Nat censorship

40 comments on “Nat censorship ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Sam Dixon 1

   16 October 2007 at 2:19 pm

   That poster really does show them to be scum at every level of the message doesn’t it?
2. Robert Owen 2

   16 October 2007 at 2:59 pm

   Should make A National / Maori Co
   alition difficult to achieve
3. Robinsod 3

   16 October 2007 at 3:08 pm

   Yeah Robert, you’d think so but unfortunately Tariana seems determined to entertain the prospect if only to have a stick to beat Labour with. What did they do to her to make her so angry?
4. Nih 4

   16 October 2007 at 3:19 pm

   I honestly haven’t seen a Maori MP who isn’t primarily interested in what they can get from the job rather than what they can give.

   A National alliance would be perfect for them.
5. Sam Dixon 5

   16 October 2007 at 3:54 pm

   Nih – Hone’s a good sort.
6. Pascal's bookie 6

   16 October 2007 at 4:10 pm

   I was thinking about those posters when reading the thread-jumping debate you have been having with burt on education.

   Now how did the education version of this poster go? I seem to remember coming away from it with an amazing warm feeling in my tingly parts due to the obvious love that the national party has for the concerns of teachers.

   oh no, that’s wrong.

   That’s right, I thought ‘What a pack of wankers’.

   loving your blog, but try and get some better trolls. You’re just pwning these ones for laughs.
7. Nih 7

   16 October 2007 at 4:12 pm

   Nih – Hone’s a good sort.

   My best friend when I was a kid was named Hone. Still, I know of too many Hones. Which Hone are you referring to?
8. Robert Owen 8

   16 October 2007 at 4:30 pm

   Give them Maori affairs ministry and promise to review Foreshore and seabed. The greens would be supportive
   Helen is the master at tying coalitions together
   What would National do ?

   one gets the impression key couldn’t tie his shoes without an advisor
9. illuminatedtiger 9

   16 October 2007 at 5:13 pm

   To: me
   subject RE: John Key
   Duly noted.

   To: Francis Till
   Subject: John Key

   Hi there,
   I saw your email to the administrators of The Standard. This is just a quick email to let you know that I support the guys at The Standard and will be using the modified images of John Key on my own sites/email lists. Time for you kiddies to stop being such hypocrites!
   Regards
10. Nih 10

    16 October 2007 at 5:24 pm

    Zing!
11. Billy 11

    16 October 2007 at 6:21 pm

    Echo, echo, echo.
12. Icky Stinky 12

    16 October 2007 at 6:43 pm

    Get a life, Billy.
13. burt 13

    16 October 2007 at 7:28 pm

    Hey who is that woman on the left of the National billboard ?

    Is that Helen’s mother or her older sister ? Nothing like the Helen we normally see on billboards so I can’t see how there could possibly be a authorisation issue. 🙂
14. Santa Claws 14

    16 October 2007 at 7:54 pm

    Wow, more self-referential back slapping going on I see. So, how does it go…

    Step 1 – Base Instinct posts a cuttingly witty hack at JK

    Step 2 – Sammy gets an RSS “Ooh look, a new post at thestupid. I must rush over and post a lovely supportive comment right away, or Base Instinct will get bored with refreshing the screen to see if any comments have arrived”

    Step 3 – After that bit of excitement Sammy has to take a loo break

    Step 4 – Sammy logs in as Robert0 and deliberately posts an incoherent comment so that ‘dear reader’ won’t suspect that they are the same person.

    Step 5 – Sammy txts Robespierre coz his responses are looking lonely.

    Step 6 – Robespierre takes a break from ‘enjoying’ his favourite picture of little Jimmy to make a follow posts.

    Rinse, lather, repeat.

    Unfortunately boyz, you are not convincing anyone. How about posting some pics of the pledge card, and wondering where the funding for that came from eh? .. eh?

    Of course Helen’s going to have a few billion more of ‘govenment’ advertising around next year isn’t she…What a bonus!

    BTW its a shame that such a bastion of NZ thought (and presumably US-hating like the rest of the Labour coven) can’t organize an NZ (or even UK) spellcheck!
15. Inventory2 15

    16 October 2007 at 8:02 pm

    burt – it’s certainly not Helen of Pledge Card fame!
16. Nih 16

    16 October 2007 at 8:02 pm

    God you’re boring.

    Also, get your faglingo right. It’s “boiz”. Do try to be less rural.
17. The Sprout 17

    16 October 2007 at 8:12 pm

    “Do try to be less rural”

    nice one Nih
18. George 18

    16 October 2007 at 8:29 pm

    Well I suppose the GST that national has conveniently forgotten will in time come up again,And didn’t national also get it “wrong when they also overspent during the election(what you say We didn’t do that did we?yep and what of the poster campaign we will see so National can spend all of their Brethren(or should I say PPP Partners) money before the election year starts.
19. Sam Dixon 19

    16 October 2007 at 9:55 pm

    Inv2, Burt – This new ‘those pics of Clark are so photoshopped that its not even her so one wouldn’t need authorisation to use them’ meme all the tories are picking up: I love it guys!

    When the going gets tough there’s always Clark’s looks or the fact that she doesn’t have children to have a crack at. The tories, top sorts.

    And, of course, you don’t need her authorisation anyway, that’s the point, just like The Standard doesn’t need Francis Till’s authorisation.
20. Sam Dixon 20

    16 October 2007 at 9:57 pm

    Santa – is Sammy me? I have to confess, I don’t get RSSs, haven’t got onto it yet. So last year I know.
21. burt 21

    16 October 2007 at 9:59 pm

    George

    Well I suppose the GST that national has conveniently forgotten will in time come up again,And didn’t national also get it “wrong when they also overspent during the election(what you say We didn’t do that did we?yep and what of the poster campaign we will see so National can spend all of their Brethren(or should I say PPP Partners) money before the election year starts.

    Get with the program George, the EFB sorts out the EB bit and Labour retrospectively validated the GST bit for National.
22. the bean 22

    16 October 2007 at 10:00 pm

    now i am all for quirky little phrases so am most intrigued by this ‘zinging’ that is going on. i get the gist of the ‘zing’…especially after it was proffered to sporuty’s “dpf has a voice for blogging” comment (which incidentally nearly killed me, that sprout should really be writing my dialogue or at least that painful facelift show) but what is the origin of the ‘zing’. where does the ‘zing’ come from?
23. the bean 23

    16 October 2007 at 10:07 pm

    ooo did i just hijack a thread? OFF TOPIC BEAN hissed headmaster dastardly dave REPORT TO ONE OF MY ‘ACCIDENTLY MIDDLE OF THE ROAD WHILST AT THE SAME TIME REPRESENTING SAFE LIBERAL MINORITY’ MODERATORS IMMEDIATELY…

    actually i heard rumours key is considering hiring daves gaggle of moderators to ensure he doesn’t make anymore offensive comments. you know…those ones he made about that war thingy and money you pay the doc etc

    also apparently some of key’s best friend are gay, and maori and live in state houses…with women (oh you don’t like women…oh you don’t like gay men living with women. well did i say women? i meant furry animals.)
24. Nih 24

    16 October 2007 at 11:10 pm

    i meant furry animals.

    That’s still not gay, unless you’re talking about Brash. That man has more hair coming out of his ears and nostrils than he does his head.
25. George 25

    17 October 2007 at 7:09 am

    Burt.Sorry but you missed the point.
    GST has nothing to do with the retrospective legislation.
    It is a tax matter not an electoral one.
    Also the EFB when or if passed will only apply to the election Year.Nationals ads will I have no doubt be run before this time so that they can spend their Ill gotten money to try to BUY the election.
    And finally the real question was about weather National can take the High ground based on they also had to pay back money as regards to their electioneering.
    This is a party who make believe that they have the answer’s when it comes to understanding the finance benches.
26. Graeme Edgeler 26

    17 October 2007 at 10:37 am

    “Burt.Sorry but you missed the point.
    GST has nothing to do with the retrospective legislation.
    It is a tax matter not an electoral one.”

    Partly true.

    GST did have nothing to do with the retrospective legislation. However it is not a tax matter. It is a debt matter.

    GST is paid by the seller to the Government. In this case by the broadcasters. They will have paid the GST, no GST is outstanding.

    National’s problem is/was that they hadn’t paid their debts. They arranged for $1m of advertising and paid $900k for it.
27. Sam Dixon 27

    17 October 2007 at 11:16 am

    Graeme – do you know if the broadcasters just forgave National’s debt to them, and if so how does that sit in terms of electoral fiance law?

    If, (if), that’s the case, there’s a transfer of wealth from the broadcasters to National. Presumably, that has to be counted as a doantion, and reported if over $10,000.
28. Santa Claws 28

    17 October 2007 at 12:37 pm

    Hey Sambo

    Perhaps you’d like to review these before beating off over the poor old Nats
    http://www.oag.govt.nz/2006/election-spending/
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2006/05/summary_of_the_case.html

    Remember dat?
29. Santa Clawz 29

    17 October 2007 at 12:48 pm

    Moderation eh?
30. Santa Claws 30

    17 October 2007 at 12:58 pm

    Sambo

    Remember this, for the paragons of virtue on the ninth floor?
    http://www.oag.govt.nz/2006/election-spending/

    or this?

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2006/05/summary_of_the_case.html

    For the conclusion to the saga see this

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0611/S00421.htm

    And for the expected ‘calm discussion’
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2006/11/gst_donated_to_charity.html

    Sant-a
31. Nih 31

    17 October 2007 at 1:03 pm

    I’d be surprised if you ever showed any moderation, fattie.
32. Santa Clawz 32

    17 October 2007 at 1:23 pm

    Oops, you are letting your calm discussion standards slip there Nil.
33. Nih 33

    17 October 2007 at 1:27 pm

    You’re not very jolly.
34. Sam Dixon 34

    17 October 2007 at 2:32 pm

    santa, I’m well aware of Labour’s overspend. I’m asking about National’s. I forgot they had done that shifty trick with the charities (wonder which they were incidentally), effectively it was the broadcasters donating to the charities of course – they were the ones who got an asset (the money National owed them) wiped off their books.
35. ahod 35

    17 October 2007 at 4:16 pm

    A blog about National party censorship posted today:
    http://www.publicaddress.net/cracker
36. Robert Owen 36

    17 October 2007 at 10:58 pm

    Current Demerits:
    Dad4Justice – 35 (15/10/07) and 20 (15/10/07) and 20 (16/10/07) and 50 (17/10/07) = 125
    Redbaiter – 35 (15/0/07)
    Current Suspensions:
    Robinson/Robinsod (until 1 November)
    Robert Owen (indefinite – for grossly abusive vitriol towards the blog owner)
    Dad4Justice (1 week until 25 October 2007)
    I appear to be worse then Redbaiter and D4J
37. JamesK 37

    17 October 2007 at 11:05 pm

    What exactly did you say that got Farrar so wound up?
38. Nih 38

    17 October 2007 at 11:37 pm

    What I want to know is, what month is at 0 and how did redbaiter get into it? Tricky nazis and their unholy science.
39. Robert Owen 39

    17 October 2007 at 11:39 pm

    I don’t really Know
    I did say his Satire was pathetic but that is hardly indefinite ban stuff . I will email him and find out
40. Robert Owen 40

    17 October 2007 at 11:53 pm

    At least he is in “o” I have been cast out

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS