What a shame

58 comments on “What a shame ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Dom 1

   25 September 2008 at 11:07 am

   I guess he just ran out of feet to shove in his mouth…

   I guess even bigoted old idiots need someone in Parliament to represent them.

   Actually, I take that back – they’re already over represented on National’s front bench…
2. monkey-boy 2

   25 September 2008 at 11:41 am

   Great piss-take of Winston’s ‘No’ signs wan’t it?
   He was also inadvertently responsible for the conditions which exposed Winston Peters as a liar, as corrupt, and as endorsed by the Labour Party. The conditions which are currently sending even loyal Labour voters away from their usual voting patterns, in disgust. Not bad for a ‘bigoted old idiot’. Imagine how effective he might have been if he’d had the right-on credentials and intellect of say – Cullen.
   He might well have been the next in line for PM. In 2009. If Labour won. After Helen stepped down. But she won’t win. So it’s ‘Bye Bye’ to that too, I guess.
3. ghostwhowalks 3

   25 September 2008 at 12:10 pm

   Monkey boy National was the party that pushed Clarkson out. Remember it was only a few months back he was still the candidate for tauranga

   Did he do a Connell and tell the caucus the emperor has no clothes ?
4. monkey-boy 4

   25 September 2008 at 12:23 pm

   They still got a pretty good deal out of him didn’t they? Wish Helen had shown a similar sense of leadership over Winston?
5. r0b 5

   25 September 2008 at 12:52 pm

   What a lot of time you spend on your ego games monkey boy:

   Lee C (3404) Vote: 0 0 Says:
   June 28th, 2008 at 10:02 am
   Kiwiblog has gone off the boil a bit so I thought would visit The Standard under ‘deep cover’. So disguised as ‘Monkey-Boy’ I spent a couple of day provoking people. Infantile I know, but rather entertaining

   I remember compiling a small selection of your gallons of bile off Kiwibog once – ahh yes, here it is. You’ve grown a bit more sophisticated over a year or so, but it’s still the same irrational hatred underneath isn’t it.

   Wish Helen had shown a similar sense of leadership over Winston?

   Yawn.
6. Stephen 6

   25 September 2008 at 1:00 pm

   Aren’t IP addressses the same no matter the name?
7. monkey-boy 7

   25 September 2008 at 1:08 pm

   oFFS R0b get a life mate. it’s a free blogosphere. At least until your lost ‘refine’ the EFA.
8. r0b 8

   25 September 2008 at 1:10 pm

   Aren’t IP addressses the same no matter the name?

   For the same “session”, or over short periods yes, but over time IP addresses can change too. Depends where you log in from, who your ISP is, whether your IP address is dynamic or static, and so on.
9. Dom 9

   25 September 2008 at 1:12 pm

   monkey boy – you do realise that trolling and provoking are two different things?

   Actually, of course you don’t….
10. r0b 10

    25 September 2008 at 1:12 pm

    oFFS R0b get a life mate.

    You do post after post after post here to feed your vanity and amuse yourself, and you’re telling me to get a life? You might want to have a think about that some time big guy.
11. monkey-boy 11

    25 September 2008 at 1:23 pm

    I had a go, at least. read the post you refer to as my ‘ego-game’ What does the last paragraph say about Labour?
    Look at my posts about The Labour Party, actually read them. We’ve had this conversation before. The trouble with you, r0b is you are ideologically blinkered. If you read what I’m saying I am not talking as one riddled with ‘irrational hatred’, but as one who is worried about constitutional issues raised by poor lawmaking. Poor lawmaking which has been facilitated by an abuse of MMP.
    I’ll tell you another thing that is wrong with you r0b, it is that you lack the maturity to look behind what you consider to be the motives of the messenger, and actually come to terms with the ideas that are being promoted.
    While I’m at it, I’ll also give you an insight into why you feel so at home in these surroundings. Because, with a few exceptions, most of the contributers are infected with a ‘Four legs good, two legs better’ arrogance which is reflected, actually in your own ‘irrational hatred’ of anything that is not party-loyal to the present regime.
    You see the difference between what I do, and what you do, is that I know I am being provocative, but you actually have been intellectually neutered into believing the crap you pass off as reality. Take some of the advice that I have been given by a number of unimaginative intellectual eunuchs who think they are the cleverer ones amongst us:
    Grow up.
    (Not you, Anita).

    Wow, you just got spanked BY a monkey…
12. John Stevens 12

    25 September 2008 at 1:24 pm

    At least BC built a stadium, unlike Trevor Duckman. Paid for a lot of it too out of his own money, a concept you lefties seem to despise.
13. monkey-boy 13

    25 September 2008 at 1:28 pm

    Tell you what, r0b, if you promise to have a good read of what I put and open your mind, I will promise to stop ‘feeding my ego’ and posting/trolling/provoking here at the Standard.
    It’s that simple, and a lot is riding on your response.
14. r0b 14

    25 September 2008 at 1:33 pm

    Tell you what, r0b, if you promise to have a good read of what I put

    As in your comment of 1:23pm?

    It’s that simple, and a lot is riding on your response.

    I wouldn’t have thought so actually.

    So just to be clear, you’re asking me to respond to your comment of 1:23?
15. randal 15

    25 September 2008 at 1:35 pm

    I never got spanked by a monkey and anything that believed clarkson was in line for the PM’s job has less intelligence than an ameoba.
16. monkey-boy 16

    25 September 2008 at 1:36 pm

    Last one today – I used to be Labour, was born and bred Labour, and if the present bunch of chinless hypocrites and over-educated buffoons that are infecting the Labour Party were cleared out tomorrow, by the Party itself, I would join the Labour Party and I would vote Labour. Basic principles. But this shower of shites is a parady of teh ‘labour movement’. They are the kinds of peopel who in teh normal course of events would only encounter the working classes if they were delivering their mail. That is why I hate them, and fervently hope they are flushed into the river with the rest of the turds this election. Then perhaps the Labour Party itself can grow some real balls and desist from rewriting the constitution to keep a power-hungry oligarchy in its high salaries and other associated perks.
    Right now I got that off my chest, perhaps I can go back to being the court jester? It seems to be the only depth you are capable of working at.
17. Ianmac 17

    25 September 2008 at 1:39 pm

    Having read a number of contributions on a number of Blogs it seems to me that there is a concerted effort from anti-Labour posters, to swamp blogs with nasty streams of abuse. They seem to use the same words as though someone has assembled a list of toxic words to use. There is seldom any issue to respond to so I guess like others, I just skip over them after the first 3-4 words. Monkeyboy does not actually say anything, so skip him and his team of whatever they are.
18. monkey-boy 18

    25 September 2008 at 1:39 pm

    r0b you provided a series of links of what I have stated historically and drew ‘irrational hatred’ as a conclusion. read the evidence you have first put on the table and stop dicking around.
19. Killinginthenameof 19

    25 September 2008 at 1:40 pm

    “r0b
    September 25, 2008 at 12:52 pm

    What a lot of time you spend on your ego games monkey boy:

    Lee C (3404) Vote: 0 0 Says:
    June 28th, 2008 at 10:02 am
    Kiwiblog has gone off the boil a bit so I thought would visit The Standard under ‘deep cover’. So disguised as ‘Monkey-Boy’ I spent a couple of day provoking people. Infantile I know, but rather entertaining

    I remember compiling a small selection of your gallons of bile off Kiwibog once – ahh yes, here it is. You’ve grown a bit more sophisticated over a year or so, but it’s still the same irrational hatred underneath isn’t it.”

    haha those threads on kiwi blog are classic, much arguing, then redbaiter comes along, claims the “liberal media” conspiracy and proceeds to rewrite history with one single copy and paste.

    It probably goes a long way to explaining why the righties are so detached from reality, as shown in that video yesterday
20. Felix 20

    25 September 2008 at 1:42 pm

    Just to be clear, monkey-boy, I don’t think really think of you as a court jester.
21. Matthew Pilott 21

    25 September 2008 at 1:48 pm

    Wow, all that got me confused again. monkey-boy – are you trying to be funny now, but not normally, or are you trying to be funny normally, and being serious now? Your indecipherable ‘parody’ most of which is utter gibberish, well it’s impossible to tell whether you think you’re being funny, witty, incisive, or just spouting off a meaningless stream-of-conciousness.

    Just tell me what you think you’re doing when you usually post and I’ll take your word for it, and from no on, assume that all of your comments are in that style.
22. monkey-boy 22

    25 September 2008 at 1:53 pm

    Well Matthew, like I said it’s a free blogosphere. I suggest you cherry-pick whatever confirms your own predispositions and just run with it. Plenty will agree. That is the best way to run an echo-chamber.
23. MikeE 23

    25 September 2008 at 1:54 pm

    And Winston Peters, the darling of the Labour Party *isn’t* a bigoted old idiot?

    Who would you rather have in supposedly liberal parliament?

    And take off your partisan caps when answering.
24. Pascal's bookie 24

    25 September 2008 at 1:56 pm

    Who would you rather have in supposedly liberal parliament?

    Easy, John Rawls.
25. r0b 25

    25 September 2008 at 1:58 pm

    read the post you refer to as my ‘ego-game’ What does the last paragraph say about Labour?

    Can’t tell which post / paragraph you mean, but in general I think Labour have handled WP appropriately. I think he’s as guilty as sin, and I hope that he’ll soon be gone from parliament, but like it or not there is actually some genuine doubt about the conflicting versions of events. I think Clark has been very cautious, standing him down from his portfolios, but otherwise on insisting on due process, as she should. I also think that there has been a genuine media witch hunt against Peters (one he did a lot to bring on himself!), compared to say Key’s more serious misdemeanours and lies.

    If you read what I’m saying I am not talking as one riddled with ‘irrational hatred’, but as one who is worried about constitutional issues raised by poor lawmaking.

    You might have aspects of genuine concern, I can’t tell. What I can tell is that you certainly have aspects of vanity trolling (comment quoted above) and pretty nasty hatred:

    Labbbour’s greatest asset is Helen Clark. She has assiduously cultivated a mystique of power about herself, so that it is almost a heresy to be seen to criticise her. Some might label her as pompous, patronising, aloof, cynical, creative with the truth, or even corrupt, but she has a teflon personality.

    Funny about Teflon, once you put one decent scratch in it, it renders the implement largely useless. However, I have yet to see an incident of a teflon pan scratching itself.

    That is the job of the opposition.

    ===

    Lee C Says:
    November 3rd, 2007 at 7:43 am

    Speaking of narrowly averted suicides. Like I heard that one time when she was at low ebb, Helen attempted suicide. Sobbing quietly, she placed the revolver against her breast., pulled the trigger. and shot herself in the knee-cap.
    drum roll, cymbal clash.
    aythenkyu..

    ===

    Lee C Says:
    November 13th, 2007 at 7:31 pm

    I’d like to see Helen Clark Burn for democracy.

    I’ll tell you another thing that is wrong with you r0b, it is that you lack the maturity to look behind what you consider to be the motives of the messenger, and actually come to terms with the ideas that are being promoted.

    I’m fond of a good debate on ideas Lee, as I think the record shows. I’m also fond of exploring motives – part of one of my little side quests to raise the standards of online debate. I regard the posting of juvenile hateful bile and vanity trolling as a waste of time and space, lowering the standard of on line discussion, detracting from the issues that you profess to care about. So I sometimes call them when I see them, in the hopes of discouraging their future occurrence. Kinda like trying to encourage people to self moderate. I’d rather see good quality discussion here than the kind of nonsense that you sometimes get up to.
26. Matthew Pilott 26

    25 September 2008 at 1:59 pm

    So, you’ve cherry-picked the idea, made a few assumptions that everyone here only wants to hear consenting views, and you want me to do the same as you have clearly done? No thanks, mb, not my style. So, say your first comment in this thread. Reading it I’d conclude that you thought Clarkson was a Labour MP. Was that deliberate, some form of joke, of have I misinterpreted it?

    Here’s a thought – you know how being paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not after you? Well just because no one agrees with what you say doesn’t mean they won’t agree with other people’s dissenting views.
27. burt 27

    25 September 2008 at 2:00 pm

    Monkey-boy

    Last one today – I used to be Labour, was born and bred Labour, and if the present bunch of chinless hypocrites and over-educated buffoons that are infecting the Labour Party were cleared out tomorrow, by the Party itself, I would join the Labour Party and I would vote Labour.

    I can relate to that. Shame about the corruption – they won’t get my vote this election.
28. Joanna 28

    25 September 2008 at 2:16 pm

    Ianmac
    Yes! I have also noticed this for some time now.
    My personal favourite is “move along, nothing to see here” or similar which is often used by “righties” and normally makes no sense in the context they use it.
    I am glad others notice this too
29. the sprout 29

    25 September 2008 at 2:23 pm

    at least one Nat has understood the Crosby Textor strategy advice for candidates: KEEP MOUTH FIRMLY SHUT AT ALL TIMES
30. Dom 30

    25 September 2008 at 2:23 pm

    I’m with Ianmac and Joanna, is someone putting out instructions to right wing bloggers because I see an awful lot of similar themed comments on any threads where the government is mentioned. Not a conspiracy theory so much as a theory of organised trolling…
31. Billy 31

    25 September 2008 at 2:26 pm

    My personal favourite is “move along, nothing to see here’

    You talking about the Winston Peters business?
32. Joanna 32

    25 September 2008 at 2:46 pm

    drat, and I got the quote wrong “nothing to see here, move along” was what I meant to type.

    Billy, I was refering to a line (one of many) that is trotted out continuously in comments (on quite a few blogs). This one in particular purports to be a quote (most often from Helen Clark) that, to the best of my knowledge, has never actually been said by a New Zealand politician. As always, I will be happily corrected if this is wrong.

    But I’m betting you already knew that was what I meant

    Dom, I did think it could be organisied trolling but I actually am leaning towards simple laziness coupled with no real arguement to back up ideas.
33. burt 33

    25 September 2008 at 3:13 pm

    Joanna

    If you think no Labour MP (especially Helen Clark) has never said “move on” then you probably believe that Taito Field was just guilty of trying to help people and Winston is honest and his presence in the Labour-led govt is helping their chances of winning the election. Best of luck to you.
34. monkey-boy 34

    25 September 2008 at 3:20 pm

    Thank you for taking the time to respond Matthew at least you had a go.

    So far, I’ve had ‘irrational hatred’ ‘brain of an amoeba’ and your rather bizarre assumption that i think Clarkson is a Labour MP.
    And then people accuse me of trolling!
    I think I started out with a general statement about how the Labour Party’s behaviour is driving old-party-loyal away. I think I offered supporting evidence from previous posts (On r0b’s initiative) about how I have been consistent in this criticism since last year. I think I have outlined again why as an ex Labour, the present lot have driven me and ar driving others away. and I think I have been pretty consisent on this and the record proves it. Perhaps I should have drawn a diagram, but I respectfully submit that I have not deviated one iota in the past year… but the constant and wilful attempts by people to accept my particular brand of dissent is evidence that … I am paranoid.
    Ok I suppose I must be. But I am consistently paranoid, whereas many who address what I say are wilful in their choices of approach – often in a vain attemtp to appear arch and clever, because deep down they are intellectual snobs. Just like the present upper echelons of the LPNZ..
35. monkey-boy 35

    25 September 2008 at 3:21 pm

    Which is one of the reasons I hate them.
36. burt 36

    25 September 2008 at 3:26 pm

    Joanna

    Here is one link to follow. If you do a search on ‘move on helen clark’ there is a lot of links to follow. All the best.

    Clark Tells Peters, Media Move On
37. Quoth the Raven 37

    25 September 2008 at 3:33 pm

    Joanna – Another common thing for rightwing trolls is the “I used to be a labour supporter” line. It’s like that alone will put some weight behind their piss poor arguments and make their insane ramblings somehow rational.
    See monkeyboy above for a perfect example.
38. Joanna 38

    25 September 2008 at 3:44 pm

    Burt –
    1. cheap trick trying to tie my comment/beliefs to the Taito Field and Winston Peters sagas.
    2. Thanks for the link, if you had read my comment you would have seen i was talking about the ENTIRE quote. (but I accept Helen Clark has said “move on”)
39. randal 39

    25 September 2008 at 3:44 pm

    when I red your posts monkey boy the conclusion I draw is not irrational hatred but congenital idiocy.
40. Matthew Pilott 40

    25 September 2008 at 3:53 pm

    I get that you don’t like the EFA, MB, which is fair enough.

    In my line of work change management is a big deal, and I see enough of the resisitance to any form of change to recognise what is a genuine problem, and what is resistance to something different and unknown.

    As you are a former NZLP supporter I’m surprised you’d go for the intellectual snobbery line. What the right has done is to make being smart something to be denigrated, what you put forward is the most classic example – classic divisive and hate-filled tactics.

    Now, a career in academia is seen as something not in the ‘real world’, and probably means you’re leeching off tax payers. (on a different note, how often have I seen a Nat supporter bitch about our lack of R & D? Think about it.)

    On top of it all, if you’re smart, you probably think you’re better than everyone else, and spend a lot of time sneering and jeering the plebs.

    That someone could have reasonable left-wing beliefs and fall for that hate-filled rage at alterity makes me disbelieve your former NZLP support, MB.

    You may have voted for them, but to believe that I don’t think you ever supported tham.
41. monkey-boy 41

    25 September 2008 at 4:20 pm

    Well, Matthew, you and several of your fellow posters have evidently come to the conclusion that I’m lying, or an idiot, or spinning a classic right-wing divisive meme of some kind. And there is no trick too low. I’ll even pretend that I ‘used to support Labour’, it appears. Just to support my arguments, because being correct at all costs is sooo important isn’t it? So much for being honest, and for intellectual rigour. I may have a massive ego, but it doesn’t extend to begging anyone to please believe me, and it appears that regardless of how consistent I have been, there is always another objection to raise rather than face the simple basic point I have striven to illustrate. That Labour is ethically and morally bankrupt, and you refuse to accept it.. Like I said. It’s a free blogosphere. If the best you can come up with is that I am suffering from some form of ingrained resistance to progress, and by implication that makes your positions appear all the more laudable, because somehow they represent progress, then so be it. I’m not here to rain on your parade, merely to invite you to question truths that you seem to hold as self-evident. If the process makes you uncomfortable then that is a good thing. as stated by your own standards.
    ps ‘alterity’ !!
42. burt 42

    25 September 2008 at 4:28 pm

    monkey-boy

    If you were a Labour supporter you wouldn’t say these horrible things…. Labour good – National bad. There are only two choices because all other nasty parties are now supporters of National. We know they are supporters of national because they didn’t back Labour in their self serving interest to protect the poodle. The nasty National supporter parties should have accepted Labour’s grand vision of power at any price and if you liked corruption you would support Winston as well.

    Sorry but it’s re-education camp for you!
43. Matthew Pilott 43

    25 September 2008 at 4:44 pm

    Monkey-boy, if you try to blame me for comments other people have put forward yo’re not going to do much for your attempt to prove you’ve an open mind!

    Nor if you state point blank that you’re right, everyone else is wrong, and people who don’t agree with you are blind to the truth.

    Seems you, more than anyone else here, is so set in their ways that a debate is worth little.

    “That Labour is ethically and morally bankrupt, and you refuse to accept it.. Like I said. It’s a free blogosphere.”

    It’s a free blogosphere…you refuse to accept it. how is it free if I’m doing something wrong by refusing to accept your proclamations? Refusing to accept something means it must be the absolute truth. You need to rethink your position, or your manner of expressing it…

    “I’m not here to rain on your parade, merely to invite you to question truths that you seem to hold as self-evident. If the process makes you uncomfortable then that is a good thing. as stated by your own standards.”

    By all means. I welcome it. Some other commentators have been able to do so with varying levels of sucess. What I find utterly useless, and thoroughly incompelling are statements such as “bunch of chinless hypocrites and over-educated buffoons”, “rewriting the constitution to keep a power-hungry oligarchy in its high salaries and other associated perks” and “Labour is ethically and morally bankrupt”.

    What do they prove? 5/8 of fuck all. If you state that, and get haughty because I dare disagree, what do you hope to achieve? I’d hardly call it a useful method of making me challenge truths. It’s not uncomfortable either, if that’s all you can do.

    It’s more akin to saying “Your team sucks”. “No, your team sucks, and they’re gay”. Equally compelling arguments.

    Burt, we’re trying to have a rational discussion. If the best you can do is crawl out of the sand-pit for another tiresome repetition of the Burt Special, “Labour good, National Bad”, then I’d ask you don’t bother. Of course you’re free to do so, but it’s bordering on pathetic.
44. Rakaia George 44

    25 September 2008 at 4:49 pm

    Nice post SP. Perfectly summing up the attitude of the trendy lefty intellectual to the kind of blokes that actually built this country.

    Yer not fit to clean Bob’s boots.
45. Phil 45

    25 September 2008 at 4:55 pm

    What the right has done is to make being smart something to be denigrated, what you put forward is the most classic example – classic divisive and hate-filled tactics

    Now, a career in academia is seen as something not in the ‘real world’, and probably means you’re leeching off tax payers.

    Funny thing is, the left spends an awful lot of time making out that a career in international finance is not in the ‘real world’ and probably leeching of innocent investors.
46. Matthew Pilott 46

    25 September 2008 at 5:01 pm

    Phil – I’ve never seen it be said it’s not a ‘real job’ nor not in the ‘real world’, just pointing out the downsides of such jobs. As the current economic climate helps illustrate…

    Rakaia George – perfectly summing up the backward attitude that started the ‘tall poppy syndrome’ and made being good at something a sin. You’re not fit judge what anyone else is fit to do, nor claim the attitude of ‘those who actually built this country’. Bit of a liberal tradition that must have slipped your mind. Great to see that in your eyes, build a staduim and you can be as racist as you want. Keep it up.
47. Felix 47

    25 September 2008 at 5:22 pm

    monkey-boy
    September 25, 2008 at 1:36 pm

    “Last one today – ”

    Oh well, my hopes weren’t high.
48. r0b 48

    25 September 2008 at 5:34 pm

    Felix – ho! But wait there’s more – check it out:
    http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=476

    Lee C
    October 14, 2007 at 4:28 pm
    Ok you win. The Standard is obviously not for me. This is my final post.

    Fare ye well.
49. Scribe 49

    25 September 2008 at 5:40 pm

    rOb,

    Please don’t call Felix a ho.
50. Quoth the Raven 50

    25 September 2008 at 5:48 pm

    I remember this: According to the wonderful TheyWorkForYou website these five quotes have been Bob Clarkson’s scintillating and sum contribution to parliamentary debate since 21 August:
    (17 Oct 2007) Interjection : “Bureaucratic!’
    (10 Oct 2007) Interjection : “Tell us the end of the story.’
    (19 Sep 2007) Interjection : “Force?’
    (22 Aug 2007) Interjection : “A bit like the Labour Government.’
    (21 Aug 2007) Interjection : “Yes, I did, actually.’
    That’s 19 words in 21 sitting days – less than one word a day. And for that, we pay him $110,000 / year?

    Rakaia George – Go clean clarkson’s boots, I mean italian loafers.
    I hear the mouths close this year I may go for a fish.
51. monkey boy 51

    25 September 2008 at 6:50 pm

    ok r0b you got me – say farewell to another bigoted old idiot.
52. illuminatedtiger 52

    25 September 2008 at 6:51 pm

    Excellent. Won’t be missing that dickhead. He bought nothing to politics besides bigotry and those interjections which I’m apalled we spent $110,000 a year on. Seriously, for that kind of money we could replace Clarkson with a fully serviced water cooler which would not only contribute more but be a fuckload cheaper!
53. Phil 53

    25 September 2008 at 6:55 pm

    QtR,

    I bet we could find a lot of MP’s with the same scintillating record of 6 interjections in 21 days.

    The vast majority of the work they do happens outside of the debating chamber. MP’s aren’t like the Stig…

    On second thought, a lot of people might view an MP doing and saying nothing to be an awful lot better than any alternative…
54. Brett Dale 54

    25 September 2008 at 6:58 pm

    Why people voted for that idiot is beyond me?
55. burt 55

    25 September 2008 at 7:06 pm

    Brett Dale

    The answer is obvious – because he isn’t Winston Peters.
56. Spider_Pig 56

    26 September 2008 at 2:33 pm

    Another reason to vote for him? He was and still is a successful businessman, with real world experience. And he wasn’t Winston Peters. A shame that the rest of NZ voted Peters back in.

    Bob is certainly rough around the edges and cut from a different cloth but that cloth provided the smarts and drive to build a self made $50+ million fortune, and in turn will have made a lot of money for 1,000s of other New Zealanders.

    The same can not be said for most people.
57. T-Rex 57

    26 September 2008 at 11:36 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4706659a6160.html

    “Rough around the edges”?

    He is a f*cking moron. Tauranga must cringe in embarassment every time he speaks. That “straight talker” argument is roughly the same thing as “the case for Bush”. He talks simply because he is SIMPLE, not because he can see through all the subtlety and nuance and get to the heart of an issue.

    Homosexuality is “like picking your nose in public”, and anyone wearing a burqua should go back to “Islam or Iraq”. That’s good old Bob the Bewilderer’s level of contribution.
    And NO HE WOULN’T BE THE KIND OF GUY YOU CAN HAVE A BEER WITH.

    You do not need “smarts” to build a self made 50mil fortune, as Clarkson more than adequately demonstrates. Who else do we know that might fall into that category… driven but not very bright… hmmmmm, think think think…
58. Swampy 58

    27 September 2008 at 12:16 am

    How does a “simple” person become a millionaire?

    It just doesn’t work that way.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS