Tuesday, 23 November 2010

So much for honest government

Was the government changed at all at the last election?

You wouldn’t think so.

  • Nanny is still with us.
  • Her anti-smacking law is still with us.
  • Aside from making it easier for the govt to bulldoze houses and factories, the Resource Management Act is fundamentally unchanged.
  • Council rate rises continue to rise, even as their borrowings to fund their spending increases accelerate.
  • The global warming/emissions trading scam continues.
  • Our substance is still eaten out by KiwiRail and KiwiBank, KiwiSaver and Welfare for Working Families, by bureaucrats and central bankers, by the IRD and ACC -- and by politicians whose snouts are in the trough with an arrogance and sense of “entitlement” that normally takes three terms to develop, not just one.
  • And in the face of the biggest economic crisis in seventy years we have a Finance Minister who can talk only about “sharp edges” and “green shoots” “rebalancing,” and between times acts in a manner that makes a deer in the headlights look purposeful.

So it’s all not good. Not good at all. 

And then yesterday it was reconfirmed, as it was was in September last year, and then again back in April this year, that the Electoral Finance Abomination is on its way back again, with just a few tweaks from Simon Power-Lust to pretend that all the campaigning and protesting and marching in the streets to oust Helen’s Electoral Finance Act really  meant something.

But it didn’t.

We marched to tear down Helen’s anti-democratic attack on free speech, only for you lot to vote in this lot to do the same themselves. To replace her Electoral Finance Abomination with their Electoral Finance Abomination-Lite. It includes:

  • a $300,000 spending limit on non-political parties running protest campaigns in the three “official” months of the election.
  • These “third party” protestors must register with the grey ones if they want to spend anything more than buying a classified ad in the Herald;
  • and include their names (and addreses?) on their ads and billboards.
  • "Anti-collusion" measures to really crack down on these jumped-up ne’er-do-wells with the temerity to criticise their betters.
  • More taxpayers’ money gifted to the big two parties to advertise themselves on television and radio to the effective exclusion of the smaller parties.

And of course Labour will support it all because it, too, wants to limit the political competition—any competition at all—from anyone outside the Tweedledum and Tweedledumber of The Big Two parties.

What a crock.

So much for all the pontificating blowhard National Socialist MPS who blew hard and long at rallies around the country about the iniquity of Helen’s Electoral Finance Abomination, only to introduce their own.

Just as they marched and blew hard and long at rallies around the country about the iniquity of Helen’s  ant-smacking law, only to support it themselves.

They are scum, scum, scum, from their back teeth to their bum.

Bernard Darnton said two-and-a-half years ago that he looked forward to seeing the back of Helen Clark, but did not look forward to seeing the front of John Key.

Two-and-a-half years on from exchanging one from another, the only visible difference is a smile and a wave and the endless repetition of the word “relaxed” while things fall to pieces around him.

But of any fundamental change, there is none. None at all.

Here’s a poster produced by Whale Oil based on those produced for the last free speech campaign. All it needs is some funding and a corner site somewhere.



  1. Sean Fitzpatrick23 Nov 2010, 14:29:00

    To answer your initial question, PC - NO.

  2. Scum, indeed. Unbelievable hypocrites. Key disgusts me, National disgust me, NZ politics disturbs me. Corruption, right here, right now, from the Power Lusters in blue. Key has absolutely no qualms of conscience, does he.

  3. Ha ha "honest government". Nice juxtaposition.

  4. As someone who voted Libertarianz:


  5. National please don't take on the mantle socialists...it is not too late, your founding principles were eschewed in thrift, liberty, democracy and capatilism. It is not too late to debase yourself. NZ voted this rubbish out, and for you to blindly slap the faces of the populace with this imposition and restriction on the choices of the populace all in an attempt to subjugate opposition is Stalinist in the extreme. We voted Clarke be gone.... why do you persisit in choking us with her imbecilities

  6. 43 votes guys. You're doing something right! Keep at it ladies. It must be the whining tone and the hysterical Hitler comparisons which are the secrets to your success.

    Judge Holden

  7. Judge Holden, are you really Clark?

  8. 43 votes simply underlines the fact that the majority prefer nanny state over freedom & self dependance.

  9. Sean Fitzpatrick24 Nov 2010, 19:03:00

    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

    Theodore Roosevelt

  10. You stood in a by-election Sean. Get over yourself. Anyway, don't you guys hate Ted?

    "43 votes simply underlines the fact that the majority prefer nanny state over freedom & self dependance."

    The vast, vast majority. So why are you so singularly unsuccessful at winning hearts and minds?

    Judge Holden

  11. Didn't Key bring in the short-term working contract?

    Didn't he also save the Hobbit by taking on the unions?

  12. Part of it is the dominance that the electoral laws grant to incumbent parties in restricting access to broadcasting. Part of it is the state media that shows itself as being anything but even handed and unbiased in presenting points of view on policy issues (who is brought in to present the view that government should do less?). Part of it is the simple difficulty in getting a profile without the free publicity the media generates (which the Greens got and have with a very simple brand that is rarely challenged for what it really is).

    Part of it is challenging a mentality people are brought up with that the government exists to fix problems.

  13. Sean Fitzpatrick25 Nov 2010, 08:30:00

    @Holden - yes I stood in a by election; thanks for noticing. How that indicates that I need to get over myself eludes me though. Maybe if you made the effort to meet me and get to know me personally you would discover that I am quite happy with how it all went and enjoyed the chance to get out and share our ideas with a lot of folk, including the other candidates who appreciated the food for thought.

    No one expects the ideas to filter through to the vast majority of the population overnight so if we get a low vote result, so what? When you are playing the long game you accept the fact there is going to be a lot more rough than smooth.

    As for 'Ted' he has never done me any harm so why should I hate him? That quote of his is superb and reflects a positive approach to life that I seek to emulate.

    Maybe if you met myself or other Libz in person and engaged in open and free conversation you might get a better idea as to what we are about - and frankly we might get a better idea as to what you are about. Hiding behind the anonymity of a blog pseudonym and lobbing non-constructive criticism can not be an effective use of your time, surely?


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.