Pathetic

37 comments on “Pathetic ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Blar 1

   3 August 2008 at 8:50 pm

   That’s a pretty bizarre reading of the law Steve – it sounds almost as if you are blessing the election advertisements and then displaying them without printed authorisation.
2. gobsmacked 2

   3 August 2008 at 8:53 pm

   The English-gate tape, as revealed on TV3 news tonight, is now up on the Scoop website. Not just talking about Kiwibank, but Working for Families too.

   (I would provide the link but then I’d just get stuck in moderation, which is frankly irritating)
3. mawgxxxxiv 3

   3 August 2008 at 8:58 pm

   Wrong blog: it’s on whaleoil.

   [lprent: Who would bother reading the technical idiot with a bloated ego and a legal problem?
   Well, you by the sound of it.
   The referred link is http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/08/efa_strikes_again.html ]
4. barnsleybill 4

   3 August 2008 at 9:10 pm

   The rich irony of you having too (if you are not just bullshitting) jump through hoops to protest or proselytize legally is brilliant. Your stupid bloody law has made a monkey of you and many others.
5. Quoth the Raven 5

   3 August 2008 at 9:16 pm

   Here’s the link. Sounds like english is admitting that keeping WfF is just electioneering and it will go. English says “We just have one guy with a spreadsheet” I guess we already knew National doesn’t do any analysis, this just confirms it.
6. dad4justice 6

   3 August 2008 at 9:25 pm

   I suppose calling Farrar pathetic is a standard response from a motley crew of paid bloggers with nothing better to do than sling shit trying to protect one of the few remaining taboos of modern socialism which is, attempting to silence criticism.

   [lprent:
   1. No-one is paid to blog here – read the About. We all think that there are better things we could do personally. This is more trying to do things right for everyone.
   2. I think that the point of the post is that Farrar seems to want to shut down all dissent about National. He seemed to make a good attempt on trying to suppress “free speech” for the EMPU from memory.
   3. If I get you correctly, I think you said that The National Party is something to do with modern socialism – yeah right.
   ]
7. Mark 7

   3 August 2008 at 9:26 pm

   “No promoter may, during a regulated period, publish, or cause or permit to be published, any election advertisement unless…the advertisement contains a statement that sets out the name and address of the promoter of the advertisement…”;
   Recording your name and address on film before electioneering in a public place does not comply with section 63(2)(a).
   I think the Commission are going to have to look very carefully at this one.
8. MikeE 8

   3 August 2008 at 9:40 pm

   You cheerleeded this law…

   the irony is… well… ironic..
9. gobsmacked 9

   3 August 2008 at 9:41 pm

   Funnily enough the news bulletins and the talkback now are all about Kiwibank and Bill English, rather than some protesting blogger nobody’s heard of.

   And we thought Key was the gaffe-prone one … but even he never dropped a clanger like Bill’s beauty. Looking forward to the coverage tomorrow!
10. killinginthenameof 10

    3 August 2008 at 9:43 pm

    “barnsleybill
    August 3, 2008 at 9:10 pm
    The rich irony of you having too (if you are not just bullshitting) jump through hoops to protest or proselytize legally is brilliant. Your stupid bloody law has made a monkey of you and many others.
    “

    Stop your posturing, every single time Farrar or any one of you liars and thieves try and make a scene about this law you’ve been shown how wrong you have been all along. You lot are just desperate to try and pretend any one on the right has a speck and decency. You are a complete embarrassment, you should shut up now before you make any more of your cause.
11. Inventory2 11

    3 August 2008 at 9:50 pm

    Just for the record, here is Farrar’s post about the EFA

    “EFA strikes again
    August 3rd, 2008 at 4:00 pm

    As not everyone in the room was a party member, it was noticeable that most of the powerpoint presentations had authorisation statements on them, and even the walk in video for John Key finished with an authorisation statement showing some poor bloke’s home address.

    Amusingly the placards of the half dozen protesters lacked authorisation statements 🙂
    Tags: Electoral Finance Act, National

    Posted in NZ Politics ”

    Doesn’t seem to be “whining” to me. He hasn’t responded to any of the commenters yet, so I don’t think he can be accused of “shut down dissent” (lprent). I think you’re dealing in hyperbole again “Steve”, and seeing shadows where there aren’t any. Little wonder another leftie was so dismissive of you guys the other day – you are becoming so paranoid, you’re losing your objectivity.
12. Paul 12

    3 August 2008 at 10:04 pm

    So we’ve heard it from the horse’s mouth, Kiwibank gone. Perhaps not this year, or even next year, but it’s gone under National.

    One good bank (whops the best), which makes money, and provides the best services for the people and the dirty stinking corporate overlords whom control the boys and girls of National want it gone.

    Watch out Kiwisaver, Kiwi Rail, ACC.

    Anything that is for and by the people will be gone.

    Don’t get me started on MMP. Yeah we all long for the good old days when parliament was filled to the brim with white middle class middle aged men. That’s when parliament reflected the face of society.
13. gobsmacked 13

    3 August 2008 at 10:09 pm

    They just played the Bill English tape on Newstalk ZB. In full.

    Oh dear. And the conference had gone so well …
14. Steve Pierson 14

    3 August 2008 at 10:11 pm

    I see no reason why a group that is electioneering shouldn’t have to identiy themselves, they’re trying to change other people’s votes. So, in our election advert today, I authorised it in my name.

    There’s no reason every single piece in an ad should be authorised.

    And it’s pretty hypocritical that people who opposed the law, on the supposed grounds it prevent political speech, and don’t comply with that law should try to use it to shut down political speech that they oppose.
15. Paul 15

    3 August 2008 at 10:15 pm

    Ah the stench of Dad4insanity.

    Banned from Kiwiblog, it seems that he’ll venture into the pure waters of the left looking to moan at anyone and everyone.

    BTW there is no greater way to silence criticism than to look at removing MMP and the voice of the people, but we’d hate to be picky.
16. r0b 16

    3 August 2008 at 10:15 pm

    So we’ve heard it from the horse’s mouth, Kiwibank gone. Perhaps not this year, or even next year, but it’s gone under National

    This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. It is obvious that the Nats will say anything to get elected and then do as they please.

    However, the fact that in this particular case the real agenda is right there on audio is a significant development. Plausible deniability is gone.

    NZ owes thanks to the source of this audio. If it gets decent media coverage, and the Nats take the election anyway, well then we pretty much deserve what they will do to us…
17. Steve Pierson 17

    3 August 2008 at 10:22 pm

    jesus. that audio is damning. He says they ‘sort out’ working for families, says John Key didn’t understand the basic fact that if you have a tax credit like working for families, you’re going to need a high abatement rate, shows the whole Key facade for what it is – ‘that nice Mr Key’, and on top of all that says they’ll sell Kiwibank.

    … Inv2, treat your audience with respect, we all know that farrar made his post in an attempt to smear us… it’s the same reason he said there were half a dozen of us when there were fifteen (not counting the ACT protest)… farrar didn’t even see the protest, he’s just being a pathetic opportunist.
18. Paul Williams 18

    3 August 2008 at 11:36 pm

    Ouch. Clunk. Mask slips. Woulda done Working for Families, will sell Kiwibank… worry about inflationary effects of Key’s tax cuts…
19. Paul 19

    3 August 2008 at 11:38 pm

    Has anyone got the audio of that yet? What time was it broadcast, I’ll try and get it from their site. I’d love to hear “the truth”.

    Come on, don’t tell me the people aren’t going to like that “nice Mr Key” any more.

    I loved the $50 in the week tax cut has been widdled down to “well we’re looking at our total package and reveal in good time” line. So it’s not going to be the $50 a week bribe you’ve been lying to the people with.

    I wouldn’t mind them being so openly right, if there was an ounce of truth to anything they said. At least you’d know what you’d be getting, with this lot you have no idea if we don’t see “For Sale, one small Pacific Nation” on Trade Me soon, “all enquiries J Key” come the boxing day sales.

    Tossers
20. alex 20

    4 August 2008 at 12:20 am

    Can someone please paste a complete transcript of this conversation?
21. chris 21

    4 August 2008 at 12:24 am

    Direct link to the audio.

    http://img.scoop.co.nz/media/audio/0808/english1.m3u
22. dad4justice 22

    4 August 2008 at 6:28 am

    Paul – why don’t you comment on kiwiblog anymore you knuckle dragging sod monkey?I couldn’t give a shit about kiwiblog.
    Get a life you sad loser!!
23. dad4justice 23

    4 August 2008 at 6:43 am

    My apologies sod monkey Paul, I see you have commented twice at Kiwiblog on the “EFA stikes again”thread for a pathetic minus thirty karma count.
    On the weekend I asked 1000 people in the suburb of Linwood if they would vote Labour and NO ONE said they would. I can see why a drop kick turd eater like yourself has a blog called “Concerned of Linwood.”
24. Ari 24

    4 August 2008 at 7:31 am

    Paul – why don’t you comment on kiwiblog anymore you knuckle dragging sod monkey?I couldn’t give a shit about kiwiblog.
    Get a life you sad loser!!

    Do you guys REALLY want to put up with this sort of ridiculous name-calling? For once, I’d really like to see D4J say something without resorting to nasty words or personal attacks.

    Then again, I’d also like to see the National Party be upfront about its agenda, and we all know the likelyhood of that.
25. Inventory2 25

    4 August 2008 at 8:22 am

    “Steve Pierson” said ” Inv2, treat your audience with respect, we all know that farrar made his post in an attempt to smear us it’s the same reason he said there were half a dozen of us when there were fifteen (not counting the ACT protest) farrar didn’t even see the protest, he’s just being a pathetic opportunist.”

    Pots and kettles “Steve”, pots and kettles. Perhaps as well as being paranoid, you’re paranormal, if you can read a smear into a straightforward post. And I’m sure that Robinsod would remind you that “farrar” is a proper name, and should have a capital “F”.

    Meanwhile, if you think I’m being disrespectful to your “audience”, just say the word, and I’ll politely withdraw and leave The Standard to preach to the converted. Mind you, at the rate that you guys have been banning people lately….

    PS – Captcha = things sinking – wow, you can read a whole lot into that eh!
26. randal 26

    4 August 2008 at 10:20 am

    farrar is a fool with a capital “F” and you sir are a fool with no qualification whatsoever. pull your socks up and get some tighter underpnts.
27. RedLogix 27

    4 August 2008 at 10:26 am

    Inv2,

    Sorry. You guys have d4j… we apparently have randal. (And thanks but no thanks, I don’t think we would consider a swap.)
28. randal 28

    4 August 2008 at 10:32 am

    I hardly think I am in the same category as a an oversexed undersized midget who is also a fullsize cretin with largescale coprophagic whipping and beating fantasies to console himself with.

    [lprent: That looks over the top to me. Calm down. ]
29. Jasper 29

    4 August 2008 at 11:22 am

    Nationals two page bullet points on their Policy is now under review at the EC and is quite likely going to result in National having breached the EFA.

    Thats what I call egg on their face.
30. Phil 30

    4 August 2008 at 12:29 pm

    “oversexed undersized midget who is also a fullsize cretin ”

    Thats GOLD!
31. randal 31

    4 August 2008 at 3:14 pm

    hi lprent…no just normal…if ya dont beleive me then hang around here for some candy coloured tangerine streamline flake babybee!!!
32. Jane 32

    4 August 2008 at 5:01 pm

    you guys undermine your credibility with all the personal attacks aimed at demonising Farrar. Its boring, and pathetic. I am a Labour voter but after reading a comment by Lynn Prentice on another mostly-leftie blog (Dim Post) I am pretty disenchanted with The Standard and probably won’t read it anymore. I think you guys should be doing more to win people like me (unaffiliated blog readers) over.. but you are doing the opposite. Although, I know the right aren’t nicey poos either but I am yet to read anything truely nasty written by Farrar himself.
    And yeah I’m sure none of you give a shit what I think.

    [lprent: I’m just not a nice person. In the case of the dim-post (or any other site), if they attack me then they will frequently get a taste of my tongue back. I presume that you have passed the same message to the idiot who wrote the attack on my site?

    As for the other parts of it. People come here to pick up information and discussion. There is reasonably intensive moderation to ensure that the comments section doesn’t become a cesspool. The site isn’t here to ‘win’ people. It is specifically here to allow discussion between people that are often never going to agree. The moderation is there to ensure that the discussion doesn’t get drowned out by the lowest common denominator.

    Now I think I’ll have a look at who this pseudonym is likely to be. It sounds bit like a troll]
33. Jane 33

    6 August 2008 at 12:04 am

    Tit for tat never gets anyone anywhere, and if you spend all your time biting back at your detractors then you have no time to do anything good. It just elevates you above everyone else, so people who are relatively new to the blogosphere get a balanced idea of what you are saying, not petty bitchfights. I’m not saying petty bitchfights don’t go on elsewhere, but, as it is the example du jour, Farrar doesn’t start them/continue them- whereas you take pride in perpetuating them.

    I just think your attitude kinda stinks lynn.

    Have a look if you like, I’m seriously not a troll. Just a Labour voter who is in two minds this election who has recently discovered blogs. Don’t be so paranoid!!!!! 🙂

    That just proves Danyl’s point. Because I said some things you don’t like, suddenly I am probably a troll… hmm. I mean this in the nicest possible way, but you really need to grow up!
34. Jane 34

    6 August 2008 at 12:07 am

    Sorry ‘it’ at the beginnig of the second sentence means- not biting at people who have a dislike of your site. I’m tired.
35. Steve Pierson 35

    6 August 2008 at 12:17 am

    Well, Jane, thanks for visiting. I know Lynn’s a bit of a grump sometime but he’s also a damn fine moderator and techie. Without him our threads would look like the disgusting stuff one sees on Farrar or Whaleoil’s site. Yes Lynn has to ban people sometimes, and yes he operates a tight ship but you will notice most of our commentators are actually from the Right (the blogosphere is mostly rightwing) and we have robust and intelligent debates… something that can’t be said for sites where there is no moderation and every thread rapidly turns into personal abuse (as did ours until Lynn put a stop to it)

    As for the topic of this post, as you can see by looking at the surrounding posts, we usually avoid commenting on posts by blogs like farrar’s because frankly they’re irrelevant to the wider political discourse and I would rather talk about wages or parties policies. However Farrar’s post just got my goat because he’ll do anything to try to shut down voices of people he doesn’t agree with, yet he has the cheek to call himself a free speech campaigner. He constantly attacks me and my fellow Standardistas, yet every time, every time, his facts are wrong.
36. Joely Doe 36

    9 October 2008 at 11:40 pm

    Pity the Electoral Commission did not agree with your assessment of the Authorisation Statements.

    [the EC found I had not breached the EFA. I won, National’s pornographer lost, eat that. SP]
37. Joely Doe 37

    10 October 2008 at 9:42 am

    “..eat that”? Pathetic is right (or Left, as the case may be). “Pity the EC did not agree with your assessment of the Authorisation Statements.” I notice you did not argue that point. You did not ‘willfully’ break the provisions of the EFA. Ignorance of the law must be a wonderful thing. Try doing it again, if as you say, you won.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS