Poor Tory Farrar

Written By: - Date published: 6:55 am, March 1st, 2017 - 62 comments
Categories: blogs, David Farrar, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags: , ,

I know everyone is bored with blog wars, but this hypocritical Tory twit is just too funny –

https://twitter.com/gj_robins/status/836411204486619136

https://twitter.com/gj_robins/status/836433401066491904

62 comments on “Poor Tory Farrar ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. David C 1
    1 March 2017 at 8:13 am

    I suppose when Andrew Little languishes at 7% and 3rd you need to fill the pages with…look, a squirrel… !

  2. Robert Guyton 2
    1 March 2017 at 8:31 am

    2% Key. Look, a weasel…!

    • greywarshark 2.1
      1 March 2017 at 10:43 am

      Robert G
      😀

    • Sam C 2.2
      1 March 2017 at 11:08 am

      Except Key isn’t running for PM in September. Quite a big difference.

      • Robert Guyton 2.2.1
        1 March 2017 at 11:45 am

        Running though…

      • reason 2.2.2
        1 March 2017 at 3:20 pm

        Yes Sam ….. …. Key Did a runner

        … ‘Johnny ‘made-off’

        Gone back to the profitable work of tax havens/cheating ? ……

        Instead of drafting & implementing corrupt laws enabling them …..

        What was the date Key our Tory cowboy turned NZ into an official Tax haven Sam ??? ..,.. our media forgot to mention it at the time.

        When will English our Tory catholic fix this grubby Economic Apartheid ???

        Or do Tory Christians believe greed and cheating are a virtue ????

  3. srylands 3
    1 March 2017 at 8:33 am

    Attacking a respected and sensible political commentator for stating the obvious will get you nowhere. The term “tory” has no resonance with mainstream New Zealanders. Family men who are fit and good keen travel writers will always have the edge.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 3.1
      1 March 2017 at 8:41 am

      Attacking the Dominion Post for stating the obvious will get Farrar nowhere, although there might be mischievous speculation as to what put his precious princess nose so far out of joint.

    • McFlock 3.2
      1 March 2017 at 11:49 am

      yes, yes, that’s right. Keep telling us that the word which has just been used in the editorial of a major newspaper isn’t mainstream. We’ll believe you.

      At least now you can’t claim the word is “unheard of”.

  4. Robert Guyton 4
    1 March 2017 at 8:43 am

    No one should attack a respected and sensible political commentator, but Farrar’s fair game.

  5. HDCAFriendlyTroll 5
    1 March 2017 at 9:18 am

    Depends if the Dominion Post is left wing or right wing.

    If they are right wing then the use of the term “tory” isn’t intended to be derogatory.

    If they are left wing then the use of the term “tory” is intended to be derogatory.

    Logic.

  6. Psycho Milt 6
    1 March 2017 at 10:04 am

    I just wish he’d learn how to use “whom” correctly if he’s determined to use it. He gets it wrong every time.

  7. tc 7
    1 March 2017 at 11:13 am

    DPF always has an agenda probably supplied to him being the well rewarded model little nact puppet he is.

    This will be a first salvo probably along the diffuse/distract category.

    He’ll be a busy boy this year with the manchild blubber boy waaaay to unstable/collins aligned.

  8. Bob 8
    1 March 2017 at 12:12 pm

    Natwatch, you seem to have missed this link: https://twitter.com/FoxyLustyGrover/status/836432927130968064/photo/1

    Are you suggesting David Farrar is:
    a) A member or supporter of the UK Conservative Party
    or
    b) A colonist who supported the British side during the war of American Independance
    or
    c) You don’t understand the word and just use it to describe someone you don’t share political views with, like a typical commie would?

    • Natwatch 8.1
      1 March 2017 at 12:42 pm

      a

      Thanks for asking!

      • Bob 8.1.1
        1 March 2017 at 1:10 pm

        Huh, I couldn’t find a link to the Dom Post editorial Farrar was referring too, I clearly shouldn’t assume as I thought it must have been relating to a NZ politician which is why he tweeted about it. If I had known it was relating to a UK politician I would have joined the queue of those mocking him!

    • adam 8.2
      1 March 2017 at 12:55 pm

      Funny how sensitive all the Tory fluff bunnies get when you call a spade, a spade. Poor poppets – must be so hard, having to face reality, and all that.

      • Bob 8.2.1
        1 March 2017 at 1:12 pm

        “Funny how sensitive all the Tory fluff bunnies get when you call a spade, a spade”
        The thing is, you are calling a spade a hacksaw… both tools, but have completely different names where I come from.

        • adam 8.2.1.1
          1 March 2017 at 1:18 pm

          Poor poppet a spade, is a spade. But I guess reality is somthing Tory’s have difficulty with.

          • Bob 8.2.1.1.1
            1 March 2017 at 2:11 pm

            Tories are generally Anglican, Bill English is Catholic, John Key is Jewish, even the basics of Toryism fails you

            • adam 8.2.1.1.1.1
              1 March 2017 at 3:25 pm

              Poor Bob, poor poor poppet, is must be hard having to be right all the time.

              Then reality comes and smacks you in the face, and you look like a heel.

              • Bob …
                1 March 2017 at 4:24 pm

                You commies are all the same aren’t you, once reality is pointed out you revert to getting personal

                • adam …
                  1 March 2017 at 5:15 pm

                  How is your Ash Wednesday going? Maybe not well, as you seem in a huff over a word. Or two.

                  You say commie, I say Tory; commie, Tory, commie, Tory, Tory, Tory, Tory and poor poppet Bob.

                • Richard McGrath …
                  3 March 2017 at 2:01 am

                  What’s more, he didn’t acknowledge your very pertinent point.

          • AB 8.2.1.1.2
            1 March 2017 at 3:18 pm

            Wouldn’t be a problem if our local Tories hadn’t decided to give their party a stupid, misleading name (“National”) which tries to imply that they have everyone’s interest at heart, which they don’t.

            • Bob 8.2.1.1.2.1
              1 March 2017 at 4:28 pm

              ??? I actually have no idea what your comment relates too at all, other than trying to shoehorn National and Tory into a sentence.

              • McFlock …
                1 March 2017 at 9:36 pm

                see, there’s your deficiency in the basic skill of understanding language again.

                • Bob …
                  2 March 2017 at 9:19 am

                  Okay, my understanding is that AB is trying to state that Farrar is in the wrong here because the National Party named itself the National Party in 1936, rather than name themselves after a British political party which dissolved in 1834.
                  Is that a fair understanding? Or can you shed some further light on AB’s comment which would give it some context within the thread?
                  I can’t wait to see your “basic skill of understanding language” in full flight, cunt.

                  EDIT: added “cunt” to make sure my point was being made properly, I am not sure if my point was made prior due to my deficiency in the basic skill of understanding language.

                  • McFlock …
                    2 March 2017 at 11:47 am

                    No, your “understanding” is suspiciously naive, selective, and literal.

                    AB mentioned nothing about Farrar, for example. AB’s main point seems to be that the “National Party” misnomer was merely further evidence of adam’s observation that tories have difficulty calling a spade a spade. If the nats had named their party accurately, they would have called it the “stupid, selfish, elitist legalised theft from the rest of the nation” party, or something similar.

                    And it wasn’t farrar who called the nats “tories”. It was the editorial writer of one of New Zealand’s largest newspapers.

                    Just because some online (probably US) dictionary is unfamiliar with how the term is in general use in New zealand, doesn’t mean that the word is being used in some archaic or nonsensical fashion.

                    Despite all your best attempts at parsing common language, you’d fail the Turing test because you wrote “name here” on the form where it said “write name here”.

                  • greywarshark …
                    2 March 2017 at 3:43 pm

                    Bob
                    Your addition of the final word reinforces that you understand base language but lack the skills of an educated gentleman who would have made his point in a finer way, methinks.

                    • Bob …
                      2 March 2017 at 5:25 pm

                      Correct. I have never had a great understanding of the English language, science and statistics have always been my stronger point.
                      This leads me to the use of far more direct language in my day-to-day life, not dissimilar to that shown above. I true to be more gentlemanly, but at times I just think, fuck it, and say what I am really thinking.

              • greywarshark …
                1 March 2017 at 10:56 pm

                Bob You managed to get shoehorn in there, it’s amazing what can be achieved by TS wordsmiths.

            • Rob 8.2.1.1.2.2
              1 March 2017 at 10:05 pm

              Yes, the name National is almost as a useless descriptor as “Labour”. Who in the the so called Labour Party has actually partaken in anything to do with Labour . Guess what , labour is not the act of poncing around cafes drinking soy lattes and bitching about the Government .

            • mac1 8.2.1.1.2.3
              1 March 2017 at 10:27 pm

              I’ve said this before but a party that won’t stand candidates in all electorates does not deserve the name National.

              At the moment it’s the National (except where we know we’re going to lose badly or we’ve cut an electoral deal with our other mates) Party.

        • McFlock 8.2.1.2
          1 March 2017 at 4:00 pm

          And yet when Farrar reads it in the dom-post, he reads it as referring to the National Party (despite his sympathies for the UK conservatives).

          I guess the basic skill of understanding language beyond the top two prescribed interpretations is what separates a tory “spin-doctor” from a tory “troll” or tory “twitterer”.

          • Bob 8.2.1.2.1
            1 March 2017 at 4:33 pm

            “And yet when Farrar reads it in the dom-post, he reads it as referring to the National Party (despite his sympathies for the UK conservatives).”
            I still haven’t seen the Dom Post editorial (no links anywhere in the post even though they would be more than a little bit useful for context), so I have no idea how overt the editorial was in linking the term Tory to the National Party.

            “I guess the basic skill of understanding language beyond the top two prescribed interpretations is what separates a tory “spin-doctor” from a tory “troll” or tory “twitterer”.”
            You must have quite a unique skill given you can understand language that you haven’t even read, or if you have, you haven’t linked to it or used quotes to back up your point. If the editorial has overtly linked the term Tory to the National Party then there is no spin at all from Farrar, and it would be you that is the commie “spin-doctor”

            • McFlock 8.2.1.2.1.1
              1 March 2017 at 9:34 pm

              Read the top tweet. You did at least read the post, right?

              Farrar quite clearly states the term “tory” is linked to nats, and called it a “perjorative term of the left”.

              That really is the basic data I’m working from: Farrar understands
              A) that the dompost editorial was talking about the nats when it used the term “tory”; and
              B) that this is a term used at the very least by “the left”. Not the “UK left”, not the “English”, but “the left”.

              Maybe farrar’s wrong. Maybe the dompost editorial was actually about american loyalist colonials a couple of hundred years ago. But maybe you’re just a dumb tory who microparses language in a prescriptive way as a last tendril of intellectual pretension on which to cling.

              • Bob …
                2 March 2017 at 9:13 am

                “That really is the basic data I’m working from: Farrar understands
                A) that the dompost editorial was talking about the nats when it used the term “tory”; and
                B) that this is a term used at the very least by “the left”. Not the “UK left”, not the “English”, but “the left”.”
                The really basic data I am working from is that no-one disputes that a blatantly biased left wing commentator is writing editorials for the Dom Post, that is the whole point of the tweet and you have just completely backed it up! The term Tory is only used in New Zealand by ignorant commies (as shown above), and the writer of the Dom Post editorial wasn’t shy about exposing themselves as one of them, while not identifying themselves personally.

                Now re-read your previous statement: “I guess the basic skill of understanding language beyond the top two prescribed interpretations is what separates a tory “spin-doctor” from a tory “troll” or tory “twitterer”.”
                Here, you even quoted “In Australia, “Tory” is used as a pejorative term by members of the Australian Labor Party to refer to members of the conservative coalition Liberal and National parties” in the past yourself, that doesn’t fit in 140 characters though..https://thestandard.org.nz/cunliffe-wins-now/#comment-697444
                So you agree with Farrar, and back up his statement, but call him a “spin-doctor”, “troll” or “twitterer”, what should I make of you then McFlock?

                • McFlock …
                  2 March 2017 at 11:47 am

                  lol

                  The day the dom post is run by commies is the day that I’ll eat my hat.

                  Are you aware what the term “at the very least” means? As in “used at the very least by […]”?There’s that basic skill deficit popping up again.

                  I also like how you seamlessly move from there being two definitions of the word “tory” to three (including the Aussie use), but only when you think it suits your argument.

                  • Bob …
                    2 March 2017 at 2:57 pm

                    “Are you aware what the term “at the very least” means? As in “used at the very least by […]”?”
                    In this case it seems to mean a loophole to back out of your stance when it suits… So now that you are suggesting that people other than the ‘left’ use the terminology, can you give three NZ examples to back up your stance? I don’t want outside of NZ examples as Farrar was specifically talking about the New Zealand National Party (before you try another ‘but, but, but, I said “at the very least”, so here are some Canadian examples).

                    “I also like how you seamlessly move from there being two definitions of the word “tory” to three (including the Aussie use), but only when you think it suits your argument.”
                    I was linking to your previous attempts to link the term Tory to New Zealand by using an unattributed Australian use. If you don’t stand by your previous comments then I am more than happy to continue to mock you for using political terminology completely out of regional context on a political blog, go nuts!
                    Shit start calling the Labour Deputy situation a beltway issue…

                    • McFlock …
                      2 March 2017 at 3:28 pm

                      Dompost wrote it.
                      Farrar understood it.
                      There’s two examples right there.

                      When he’s not off on a ban, CV uses it, and he rejects being called “left wing”. Oh look, there’s three.

                    • Bob …
                      3 March 2017 at 8:43 am

                      “Dompost wrote it.
                      Farrar understood it.”
                      Dompost wrote it, confirming the writers bias, Farrar understood it in an international context and called out the writer based on their use. So zero from two so far.

                      CV used it when he was a Labour Party member, can you show me a time he has used it since 2015 (after Cunliffe was axed)?

                    • McFlock …
                      3 March 2017 at 5:38 pm

                      Dompost wrote it, confirming the writers bias,

                      Sez you. The editorial board of the dom post are decidedly not “commies”. Even compared to tories like you.

                      Farrar understood it in an international context and called out the writer based on their use. So zero from two so far.

                      No he didn’t. Read the top tweet again. He clearly understood that the dompost was referring to the NZ National party. I doubt that the nats are a common topic of discussion for Comintern.

                      CV used it when he was a Labour Party member, can you show me a time he has used it since 2015 (after Cunliffe was axed)?

                      here, 15/9/2015:

                      Exactly. Pagani is a disgrace, a Tory strike breaker.

                      Google really is not your friend, is it Bob.

  9. marty mars 9
    1 March 2017 at 1:08 pm

    Desprate Tory gnats are so worried about Bill. Sad. Have to divert with any rubbish. So sad.

  10. Brian 10
    1 March 2017 at 2:00 pm

    #youjustcanttrustatory

  11. the pigman 11
    1 March 2017 at 7:23 pm

    Question to David Farrar. In his visits to the UK, has he ever attended a Tory Garden Party?

    They are a proud tradition of his self-proclaimed Tory friends all over Tory rural England. Attendance is a badge of honour and how one establishes oneself in the village.

    But yeah obviously it’s heinous pejorative because Farrar says so!

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