- Gordon Copeland, Independent: mailto:gordon.copeland@parliament.govt.nz
- Phillip Field, Independent:mailto:taito.phillip.field@parliament.govt.nz
- Rodney Hide, ACT: mailto:rodney.hide@parliament.govt.nz
- Ron Mark, NZ First: mailto:ron.mark@parliament.govt.nz
- Pita Paraone, NZ First: mailto:pita.paraone@parliament.govt.nz
- Winston Peters, NZ First: mailto:wpeters@ministers.govt.nz
- Heather Roy, ACT: mailto:sandy.grove@parliament.govt.nz
- Judy Turner, United Future: mailto:judy.turner@parliament.govt.nz
I'm talking to those sell-outs who voted for this Bill; National Socialist sell-outs like Bob Clarkson and Chester Borrows and Shane Ardern and Tau Henare and Maurice Wimpianson and Judith Bloody Collins who stood there on the steps of Parliament just a few weeks ago and told an audience passionately opposed to the Bill that they were too ... and who then showed last night with their pathetic acquiescence that they are liars. That their assurances and their promises are one-hundred percent worthless. As they are. As is their spineless, deal-making leader.
What are these entities worth? Nothing. Not a single bloody thing. They are pathetic sell-outs all of them. I'd suggest you remember this, and never trust them again.[Oh by the way, if you're wondering what Gordon Copeland looks like, that's him in the top photo talking to Bob "Lost Without a Clue" Clarkson.]
UPDATE: You think it's over? You think this is all Bradford wanted? You poor amateurs: "This," says Bradford, "is very much the end of the beginning."
9 comments:
Thanks for the addresses, PC.
I'll thank them on Ruth's behalf, too. (Save her the job). :)
The voters will thank them next election - all except NZF will not be represented in the next govt, unless the good lord hisself saves them. Write it down. Another PC contrarian indicator success! You are a strong buy!
What a laugh about your hero Copeland -- He resigns from United Future, but keeps his head in the public trough, thankful that the waka jumping legislation has lapsed.
And then he hasn’t even got the brainpower to turn up to the House in time to place his vote.
That's what you get when you align yourselves with small-minded conservatives -- they are dumber that potted plants, and YOU are judged by who you associate with.
I've got your moral judgement right here.
Of course, the real irony is that Copeland never actually voted against the bill, because he was too busy grandstanding at the time of the vote.
Ask the good representitives who voted in favour of this what its like to have Sue and Helen sit on their face.
Gutless wonders all of them.
"That's what you get when you align yourselves with small-minded conservatives -- they are dumber that (sic) potted plants ..."
Yeah, most of the time. But sometimes even the dumbest twat talks sense. I'll support anybody who stands for freedom, on an issue-by-issue basis. That also means I may disagree with that same individual on another matter. It's called remaining true to one's principles.
" ... and YOU are judged by who you associate with."
As are you. In this case, big govt authoritarians.
what its like to have Sue and Helen
What its like to have Sue , Helen and Ruth cuddling together? They all like to ban smacking.
Why does everyone think every anonymous commenter is Ruth?
You are all dumber than a bag or rocks.
Unlike some women, Sus, I am not willing to degrade myself by doing a little lap dance to appease the zombie hoards of the religious right.
Oh yes. The old "personal liberty and property rights for me but not for others (in this case children), attitude. Apart from age, what other arbitrary criteria must one meet before one should be granted self-ownership, Peter?
This bill still makes one a criminal if you smack your child for corrective purposes. Just like a burglar who doesn't get caught is still a criminal becuase breaking and entering and theft are criminal acts. So, 80% of NZ parents will now be criminals, if the police do anything about their smacking or not.
One other thing from the linked article.
Turia's claim that the beating to death of a 3 year old with a baseball bat and the parents using the defence of the old s59 Resonable Force is justification for this bill is crap. A jury would no doubt disagree with their use of s59 as a defence and convict them.
Brian Smaller
Post a Comment