Friday, 18 August 2006

Party stooges still spinning party corruption

Unwilling and also unable to defend the corruption of his favourite political party, Labour party hack Jordan Carter is instead peddling his party's chosen spin -- he's posting instead in breathless support of so-called 'Democracy Funding,' that is:
  • the proposal for taxpayers to fund politicians both to run their offices, and to run for office;
  • the proposal to force taxpayers to pay for political parties whose opinions they may well despise;
  • the proposal to allow the ruling party to force taxpayers to pay for their election campaigns.
There are only two reasons anyone is talking about this:
  1. Labour can't find enough people willing to voluntarily write a cheque to support them.
  2. The slimy buggers have been caught with their hands in the till so they want to legitimise the theft.
  3. They've been found breaking the rules that define the difference between democracies and dictatorships, so they want to changing those rules.
  4. They'd rather have everyone talking about changing the rules rather than how they broke the rules.
But is anyone but the party stooges really buying this?

RELATED: Politics-NZ, Politics-Labour, Darnton v Clark


  1. You're not on fire on this one, are you? I realise you're a Libertarian and so you are that ordinary mix of arrogance and otherworldliness that characterises that movement, but your sanctimonious tone on this is way off beam.

    It's a simple issue. Who should own the political system? All voters? Or the interests with most money?

    My answer's the former.

  2. As a working taxpayer, I already fund treatment for paedophiles, gang members in jail enjoying their televisions and ordered-in KFC, solo mums laying on their backs to breed more brats,IVF treatment for lesbians,a standby income for unemployed arseholes dealing dope etc etc etc.
    Why should I also fund the lower life forms who choose politics as a career?

  3. And Jordan, "all voters" don't own the political system.
    Tghe rotten political system rolls on and we the people get to choose what we hope is the best of a bad bunch every few years.
    The political system is no more "ours" than the justice system.
    Accusing someone of arrogance isn't a good look, coming from you.

  4. "It's a simple issue. Who should own the political system? All voters? Or the interests with most money?"

    What a weasel-worded question! All envy and Marxism. You want to remove my freedom to contribute to parties that I support? And you want to make me contribute to parties I do not? Where's the ownership in that? How do you feel about some of your taxes going to the New Zealand National Front? And how the hell do you think the Lib'z feel about *having* to take tax payer money? Well, you know what, your comment has motivated me to make another donation to Bernard Darnton's campaign. Because that campaign is about the real issue and not what you what to twist the issue into. I do hope that Bernard's "ordinary mix of arrogance and otherworldliness" is not making you sweat too much?

  5. Jordan:

    Yes, it's a simple issue to anyone who actually believes in freedom of association in a civil society, and that political parties should be funded by their supporters NOT the state. And your arrogant and otherworldly confusion of the self-interest of the Labour Party with the 'public good' shows that you're on the wrong side of the argument.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.