to subsidize smokers health costs and loss of productivity to the tune of $2-$3billion dollars thats going to help productivity. and on that note Don Key has made spurious claims of big productivity gains when their policies have been implemented when clearly unemployment has gone up at the same time laying off of unskilled workers who are less productive People now have better access to to information and are not sucked in by your pathetic attempts at propaganda so when you put your policy out their it must be researched a lot better otherwise you will only be able to be a spineless addition to National

                • mik e …
                  14 July 2011 at 12:03 pm

                  Cactus Kate thats another lie, Labour was the fist Govt 30 years to close the income gap with Australia and reduce child poverty those facts are in the New Zealand year book for your information.When you stop lying your party might actually get some traction in the polls.

            • Hanswurst 5.1.2.1.1.5
              10 July 2011 at 12:25 am

              Leaving aside the bizarre equation of class politics with racism, it would seem, listening to the NActs adn their allies over the last quarter-century, that the politics of envy are practised most heavily by the rich against the poor, because the latter have the joy of paying little tax.

          • Deadly_NZ 5.1.2.1.2
            10 July 2011 at 1:20 pm

            Oh here we go again. Yet another Bloody Lawyer who thinks they can be a politician. And in the mould of John KY she don’t even live in NZ. What is it about NZ that we can have virtual foreigners coming in here, and Trying to run our country in what ever way their twisted little minds think fit. Kate we have had enough of foreigners coming into NZ and trying to tell us how to do it. John KY is a case in point he has fucked it up and I suppose that even if the Men in Act even bother to give you more than the ‘tea girl’ job you will be spouting their out of date racist and sexist ideas in parliament. Do us and your self a favour stay in HK, and stick to your hate filled rant from afar.

    • Lanthanide 5.2
      9 July 2011 at 6:24 pm

      Wow.

    • McFlock 5.3
      9 July 2011 at 6:35 pm

      Oh. My. God.
       
      And Bill had me with the crap advertising.
       
      There is actually hope for the complete dissolution of ACT as a registered party.

  6. Frank Macskasy 6
    9 July 2011 at 5:27 pm

    “Disintergrate”?

    Don’t speak too soon, folks. ACT’s strategists atre no fools – they understand that their redneckery has a constituency in this country. All they need is 5% to cross that magic thresh-hold, and bob’s-your-aunty.

    A cursory glance at internet messageboards and blogs very quickly reveals that there are people who would quite eagerly subscribe to ACT’s bigotry. Because those people are biggoted themselves.

    ACT has three ‘staples’ that it can rely on;

    -$- “Get tough on crime”

    -$- “Get tough on beneviciaries”

    -$- “Get tough on Maori ‘radicals’ and the ‘grievance industry’

    All are “Get Tough” on some-one-or-other who, bigots perceive, are getting “something for nothing”. (The core nature of bigottry is that the bigot doesn’t actually look too deeply into issues. They don’t so much as think an issue through, as rely on an emotional response. )

    And if there happens to be another horrendous murder in New Zealand between now and November 26 – expect ACT to push for a referendum on capital punishment as a policy plank.

    Sorry, Irishbill, but far from putting the nail into ACT’s coffin, they will most likely increase their poll-ratings.

    Keep an eye on the next poll results, post-advert.

    • IrishBill 6.1
      9 July 2011 at 5:42 pm

      I disagree. ACT’s strategists are fools. Crazy old fools ranting their way to political oblivion.

      • Frank Macskasy 6.1.1
        10 July 2011 at 5:38 pm

        Irishbill, if I’m wrong in my assessment above, I will be happy-as-Larry (whoever Larry happened to be…).

        Not often that I hope and pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that I’m way off-beam in my analysis – but this is one of them.

    • Lanthanide 6.2
      9 July 2011 at 6:25 pm

      They’re not going to get 5%. They only managed 3.65% on the back of the anti-Labour sentiment at the last election, with everyone expecting National to win. This gave them air – people who would vote National in a tight race would have switched to vote for Act because they figured National were going to win anyway. This election will end up being much tighter on present polling numbers (see David Farrar’s back-of-the-envelope forward projection) which will suck their vote down.

      Last election, for Act, was the same as 2002 for Act. The upcoming election will be more like 2005.

      • Reality Bytes 6.2.1
        9 July 2011 at 9:12 pm

        Yeah Banks and Epsom is their only hope and very last chance.

        They will never get 5%.

        Too many other parties to give your vote to. And if you are a true blue Nact supporter, why would you risk wasting your party vote on Act this year? Especially when things are so precarious for Act. If they don’t get in, then any Nact voter giving Act the party vote wastes the party vote. Any slightly tactically minded Nact loyalist will put her/his vote with the safe option, National, not Act. So like I said 5% is not going to happen for Act. It’ll be a miracle if they can get even 3 seats assuming a Banks win in Epsom.

        • mik e 6.2.1.1
          14 July 2011 at 12:25 pm

          Labour and the Greens and anyone else in in Epsom that does,t like Act should vote national in the electorate vote and their party on the party vote and put an end to their misery once and for all but i suspect that if polls were getting close to National winning Epsom they would withdraw their candidate worth a try . The left hasn,t learn,t to strategically vote as well as National yet except in the Maori seats where they know they have to have a coalition partner.

          • Reality Bytes 6.2.1.1.1
            15 July 2011 at 8:07 pm

            You do have to wonder what the threshold for Nat’s getting fed up with the Act’s threshold is.

            Surely there must come a point where they have the confidence to expect a ‘we can rule alone’ outcome. And that is by far the best outcome they would be hoping for. Even though Act is quite aligned with them on many principles, it must be quite a hassle for the Nats to have to rely on another party to pass policy. It would be way easier to rule alone, and I’m sure the Nats would prefer to rule alone.

            I recon if the voting public are numb enough to vote the Nats in by a majority… Then the Nats will ‘pretend’ to pay lip service to Act policies as it suits them, in order to show they care about the righty policies and issues Act raises in order to stike a chord with their righty fan-base.

            It’s understandable really, if you are in the ‘We want to be the government business’ then maintaining power is the utter priority.

    • Hennie van der Merwe 6.3
      9 July 2011 at 7:28 pm

      I am one of many who cannot see what is wrong with his Maori policy – to the contrary, we are in no doubt as to where NZ is heading if the current racial discrimination continues.

      • The Voice of Reason 6.3.1
        9 July 2011 at 10:44 pm

        Mandela? Hanging’s too good for the likes of him! Had that Eugene Terre Blanche in the back of the cab a while back. Lovely bloke, very sound on the race question, too.

        • Hennie van der Merwe 6.3.1.1
          9 July 2011 at 11:36 pm

          VOR

          Are you seriously suggesting that the majority of South Africans are now better off than they were before? If having the vote is your only criteria, then yes, else there is not one single aspect of the previously disadvantaged life’s that have improved.

          All I am trying to get across is that we need to get rid of the racial divide in NZ – let us practice what we preach and NZ will go from strength to strength, else …………..

          • Ianupnorth 6.3.1.1.1
            10 July 2011 at 12:04 am

            Hennie, with due respect the black South Africans had no treaty, much of Africa was exploited and colonised by the Brits, the Dutch, the French, the Belgians, the Germans and the Portuguese.
             
            Was it right how the black South African population were treated, hell no. Is it a bed of roses since the whites lost power, hell no. Rome wasn’t bult in a day, and every other previously colonised country has needed to go through immense change before emerging as a robust democracy. It is up to the rest of us to see that happens.
             
            What racial divide do you see in NZ? 90% of the Maori I know are generous, hard working, honest and productive members of our multi racial society. I wish I could say the same about white NZ – and I am one of them! Maori have been kept in a majorly disadvantage situation – have you been to Kaingaroa, Murupara, Te Kaha, Turangi? Have you seen how some people are forced to live?
             
            I am sick of the bigotry that surrounds certain peoples views on Somalians (all taxi drivers), Asians (used as a generic term for mainly Chinese and Koreans) – maybe they don’t realise that India and Sri Lanka are in Asia too, and any other ethnic group who does not fit conveniently into the system.
             
            Many of the South Africans I have known have expressed the same sentiment as you; your experiences in SA, I feel, cannot be readily transferred into an NZ context.

            • Hennie van der Merwe 6.3.1.1.1.1
              10 July 2011 at 8:05 am

              Hi IanUN

              Whilst I agree with most of your post and admittedly am still finding my way around NZ politics, I have to point out the following:

              The interpretation of the Treaty you are referring to seems to me to have created the current mess rather than solving it. To me it is so obviously clear that the Treaty states that everybody is equal British subjects and does not (as far as I can see) make any provision for deferential treatment. I agree that that the initial buying up of Maori land by the settlers were sometimes under handed, however the past and current efforts to rectify that seems to have been less than satisfactory.

              Something that really bothers me is that I cannot find any public records of the affairs of those bodies that received the settlements negotiated under the Treaty. Where can I find these? Surely these settlements went to Iwi and Trusts to keep and apply for the betterment of all Maori and as such the rights and properties thus received really belongs to all Maori and should be accountable to all Maori? What am I missing here?

              Those countries in Africa that have had independence the longest seems to be in the worst state, i.e. Congo, Rwanda and Uganda. Those that have never been colonised are not much better off, i.e Ethiopia and Haiti (largely African population). Botswana is IMO opinion the only African country with reasonable human rights record (except for the total abuse of the Bushmen), thriving economy and an established democracy.

              I share your opinion that 90% of Maori are honest hard working decent citizens but my gripe is that the privileges being bestowed on Maori only benefits a select few individuals whilst the others continue to suffer. This is almost an exact analogy to what happened in SA after everybody got the vote.

              I maintain that this practise, instead of furthering the majority of Maori is creating racial tensions that we can do without. The perception is being created that Maori are receiving preferential treatment, but the reality is that 90% of them are not.

              Confused Hennie

              • Colonial Viper …
                10 July 2011 at 8:44 am

                You say “The interpretation of the Treaty you are referring to seems to me to have created the current mess rather than solving it.”

                The question NZ has faced is around how to put right the wrongs of the past, given the structure that the Treaty provides.

                Saying that everyone should have been treated like equal British Subjects is neither here nor there because that is not what happened.

                Something that really bothers me is that I cannot find any public records of the affairs of those bodies that received the settlements negotiated under the Treaty. Where can I find these?

                If they are private trusts or companies you will find very limited public records.

                is creating racial tensions that we can do without.

                I notice that you talk this up.

                • Hennie van der Merwe …
                  10 July 2011 at 9:24 am

                  Hi CV

                  “If they are private trusts or companies you will find very limited public records.”

                  My point exactly – as these were supposed to be settlement for claims ‘on behalf of’ then surely those that are the beneficiaries should have access to what is being done with their assets. Who are the shareholders/ beneficiaries of these trusts/ companies who have received billions of $ in assets and rights? What are they doing with it?

                  “I notice that you talk this up” – I am merely expressing what I hear, see and read every day. Maybe you are talking it down?

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    10 July 2011 at 9:32 am

                    1) Private trusts and companies do not follow the same disclosure rules as public companies.

                    2) I am merely expressing what I hear, see and read every day. And that is about a Class War (not a racial one like ACT is pushing) between the Wealthy Few and the Struggling Many.

                    As I said before, you can imagine that the Treaty said all peoples in Aoteroa should be treated equally as British Subjects, but that is not what actually happened historically.

                    • Hennie van der Merwe …
                      10 July 2011 at 2:27 pm

                      CV

                      “As I said before, you can imagine that the Treaty said all peoples in Aoteroa should be treated equally as British Subjects, but that is not what actually happened historically.”

                      Even if this statement is 100% correct, these wrongs cannot now be put right by discriminating against the rest of the population.

                      “Go ask the iwi involved, Regional Council, DoC, Fish & Game, or your local Forest and Bird.”

                      The local iwi will just tell me to go to hell – it is none of my business and this is my problem – how can public funds and Crown Assets be handed over to private Trusts and iwi with no strings attached (or at least no measurable ones)? Also if these claims are being made on behalf of a certain group of citizens and are then awarded to them presumably on the basis of correcting a historic injustice, then surely the original owners (Crown and NZ citizens) have a right to know that it is being used to benefit ALL of those involved. I would have expected that the proceeds or income from these settlements would have been more than adequate to teach young Maori their own language, uplift their culture and create jobs for their unemployed. Sadly this does not seem to be the case and in stead additional claims are being generated to cater for these needs when the Maori Asset base apparently stands at $37 billion.

                      Am I just to blind to see or too stupid to understand?

                  • weka …
                    10 July 2011 at 2:23 pm

                    as these were supposed to be settlement for claims ‘on behalf of’ then surely those that are the beneficiaries should have access to what is being done with their assets. Who are the shareholders/ beneficiaries of these trusts/ companies who have received billions of $ in assets and rights? What are they doing with it?
                     

                    Iwi were forced by the Crown to form legal structures that the Crown could pay out to. We can hardly complain at this late stage if we don’t like those structures. Having said that, have you contacted any local iwi to find out? Have you looked at their websites and put some effort into understanding how they work?

                  • SHG …
                    11 July 2011 at 2:40 am

                    as these were supposed to be settlement for claims ‘on behalf of’ then surely those that are the beneficiaries should have access to what is being done with their assets. Who are the shareholders/ beneficiaries of these trusts/ companies who have received billions of $ in assets and rights? What are they doing with it?

                    One example:

                    http://www.ngaitahu.iwi.nz/Ngai-Tahu-Whanui/Whai-Rawa/

              • Peter …
                10 July 2011 at 9:02 am

                What happens to the settlement money, good question? Not to long ago a settlement was made to clean up the Waikato river. Where do we go to find out what progress has been made?

                • Colonial Viper …
                  10 July 2011 at 9:34 am

                  Go ask the iwi involved, Regional Council, DoC, Fish & Game, or your local Forest and Bird.

              • Ianupnorth …
                10 July 2011 at 1:26 pm

                Hennie, I’ve been in NZ for 10 years; I too have had mood swings associated with various treaty things (settlements, interpretations, etc.)
                 
                The 90% of Maori are not the problem as you seem to agree with me; there are a few (very) greedy, power hungry people who, in my opinion, take more than their fare share of what rightly belongs to all Maori – a certain local lawyer takes 10% of any claim as her fee – is that fair?
                 
                I guess for me there are issue regarding race as I described earlier; yes, there are Maori radicals, but there are also white supremicist radicals, and in my opinion ACT’s policies are not very far away. They are divisive and want to stir up trouble. Don Brash frankly is NZ’s Enoch Powell. I do not think his predictions will ever come to fruitition. In addition, Maori are so far down the pecking order in terms of jobs and education there are as many in Aussie as there are here, and I place the blame for that on current government policies.
                 

              • Descendant Of Smith …
                10 July 2011 at 2:05 pm

                “The interpretation of the Treaty you are referring to seems to me to have created the current mess rather than solving it.”

                I had the same viewpoint expressed by a taxi driver the other day (also someone not grown up here).

                He got quite angry when I politely explained that he didn’t know what he was talking about.

                New Zealand is in quite a unique position with colonisation happening at a time when there was a desire by many British to do something better than they had in the past for native people, a country that had already been granted independence, a treaty signed with the British Crown when the British were a significant small minority in a much larger population, a high rate of intermarriage over time, a willingness by Maori to share their possessions and resources – which continues to this day – a translation of legal systems and process to NZ as well as democracy.

                I’m sure there are other aspects as well but all these things mean that we are one of the few countries that can have a treaty settlement process to right wrongs.

                This process does depend on goodwill on both sides but more importantly because of the practical developments such as legal systems and treaties much of the taking of land etc was well documented and often required legislative action.

                Even when land was taken by force their are good records.

                So firstly we have that opportunity to go through the records and work out what happened and put it right.

                Secondly it is all too easy for people to portray the view that the treaty process has created the grievances – Maori were petitioning to England re the taking of land etc continuously since the Treaty was signed – quietly and with dignity and a continual sense of loss.

                What changed was a younger generation came through and went public – 140 years of petitioning wasn’t really working.

                The mess has always been there and Maori have always been aggrieved – the settlement process is a source of resolution and of repair and should be well respected for what it has achieved – not maligned for what ir hasn’t or where it hasn’t quite satisfied all parties. We should view that process and our willingness to engage in it with a sense of pride.

                We don’t know where we would have been without it but I’m quite sure that the grievances would not have gone away and we would much likely be in a worse place.

                • Hennie van der Merwe …
                  10 July 2011 at 7:40 pm

                  Hi DoS

                  “New Zealand is in quite a unique position with colonisation happening at a time when there was a desire by many British to do something better than they had in the past for native people, a country that had already been granted independence, a treaty signed with the British Crown when the British were a significant small minority in a much larger population…”

                  At about the same time Britain was involved in several wars with the SA indigenous peoples over border disputes and in that case certainly did not show any desire to do something better for the native people. I can refer you to several sources that will also make it patently clear that Britain was the architect of the infamous “apartheid” system in SA!

                  “..a willingness by Maori to share their possessions and resources – which continues to this day..”

                  If I interpret the history correctly, the Maori approached the Crown for protection as they feared an invasion by France. So, yes , I suppose that could be interpreted as a willingness to share their resources, but in practical terms they really had no choice and went with what they determined to be the lesser of two evils.

                  I agree that intermarriage has solved a lot of problems, but it has also created a new one in so far as it now becomes very problematical to define being Maori.

                  Still as clear as mud to me and still waiting for an answer re the application of proceeds from settlements

    • Deadly_NZ 6.4
      10 July 2011 at 2:34 pm

      Hey Frank

      “beneviciaries” ??? Unemployed priests? lol

  7. Ianupnorth 7
    9 July 2011 at 5:38 pm

    So the Maori Radicals line that they have in this add will win them more votes?
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/59632488/MaoriRadicals

  8. ak 8
    9 July 2011 at 5:38 pm

    Puts Nicey in an interesting spot. This is his last cobber remember. Does he continue to call Brash extreme and divisive – and then scramble to explain why he’ll rort Epsom for such scum – or does he kick Tari and Pita in the guts and roll out the talkback and provincial editorial whores again, a la Orewa One? And would Garner and Espiner risk all over this issue? Not Garner, at least.

    I’m picking a Pontius Pilate act for a week or two. Then, if the ads keep coming, it’s call out those same whores, bye bye Don, and it’s Man Alone. An increasingly threadbare man. She sure does move in mysterious ways.

  9. Jim Nald 9
    9 July 2011 at 6:04 pm

    For a man who has been privileged throughout his career (thank you, taxpayers), he certainly sees rights overflowing in abundance and hidden in every corner for Maori, and even swimming merrily every morning in his porridge.

    On the best of days, he seems to put it beyond doubt about his onset of political dementia.
    On the worst of days, he seems to put on eager public display his political rigor mortis.

    I say to voters – reject his diet of envy and hatred on which he sustains himself and want so desperately to feed us.

  10. Tangled up in blue 10
    9 July 2011 at 6:38 pm

    It’s a big call, I know, but I’m pretty sure we’re seeing the end of the ACT party happening right before our eyes.

    I hope so.

    But this is assuming the that this anti-Maori stuff is enough to actually scare away ACT voters who are unhappy with the ads – and that this stunt won’t attract a big chunk of NZF’s support.

    • Puddleglum 10.1
      9 July 2011 at 8:15 pm

      I think there are probably considerably more than 5% of electors for whom this sentiment resonates.

      They’re actually getting a bit spoilt for choice at the moment, though, and it’s anybody’s guess where they’ll eventually cast their vote – ACT, National, NZF and aspects of Labour (for those more timidly inclined this way – e.g., ‘we won’t go with Hone’). It comes down to how important it is for each of them in the mix of other issues.

      I presume the ad campaign is an attempt to make it the most salient election issue by getting everyone talking about it and being polarised by it – and, of course, associating the ACT brand with it in a ‘leader of the pack’, ‘ownership’ role.

      The campaign certainly sharpens the issue for the Maori Party of whether or not it would support a government of which ACT was a part. 

      • McFlock 10.1.1
        9 July 2011 at 8:58 pm

        The ad sharpens nothing. Look, Orewa1 was hateful, but was pithy, to the point, and used small words so its audience could understand it.
        This is a shite ad rehashing the issues of yesterday – a bit like when Clark, in the 2008 election, said something like “don’t change a horse in mid  race”.
        Oh, and they need to pick up the brown-fearing blue-rinse brigade for Brash after alienating the deep blue straitjacket mob by nuking Hyde and Douglallies, all before the election.
         
        It’s a stretch, and they might not keep the backbone of a political party if they leave the House.
         

        • Puddleglum 10.1.1.1
          9 July 2011 at 10:50 pm

          The ads do sharpen the issue for the MP. Just like a pencil gets blunt over time, Orewa1 has become blurred and blunted by other political changes (e.g., the rise of John Key). This campaign takes the blunt pencil and sharpens it again and so raises it – again – as an issue for the MP.

          • McFlock 10.1.1.1.1
            10 July 2011 at 12:38 am

            Sorry, we’re talking the ACT ad linked to in the post?
            The one which makes the unabomber manifesto look like a banal postcard?
            They’ve got the worst combo – rabid paranoia that alienates much of the population, mixed with crap ad writing and design. If you’re going to market to morons, you need to remember that big blocks of text will scare most of them away.

            • Puddleglum 10.1.1.1.1.1
              10 July 2011 at 1:10 pm

              My comments weren’t about the quality, or otherwise, of the ad or its ability to appeal, or otherwise, to those who agree with its sentiment.

              My point was about the Maori Party having to consider whether or not they would, in the future, go into a coalition or support agreement in a government also supported by ACT – which has just re-affirmed, under its new leader, its intention to attack both the Maori Party and the ‘Maorification’ of New Zealand (whatever that means).

              I was implying that these ads presumably make it more difficult – in a political sense – for the Maori Party to support a National-ACT government. They could get away with it last time because (a) Don Brash (Mr Orewa) was not in ACT or National; and, (b) politics had ‘moved on’ to other concerns (e.g., Section 59, showerheads and that nice man Mr Key who will change politics as we know it).

              These ads show that ACT wants to reignite the ‘Maori are a privileged minority’ message for this coming election in a very overt way. Surely that can’t make it easier for the MP to support a government that ACT is involved in – at least in terms of the perceptions of its own supporters? 

              I don’t really understand why we seem to be arguing. I agree with you that the ad is woeful, the strategy is likely to backfire, etc.. (although the big bold headline is all most who are inclined to agree will need to see and, who knows, they might even feel that there must be many learned arguments supporting their prejudice by the fact that the big headline is followed by lots of text – even if they have no intention of reading it all. Who knows how the psychology works?)

              But, if ACT get in to parliament and National looks towards them for support, it does make the choices ‘complicated’ for the Maori Party.

  11. millsy 11
    9 July 2011 at 8:05 pm

    I wouldnt be writing ACT’s obituary just yet.

    If anything it could very well get stronger, and judging from the likely list, more radical. Don Brash, hardcore economic dry, John Banks – social conservative, backed up by the prickly b**** and Don Nicholson. I wouldnt be suprised if they signed up Lindsay Mitchell as well.

    I am actually very fearful of ACT, and where any sizeable influence they have would take this country.

    • Campbell Larsen 11.1
      9 July 2011 at 8:42 pm

      Nothing like a bit of humor to banish the bogeyman – watch these other RWNJ’s battle it out….

      http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=NZ#/watch?v=AFA-rOls8YA

      …..It quite a bit like the ACT party really, kind of sick, but still laughable : )

    • Deadly_NZ 11.2
      10 July 2011 at 2:41 pm

      Or maybe the people will look at that list and think WTF. “I am sick of raising the dead”. And to be honest their core people (their voters from 2008 ) must be looking at the way Bracula knifed old Rodders strait in the chest and sucked up his leadership, and think there has to be a better way. Yep could be they are gone.

  12. jackal 12
    9 July 2011 at 11:41 pm

    I think the main issue here is that a lot of the mainstream media isn’t willing to ask Act the hard questions that will “out” their true racist beliefs to a wider audience. One can only assume that Act’s advertisements and statements are somewhat subdued compared to what they truly believe.

    One contrast within Act’s message is that they say Maori’s are privileged while arguing that Maori’s disproportionately contribute to negative statistics such as higher incarceration rates and unemployment. It simply does not compute that if Maori are getting preferential treatment, they would disproportionately contribute to negative statistics. But rarely do bigots comprehend their own insanity.

    Act argue that measures should not be taken to help Maori while continuing to try to demonize the victims of colonization. It’s such an outdated and destructive meme that I’m having difficulty accepting that it exists at all in this day and age.

    If Act truly believed that we’re all equal Kiwi’s, they would not discriminate against a repressed minority, instead they would advocate for measures that ensure Maori attain the same opportunities and lifestyles most New Zealander’s enjoy thus reducing those negative statistics every Act Member can quote off by heart.

    I hope this time next year the issue wont even need to be debated. Going by Act’s current form, it seems I might be in luck… Especially considering some of the recent nail’s in Act’s coffin:

    ACT on Campus Auckland vice-president Cameron Wayne Browne tells Tania Lim to “Get raped.”

    Don Brash calls people working in government who uphold the RMA “Little Hitler’s.”

    David Garrett get’s a false passport by stealing a deceased babies identity.

    Muriel Newman says “The Maori grievance industry has gone too far and is now damaging the fabric of our society.”

    Cathy Odger’s writes “The heaving pathetic underclass do not seem to have any idea how to look after and better themselves let alone their kids.”

    • felix 12.1
      10 July 2011 at 12:57 am

      “It simply does not compute that if Maori are getting preferential treatment, they would disproportionately contribute to negative statistics.”

      Sure it does, if you believe that Polynesians are genetically inferior to Pakeha.

      Which is precisely what Brash and Odgers believe but are too chickenshit to say in public.

      • higherstandard 12.1.1
        10 July 2011 at 9:06 am

        “Sure it does, if you believe that Polynesians are genetically inferior to Pakeha.

        Which is precisely what Brash and Odgers believe but are too chickenshit to say in public.”

        Have you got a link for that ?

      • pollywog 12.1.2
        10 July 2011 at 2:31 pm

        Sure it does, if you believe that Polynesians are genetically inferior to Pakeha.

        Which is precisely what Brash and Odgers believe but are too chickenshit to say in public.

        The fear is what they know to be true and which they would never dare say in public.

        that we are in fact genetically superior. Bigger, faster, better, stronger and more cleverer too 🙂

        • Descendant Of Smith 12.1.2.1
          10 July 2011 at 2:46 pm

          Nah you share Neanderthal genes along with us whiteys and Asians – it’s only black Africans that are genetically superior and pure.

          I assume that came as quite a surprise to the KKK.

          • Colonial Viper 12.1.2.1.1
            10 July 2011 at 2:55 pm

            I thought pasifikans are very closely tied (genetically) with South East Asia?

            • Descendant Of Smith 12.1.2.1.1.1
              10 July 2011 at 2:58 pm

              That’s my understanding too.

              The Asians also share Neanderthal genes.

              • pollywog …
                10 July 2011 at 3:37 pm

                Fuck your purity bullshit. Where’s purity of “race” gotten my brothers of nubian persuasion ?

                Pasifikans are the ultimate hybrid. Next level evolution right here baby. 2 more generations and we’ll be running tings proper.

                Brash and Odgers are just the last gasp of a species facing extinction…the land raping white muthafucka.

                • Descendant Of Smith …
                  10 July 2011 at 4:11 pm

                  “Pasifikans are the ultimate hybrid.”

                  Best comment I’ve seen all week.

                • higherstandard …
                  10 July 2011 at 4:23 pm

                  Hate to ruin your party polly but although Polynesians enjoy great genetics when it comes to gaining muscle mass and bone density it’s a double edged sword which causes increased susceptibility to type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

                  Despite many races views that they are genetically and culturally gifted things tend to balance out – in another few thousand years unless things turn to complete cak our dscendants will all be a shade of coffee with a slight asiatic tinge I suspect…….. or they’ll all be super intelligent cyborgs who knows ?

                  • pollywog …
                    10 July 2011 at 5:40 pm

                    in another few thousand years unless things turn to complete cak our dscendants will all be a shade of coffee with a slight asiatic tinge …

                    So you’re saying in a few thousand years you’ll all be what Pasifikans already are. Shades of coffee with an asiatic tinge…like i said, y’all got some catching up to do.

                    We as a people, because we’re not a race as such, are evolution at the leading edge. We’ve assimilated most phenotypes into a truly superior hybrid of all “races”. Sure we had to suffer and sacrifice a lot to become next level humans, Homo Superior as it were, but what didn’t kill us made us stronger, more fit to survive that your brashs and odgers of the world.

                    🙂

                    [OK so you play a clever game here, running a fine line between maybe satire and maybe blatant racism. You’ve gotten away with it for a long time. I’ll make it clear and non-negotiable… this “Homo Superior” line you are running is nothing new. We know where it comes from and exactly where it leads to, and you may want consider carefully whether it any more mileage left to run here at The Standard….RL]

                    • pollywog …
                      10 July 2011 at 6:11 pm

                      OK so you play a clever game here, running a fine line between maybe satire and maybe blatant racism. You’ve gotten away with it for a long time. I’ll make it clear and non-negotiable… this “Homo Superior” line you are running is nothing new. We know where it comes from and exactly where it leads to, and you may want consider carefully whether it any more mileage left to run here at The Standard….RL

                      We’re not all born equal. Some of us are not just more equal than others, we’re better.One thing you should know, I don’t respond to threats very well, but i’ll rise to the challenge and i’m not too chickenshit to call it how i see it.

                      As long as theres a percieved sense of superiority coming from racist white muthafuckas there’ll be a counter coming from me. Fact is, fuckers like Ansell, Brash and Odgers have gotten away with it for a long time and i’m not your typical humble jolly poly with a misplaced turn the other cheek christian attitude to let it go on for any longer.

                      do what you gotta do…

                      [Sighs… two wrongs do not make a right. The bottom line here is that we do not tolerate blatant or sustained racism from anyone. And racism is not just something only white people can do. So exactly what do you expect me to do? …RL]

                    • pollywog …
                      11 July 2011 at 9:56 am

                      Sighs… two wrongs do not make a right.

                      How come it’s expected of Pasifikans to turn the other cheek and be better than our detractors and not say what i believe to be true. To, in NZ’s case, always be the humble aquiescent loyal british subjects who use the rule of colonial law to air grievances and express our frustrations and supposedly be grateful for the opportunity ?

                      So exactly what do you expect me to do? …RL]

                      martyr me for the sake of keeping order and to avoid the crux of the argument..

                      [Deliberate provocation deleted. You are now in moderation….RL]

  13. ropata 13
    10 July 2011 at 1:14 am

    Rogernomics, Ruthanasia, and Bankster Brashism constitute an ongoing attack on the working class, via privatisation, mass redundancies, destruction of collective bargaining, longer hours and harder work, higher productivity but lower wages, a yawning chasm between rich and poor, and the coup de grace: stealing the life savings of thousands of people via Finance company ripoffs.

    The Act party might not meet the legal definition of criminality but they are sociopaths nonetheless. The systematic stripping of the nation’s wealth and creation of a suffering underclass can be laid squarely at the feet of Douglas, Richardson and Brash and the evil ideology they serve.

    It’s time to consign their corrupt and self serving party to the dustbin of history.

    • ropata 13.1
      10 July 2011 at 1:22 am

      PS: Rodney Hide is a flawed and conflicted personality but he was a human face of the party. Now their true robotic nature is revealed

  14. Alice 14
    10 July 2011 at 2:00 am

    You say I am delusional, but sad fact is that is just your excuse – because you are scared.

    You are scared.

  15. Alice 15
    10 July 2011 at 2:02 am

    I see straight through you.

  16. Secret Squirrel 16
    10 July 2011 at 8:24 am

    Exit, stage right – Ansell?

    The statements from Ansell will inflame divisions emerging in the Act Party. Ansell has the ear of new leader Don Brash but deputy leader John Boscawen is facing claims of insurrection after questioning the
    direction of Ansell’s adverts.

    But last night, Brash distanced himself from Ansell’s “extreme statements”.

    From Act ad man blasts ‘apartheid’

    Act may be flying to bits, which isn’t surprising considering their upheavals this year.

  17. gnomic 17
    10 July 2011 at 9:48 am

    Perhaps veering slightly off topic, but I really hope all here are being nice and tolerant to the right wing nut jobs and trolls who happen to venture in. It seems the Standard is a notably oppressive environment for those who oppose the local orthodoxy.

    See comment in the Herald by one John Drinnan largely quoting some academic.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/john-drinnan/news/article.cfm?a_id=324&objectid=10737026

    ‘The left-wing blog The Standard, used for strategic public relations by the Labour Party, was a major offender and a victim of the trend to squash opposing views.’

    Please consider yourselves reprimanded, and try to play nicely in future. Perhaps a guest post from Cactus Kate?

    Or just ignore these fatuous ramblings from Nanny Granny and carry on as you were.

    • Colonial Viper 17.1
      10 July 2011 at 9:58 am

      Squashing opposing views is good fun. Especially if they are racially or sexually prejudiced views, decades past their use-by date and generally ignorant.

      Get used to it eh?

      IrishBill: give the tough talking a rest mate.

      • higherstandard 17.1.1
        10 July 2011 at 10:12 am

        Yes it’s really easy to smear and talk shite behind a pseudonym on a blog.

        [lprent: And your psuedonomyous point is? The blogs are there for expressing viewpoints. They are not there for contributing to the journal of record for prosperity. ]

        • higherstandard 17.1.1.1
          10 July 2011 at 11:21 am

          I was baiting loota

          [lprent: In a reply to CV on using debating styles and psuedonyms? Perhaps you should be less ‘subtle’ so this poor moderator can figure out what you were trying to talk about. ]

    • IrishBill 17.2
      10 July 2011 at 10:00 am

      Drinnan has a bee in his bonnet about the Standard being part of some Labour-controlled conspiracy. Frankly I find it a little offensive given the fact Labour are a bunch of amateurs but I suspect that he’s had some rightie (maybe Bill Ralston?) in his ear.

      It’s a shame as I like his work and it generally sucks to be run down by a journo you appreciate.

    • lprent 17.3
      10 July 2011 at 10:01 am

      I suspect that a academic popped in, started pontificating, and found out that there are people who knew as much if not more than he did on a topic – and who did not appreciate their ‘wisdom’. It is a bad approach to assume that who or what you are in real life counts for much in virtual spaces.

      You have to impress with what you say, that is how you earn respect. If you don’t make the effort, then you tend to attract derision…

      • gnomic 17.3.1
        10 July 2011 at 10:31 am

        Drinnan’s column often has something of interest, and he appears to be in the loop where media gossip is concerned. I wish he wouldn’t keep banging on and on and on about his opinion that the current Morning Report team are like unto dead sheep – enough already!

        Personally I have no objection to some debate around the articles here. What I do find tiresome is those who merely come here to recite ad nauseam their barely understood rightist/neolib talking points tending to disrupt any useful discussion that might be going on without making any useful contribution. Alas, I fear they probably don’t know who they are . . . .

  18. Secret Squirrel 18
    10 July 2011 at 10:06 am

    Brash Act now self An(sell)nihilates?

    With the Maori splits and NZ First looking decidedly cobwebby the major parties need some central stability, and the voters need a party that will limit and balance large party power.

    Unite and build, stage centre?

    • felix 18.1
      10 July 2011 at 10:18 am

      Green Party: 6.72% = “niche party”

      United Future: 0.87% = “strong non-ideological common sense centre party”

      What a fascinating mind you have.

      • Secret Squirrel 18.1.1
        10 July 2011 at 10:24 am

        That’s just current percentages. United Future have had similar levels of support as Greens in the past, and there’s not reason it can’t happen again, especially in the current vacuum of options. With the right mix it wouldn’t be hard to build again.

        The Greens are trying to position themselves as a more centre-ish general party but they are stuck with their radical tinges and green focus, they will have difficulty leaving that behind.

        • felix 18.1.1.1
          10 July 2011 at 10:47 am

          Yep, in 2002 they even managed to cross the 5% threshold. Pretty sure that was the only time though.

          What’s your definition of “niche”?

          Or “radical”?

          ‘Cos however you look at the numbers, in every election (apart from 2002 when they were roughly equal) The Greens have attracted the support of far more New Zealanders than UF.

          If they’re “niche” then UF is a much smaller and more narrowly focussed niche.

          If they’re “radical” then UF is ultra-radical.

  19. Pascal's bookie 19
    10 July 2011 at 11:39 am

    That KB thread is hilarious, if you’ve the stomach for it.

    What a pack of misanthropes.

    The voters are stupid morons when they are not cowardly race traitors asking to be raped. ACT is the great white hope, except it’s all just a circuit breaker see; this is just to get the people’s attention and then ACT will start explaining their economic policy see, which everyone agrees is their strong point. And then, when people hear that policy, this time they’ll fall in, because no one knows what ACT’s economic policies are and they haven’t repeatedly rejected and laughed at and recoiled in horror from them at all, in spite of what your lying eyes, the media, the polls, and elections might have you believe.

    Yessirree, this is just a bit of theatre, this racist stuff; just a wee bit of kabuki play to get the sickly white race traitors up in arms, and it’s working see. Next stop, twenty percent in polls and glory. And if it doesn’t, it’s because they were stabbed in the back by the elitist effete emmessemm who would give away your birthright to the Maaaaaris who lost it fair and square and they should be thankful, but are they? Are they fuck. They just want to eat your eyeballs.

    To be fair there are some islands of sanity in the morass. Like Big Bruv for example. Oh no hang on, he’s four square behind this and happy’er ‘n a ferrit in a chicken nursery. Paul East Bay though, gets it not batshit insane when he speaks:

    If talking about eating eyeballs is what ACT has become, they are fucked.

    least I think it was him. I’m relying on memory and have no great desire to rewade into the mire. Paul East Bay is making some sense in that thread. Fat lot of good it’s doing him though. They don’t want his vote, Quisling. Race traitor, etc.

    Nice friends national has. One must say.

  20. MikeG 20
    10 July 2011 at 1:28 pm

    Breaking news: Ansell – Gone by this lunchtime.

    • weka 20.1
      10 July 2011 at 2:06 pm

      He said Prime Minister John Key and Attorney-General Chris Finlayson were “grade-A idiots” but he admired the Maori Party for taking advantage of them. “When the white man opens the door and says come in and rape us, of course, if you’ve got any sort of business like sense you’ll go for whatever you can get.”

       
       
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10737507

       
       
      ACT will not succeed until it champions the latter and tells the dishonest others to go to Hell.
      In short, their catchment is men and women who think like men. Not men and women who think like women. ACT is the party of the strong father, not the soft mother.
      (By strong father I include strong women like Rand, Richardson and Thatcher, and by soft mother I include weak men like Key.)
      I hope you people will think about that.

      http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/07/acts_new_ad.html#comment-850171
       
      Are there any women that actually vote for ACT?

  21. Secret Squirrel 21
    10 July 2011 at 2:46 pm

    Exit, hard right.

    IrishBill: It’s a big call, I know, but I’m pretty sure we’re seeing the end of the ACT party happening right before our eyes.

    How did you know what would happen today?

  22. Billy Fish 22
    10 July 2011 at 10:42 pm

    Politics of Envy?
    I’m bored with that. Can we pick another of the 7 deadly sins?
    So which party is the Politics of Gluttony?
    And who has the Politics of Lust?

  23. Reality Bytes 23
    17 July 2011 at 7:49 pm

    re: My unresponded legitimate questions to Cactus Kate that others no doubt are asking.

    I find your failure to respond to my friendly legitimate questions to be very telling about the future of your party.

    On the balance, based on your lackluster attitude and concern about legitimate issues, I sadly will probably not be giving Act my party vote this year.

    Having not received any form of reasonable response and explanation to my simple concerns about your parties policy, I am sadly unable to support nor promote your agenda.

    Seriously, lol, do you guys actually want to get in this election or have you simply just given up?

    If you are unwilling to address basic concerns and issues to win over fence sitters, what is your goals, to simply steal a few votes from the Nats?

    You are doing nothing to win over slightly lefty pragmatists. Act used to hold my respect for being pragmatic, but as of late I don’t even see that pragmatism in Act anymore.

    Ironically I know and like Act party MPs personally too, but am sad about how they have wasted their relevance.

    Kind Regards.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.