Discussion:
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR FUNCTION!!!! (advertisement)
(too old to reply)
Morrissey Breen
2003-10-01 05:13:22 UTC
Permalink
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!

Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country. 

His award-winning television program, imaginatively titled "Holmes",
has the greatest overall viewing ratings in New Zealand and if that's
not enough his breakfast show on Newstalk ZB is the number one
breakfast show for news in New Zealand. Paul can always be counted on
to bring a subtly - and sometimes overtly - racist, politically
conservative, and often downright fascist, viewpoint to any interview
or discussion. Paul has won a special place in the hearts of all New
Zealanders with his charming (some might say smarmy) smile, his famed
empathetic stare, and his famous sign-off phrase "And that was OUR
people, tonight".

After completing a BA at Victoria University Paul  joined the New
Zealand Broadcasting Corporation in 1972 as an announcer in
Christchurch. For much of the seventies he worked in Britain, Europe
and the United States. Since returning to New Zealand in 1985 his rise
has been dramatic, first as host of the morning talkback show on 2ZB
in Wellington then as host of the new breakfast session on Newstalk
1ZB when the format was changed overnight.

Now the top-rated show host on New Zealand radio, Paul Holmes has won
several awards including Best Talk Host (International) and Best Talk
Personality (Australian) at the 1989 Annual PATER Awards for
International Broadcasting.

Controversial, unorthodox, outrageous, racist, yet always ready to
apologize, Paul Holmes is the person people love to hate. Whether
it's his well publicised harassment of young women, his penetrating -
though some might say sycophantic - interviews, his sneering
denigration of working people, his unquestioning, grovelling support
for the rogue Bush administration and its illegal invasion of Iraq,
his unrestrained expressions of delight at the prospect of political
prisoners being tortured at Guantanamo Bay, or his racist outbursts
against "cheeky darkies", Paul remains New Zealand's best known, and
undoubtedly most loathed, media personality.

His humanitarian projects sometimes go unnoticed but Paul is much
loved by the many New Zealanders who know the man behind the mask.

As he has often reminded us, Paul is "a GOOD MAN", full of "humour"
and "compassion" and "sensitivity". Paul displayed these fine
qualities in abundance during his high-rating and sincere (though some
might say otherwise!) apology on Monday evening.

PLEASE NOTE: As New Zealand's leading and most respected commentator,
Paul stipulates that the following conditions must be observed to the
last detail:

1.) no white bread;
2.) no orange cheese;
3.) no alcohol of any kind;
4.) NO ABOS; (Paul stresses most sincerely that he is not a racist,
and that this is merely a matter of personal taste)
5.) three bottles of Pierre Cardin No. 8 aftershave lotion;
6.) no processed meats on the deli platter;
7.) a half-dozen bottles of Perrier water;
8.) three bottles of Ramalosa water;
9.) two litres of soda and spring water;
10.) ten fresh towels;
11.) NO ABORIGINES; (Paul welcomes the cultural diversity they bring
to Australia, but he sees no reason why he should encourage them when
he is over there);
12.) M&Ms (but no brown ones);
13.) sushi on demand. This MUST be prepared by a JAPANESE male sushi
chef. (N.B. This is absolutely essential; Paul will not tolerate
sushi prepared by a woman or by a Korean, because he regards Koreans
as the "abos of Asia");
14.) six tubs of Beluga caviare;
15.) one under-age prostitute per night to, be delivered to Paul's
hotel ("darkies" acceptable);
16.) no negro or Polynesian or Maori or Korean or aboriginal
Australian will prepare or touch or serve any food that Paul eats;
17.) music from Paul's best-selling, wildly popular, critically
acclaimed musical album to be piped constantly on sound system in
hotel room;
18.) Five-star hotel accommodation only;
19.) one under-age prostitute per night to be procured for Paul (just
making sure);
20.) absolutely one hundred per cent NO FUCKING ABOS. (Paul says:
"They can fuck off.")

If you would like to contact Paul to speak at your next Klan rally,
pro-torture convention, anti-union meeting, or football club dinner,
contact his management at this address:
http://www.talentonline.co.nz/



M. BREEN
Talentonline Top Talent Manager
billsmith
2003-10-01 05:33:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country.
His award-winning television program, imaginatively titled "Holmes",
has the greatest overall viewing ratings in New Zealand and if that's
not enough his breakfast show on Newstalk ZB is the number one
breakfast show for news in New Zealand. Paul can always be counted on
to bring a subtly - and sometimes overtly - racist, politically
conservative, and often downright fascist, viewpoint to any interview
or discussion. Paul has won a special place in the hearts of all New
Zealanders with his charming (some might say smarmy) smile, his famed
empathetic stare, and his famous sign-off phrase "And that was OUR
people, tonight".
After completing a BA at Victoria University Paul joined the New
Zealand Broadcasting Corporation in 1972 as an announcer in
Christchurch. For much of the seventies he worked in Britain, Europe
and the United States. Since returning to New Zealand in 1985 his rise
has been dramatic, first as host of the morning talkback show on 2ZB
in Wellington then as host of the new breakfast session on Newstalk
1ZB when the format was changed overnight.
Now the top-rated show host on New Zealand radio, Paul Holmes has won
several awards including Best Talk Host (International) and Best Talk
Personality (Australian) at the 1989 Annual PATER Awards for
International Broadcasting.
Controversial, unorthodox, outrageous, racist, yet always ready to
apologize, Paul Holmes is the person people love to hate. Whether
it's his well publicised harassment of young women, his penetrating -
though some might say sycophantic - interviews, his sneering
denigration of working people, his unquestioning, grovelling support
for the rogue Bush administration and its illegal invasion of Iraq,
his unrestrained expressions of delight at the prospect of political
prisoners being tortured at Guantanamo Bay, or his racist outbursts
against "cheeky darkies", Paul remains New Zealand's best known, and
undoubtedly most loathed, media personality.
His humanitarian projects sometimes go unnoticed but Paul is much
loved by the many New Zealanders who know the man behind the mask.
As he has often reminded us, Paul is "a GOOD MAN", full of "humour"
and "compassion" and "sensitivity". Paul displayed these fine
qualities in abundance during his high-rating and sincere (though some
might say otherwise!) apology on Monday evening.
PLEASE NOTE: As New Zealand's leading and most respected commentator,
Paul stipulates that the following conditions must be observed to the
1.) no white bread;
2.) no orange cheese;
3.) no alcohol of any kind;
4.) NO ABOS; (Paul stresses most sincerely that he is not a racist,
and that this is merely a matter of personal taste)
5.) three bottles of Pierre Cardin No. 8 aftershave lotion;
6.) no processed meats on the deli platter;
7.) a half-dozen bottles of Perrier water;
8.) three bottles of Ramalosa water;
9.) two litres of soda and spring water;
10.) ten fresh towels;
11.) NO ABORIGINES; (Paul welcomes the cultural diversity they bring
to Australia, but he sees no reason why he should encourage them when
he is over there);
12.) M&Ms (but no brown ones);
13.) sushi on demand. This MUST be prepared by a JAPANESE male sushi
chef. (N.B. This is absolutely essential; Paul will not tolerate
sushi prepared by a woman or by a Korean, because he regards Koreans
as the "abos of Asia");
14.) six tubs of Beluga caviare;
15.) one under-age prostitute per night to, be delivered to Paul's
hotel ("darkies" acceptable);
16.) no negro or Polynesian or Maori or Korean or aboriginal
Australian will prepare or touch or serve any food that Paul eats;
17.) music from Paul's best-selling, wildly popular, critically
acclaimed musical album to be piped constantly on sound system in
hotel room;
18.) Five-star hotel accommodation only;
19.) one under-age prostitute per night to be procured for Paul (just
making sure);
"They can fuck off.")
If you would like to contact Paul to speak at your next Klan rally,
pro-torture convention, anti-union meeting, or football club dinner,
http://www.talentonline.co.nz/
M. BREEN
Talentonline Top Talent Manager
bleeeeeeeeuuuuk spew dont give up the day job dick head
Enkidu
2003-10-01 07:40:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by billsmith
bleeeeeeeeuuuuk spew dont give up the day job dick head
Why repost it *all* just add a one-line comment, smithy?

Cheers,

Cliff
--

The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
that the conspiracy is working.
Gordon
2003-10-01 06:11:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
Paul can always be counted on
to bring a subtly - and sometimes overtly - racist, politically
conservative, and often downright fascist, viewpoint to any interview
or discussion.
Heck, I have a co-worker who can do this in one sentence.
--
Gordon

Google knows where to find things, ask at http://www.google.com
Works for me, will work for you, so be it.
LeftAintRight
2003-10-01 08:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country.
You're really getting the most out of this aren't ya? Still, I agree
with you about Holmes, except for the bit about him being right wing.
Morrissey Breen
2003-10-01 16:23:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by LeftAintRight
Post by Morrissey Breen
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country.
You're really getting the most out of this aren't ya?
So call moi an opportunist...
Post by LeftAintRight
Still, I agree with you about Holmes, except for the bit about him being right wing.
Holmes is implacably anti-union, he's one hundred per cent behind the
rogue Bush administration, he's virulently pro-Israel, he's a crude
racist. All of these things, I would suggest, indicate a right wing
point of view....
DPF
2003-10-01 17:06:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
Post by LeftAintRight
Post by Morrissey Breen
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country.
You're really getting the most out of this aren't ya?
So call moi an opportunist...
Post by LeftAintRight
Still, I agree with you about Holmes, except for the bit about him being right wing.
Holmes is implacably anti-union, he's one hundred per cent behind the
rogue Bush administration, he's virulently pro-Israel, he's a crude
racist. All of these things, I would suggest, indicate a right wing
point of view....
Do you ever listen to the man???? Pro-Israel???? He slams Israel and
Sharon almost every day.

DPF
--
Blog: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz
E-mail: ***@farrar.com
ICQ: 29964527
MSN: ***@hotmail.com
Jason M
2003-10-02 11:09:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
Holmes is implacably anti-union, he's one hundred per cent behind the
rogue Bush administration, he's virulently pro-Israel, he's a crude
racist. All of these things, I would suggest, indicate a right wing
point of view....
Do you or anyone happen to have a list of what views are considered
right-wing or left-wing?
Morrissey Breen
2003-10-02 18:31:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason M
Post by Morrissey Breen
Holmes is implacably anti-union, he's one hundred per cent behind the
rogue Bush administration, he's virulently pro-Israel, he's a crude
racist. All of these things, I would suggest, indicate a right wing
point of view....
Do you or anyone happen to have a list of what views are considered
right-wing or left-wing?
I don't like the terms "left" and "right". They are vague and
largely unhelpful. I think that when Redbaiter, for instance,
launches into one of his tirades against the "left", he really has no
idea of what he is really talking about.

We might be better advised, when discussing the likes of American
mouthpieces like Holmes, to use terms like "fascist" or
"proto-fascist" or "uncritical dupe of American propaganda".
Redbaiter
2003-10-02 20:08:31 UTC
Permalink
Morrissey Breen says...
Post by Morrissey Breen
I don't like the terms "left" and "right". They are vague and
largely unhelpful. I think that when Redbaiter, for instance,
launches into one of his tirades against the "left", he really has no
idea of what he is really talking about.
We might be better advised, when discussing the likes of American
mouthpieces like Holmes, to use terms like "fascist" or
"proto-fascist" or "uncritical dupe of American propaganda".
Really, I don't think there is any need for such complicated
labels, especially since the hate campaign against George Bush
was initiated.

I have always been ambivalent about the war in Iraq, concerned
about what the long term outcome might be, but realising that
the US was bound to take proactive action against thugs and
murderers who had previously been acting with virtual impunity.

The war now is only a minor issue. The real concern is the
global tyranny of the left, and the way they have infiltrated
and taken control of our public services, our governments, our
education facilities, and most damaging, our media.

The war has not only exposed the hatred and intolerance of the
left, it has also exposed how deep seated is this hatred, how
widespread it is, and how successful the left can be in
attempting to exert their influence in every way possible.

The hounding of Bush and Blair is the most salient example of
the destructive forces that the left can call on when they need
to.

Their tactics are always the same, the lies, false allegations,
exaggerations, deceptions, misrepresentation deceit and
dishonesty. One sees the repellent and repugnant leftists on
this very newsgroup behaving in exactly the same thuggish way.
The problem is not the war, or exhaust emissions, or even the
foreshore, it is the influence of these odious scum, and their
predominance today.

I've never been a religious person, but the thought suddenly
occurs that another great flood wouldn't be such a bad idea. Or
perhaps its modern day equivalent, a massive high pressure fire
hose, pumping millions of gallons of water and sluicing all the
vile lying leftist filth that contaminate the streets down into
the sewers where they belong.

As for "What is a leftist"- John Ray defines it quite well:

www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1226

An excerpt that reminds me of Bween's attacks on his ideological
buddy Paul Holmes-

"Wanting to change the existing system is however the umbrella
under which all Leftists at all times meet. Even at the height
of British socialism, for instance, British Leftists still
wanted more socialism. That permanent and corrosive
dissatisfaction with the world they live in is alone what makes
people Leftists. That is all they have in common. They are
extremely fractious and even murderous towards one-another
otherwise (e.g. Stalin versus Trotsky). It is in describing his
fellow revolutionaries (Kautsky and others) that Lenin himself
spoke swingeingly of "the full depth of their stupidity,
pedantry, baseness and betrayal of working-class interests"
(Lenin, 1952). He could hardly have spoken more contemptuously
of the Tsar."

Another good essay is "None Dare Call It Fascism' by Jack
Wheeler.

www.truebluenz.orcon.net.nz/newfile1.html#liberals

An excerpt-

"The result of both socialism and fascism is the same: the
destruction of economic freedom, replace the individual's choice
of how to make a peaceful, honest living with State edicts.
Fascism accomplishes this, however, more insidiously. Instead of
being a straightforward employee of the government, you and I
are told our lives and businesses are still private, while any
attempt to act as such is proscribed by some regulation -- until
we are trapped and immobilized in Washington's (Wellington's)
web."
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
owend
2003-10-03 02:21:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Redbaiter
Really, I don't think there is any need for such complicated
labels, especially since the hate campaign against George Bush
was initiated.
I have always been ambivalent about the war in Iraq, concerned
about what the long term outcome might be, but realising that
the US was bound to take proactive action against thugs and
murderers who had previously been acting with virtual impunity.
Actually Red, I don't think there was anything "virtual" about the
impunity enjoyed by the thugs and murderers of the "United Nations Era".
It's actually been all too real. The european nations instinctively
seek to appease, desperate to avoid confrontation at almost any cost.
The foreign ministries of the west are teaming with little Neville
Chamberlains, convinced that if they conceed enough to the wolves at the
gates, then those wolves will settle down and start being good chaps.
Post by Redbaiter
The war now is only a minor issue. The real concern is the
global tyranny of the left, and the way they have infiltrated
and taken control of our public services, our governments, our
education facilities, and most damaging, our media.
The war has not only exposed the hatred and intolerance of the
left, it has also exposed how deep seated is this hatred, how
widespread it is, and how successful the left can be in
attempting to exert their influence in every way possible.
The hounding of Bush and Blair is the most salient example of
the destructive forces that the left can call on when they need
to.
The left are great haters. And best of all, they reserve their very best
hatred for apostates. That won't bother Bush, but it's going to be a
long, cold retirement for Tony.
Post by Redbaiter
Their tactics are always the same, the lies, false allegations,
exaggerations, deceptions, misrepresentation deceit and
dishonesty. One sees the repellent and repugnant leftists on
this very newsgroup behaving in exactly the same thuggish way.
The problem is not the war, or exhaust emissions, or even the
foreshore, it is the influence of these odious scum, and their
predominance today.
What is it about being a first-year Arts student that makes them think
they know everything about the world? Maybe those polo-neck sweaters are
a little too tight.
Post by Redbaiter
I've never been a religious person, but the thought suddenly
occurs that another great flood wouldn't be such a bad idea. Or
perhaps its modern day equivalent, a massive high pressure fire
hose, pumping millions of gallons of water and sluicing all the
vile lying leftist filth that contaminate the streets down into
the sewers where they belong.
A flood might be problematic. Normally you'd say that self-starters
would build a boat and survive, but in the day and age of the Resource
Management Act, even they might not be able to save themselves; too many
planning consents required.
Post by Redbaiter
www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1226
An excerpt that reminds me of Bween's attacks on his ideological
buddy Paul Holmes-
"Wanting to change the existing system is however the umbrella
under which all Leftists at all times meet. Even at the height
of British socialism, for instance, British Leftists still
wanted more socialism. That permanent and corrosive
dissatisfaction with the world they live in is alone what makes
people Leftists. That is all they have in common. They are
extremely fractious and even murderous towards one-another
otherwise (e.g. Stalin versus Trotsky). It is in describing his
fellow revolutionaries (Kautsky and others) that Lenin himself
spoke swingeingly of "the full depth of their stupidity,
pedantry, baseness and betrayal of working-class interests"
(Lenin, 1952). He could hardly have spoken more contemptuously
of the Tsar."
Another good essay is "None Dare Call It Fascism' by Jack
Wheeler.
www.truebluenz.orcon.net.nz/newfile1.html#liberals
An excerpt-
"The result of both socialism and fascism is the same: the
destruction of economic freedom, replace the individual's choice
of how to make a peaceful, honest living with State edicts.
Fascism accomplishes this, however, more insidiously. Instead of
being a straightforward employee of the government, you and I
are told our lives and businesses are still private, while any
attempt to act as such is proscribed by some regulation -- until
we are trapped and immobilized in Washington's (Wellington's)
web."
Redbaiter
2003-10-03 20:02:16 UTC
Permalink
owend says...
Post by owend
Actually Red, I don't think there was anything "virtual" about the
impunity enjoyed by the thugs and murderers of the "United Nations Era".
It's actually been all too real. The european nations instinctively
seek to appease, desperate to avoid confrontation at almost any cost.
The foreign ministries of the west are teaming with little Neville
Chamberlains, convinced that if they conceed enough to the wolves at the
gates, then those wolves will settle down and start being good chaps.
For example their fawning over the thug Castro.
Post by owend
The left are great haters. And best of all, they reserve their very best
hatred for apostates. That won't bother Bush, but it's going to be a
long, cold retirement for Tony.
Siding with Bush has cost him dearly, right or wrong is of no
consequence.
Post by owend
A flood might be problematic. Normally you'd say that self-starters
would build a boat and survive, but in the day and age of the Resource
Management Act, even they might not be able to save themselves; too many
planning consents required.
Yes, no doubt you have seen the quite funny article on Noah
trying to build his ark today, and totally impeded by a plethora
of bureaucratic obstructions.
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
Michael Gordge
2003-10-03 03:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Redbaiter
Morrissey Breen says...
Post by Morrissey Breen
I don't like the terms "left" and "right". They are vague and
largely unhelpful. I think that when Redbaiter, for instance,
launches into one of his tirades against the "left", he really has no
idea of what he is really talking about.
We might be better advised, when discussing the likes of American
mouthpieces like Holmes, to use terms like "fascist" or
"proto-fascist" or "uncritical dupe of American propaganda".
Really, I don't think there is any need for such complicated
labels, especially since the hate campaign against George Bush
was initiated.
I have always been ambivalent about the war in Iraq, concerned
about what the long term outcome might be, but realising that
the US was bound to take proactive action against thugs and
murderers who had previously been acting with virtual impunity.
The war now is only a minor issue. The real concern is the
global tyranny of the left, and the way they have infiltrated
and taken control of our public services, our governments, our
education facilities, and most damaging, our media.
The war has not only exposed the hatred and intolerance of the
left, it has also exposed how deep seated is this hatred, how
widespread it is, and how successful the left can be in
attempting to exert their influence in every way possible.
The hounding of Bush and Blair is the most salient example of
the destructive forces that the left can call on when they need
to.
Their tactics are always the same, the lies, false allegations,
exaggerations, deceptions, misrepresentation deceit and
dishonesty. One sees the repellent and repugnant leftists on
this very newsgroup behaving in exactly the same thuggish way.
The problem is not the war, or exhaust emissions, or even the
foreshore, it is the influence of these odious scum, and their
predominance today.
I've never been a religious person, but the thought suddenly
occurs that another great flood wouldn't be such a bad idea. Or
perhaps its modern day equivalent, a massive high pressure fire
hose, pumping millions of gallons of water and sluicing all the
vile lying leftist filth that contaminate the streets down into
the sewers where they belong.
www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1226
An excerpt that reminds me of Bween's attacks on his ideological
buddy Paul Holmes-
"Wanting to change the existing system is however the umbrella
under which all Leftists at all times meet. Even at the height
of British socialism, for instance, British Leftists still
wanted more socialism. That permanent and corrosive
dissatisfaction with the world they live in is alone what makes
people Leftists. That is all they have in common. They are
extremely fractious and even murderous towards one-another
otherwise (e.g. Stalin versus Trotsky). It is in describing his
fellow revolutionaries (Kautsky and others) that Lenin himself
spoke swingeingly of "the full depth of their stupidity,
pedantry, baseness and betrayal of working-class interests"
(Lenin, 1952). He could hardly have spoken more contemptuously
of the Tsar."
Another good essay is "None Dare Call It Fascism' by Jack
Wheeler.
www.truebluenz.orcon.net.nz/newfile1.html#liberals
An excerpt-
"The result of both socialism and fascism is the same: the
destruction of economic freedom, replace the individual's choice
of how to make a peaceful, honest living with State edicts.
Fascism accomplishes this, however, more insidiously. Instead of
being a straightforward employee of the government, you and I
are told our lives and businesses are still private, while any
attempt to act as such is proscribed by some regulation -- until
we are trapped and immobilized in Washington's (Wellington's)
web."
And Mass-d-baiter reckons, Act have an alternative to socialism, what
a drongo.

Act want socialism just as much as socialists do.

I know I am right because Acts policies confirm I am right, eg Act
will keep the RMA, Act want to keep state welfare, Act want to make
Superanuation compulsory, Act claim the state must stay involved in
the education of OUR children, Act claim the state must stay involved
in Health, Act would NEVER privatise the roads, just about every Act
policy is socialist based.

Act just want to USE capitalism as a means to achieve a socilaist end,
just ask that lieing scum bag prick Prebble, he even wrote a book
about it.

Act are only less socialist than National, who are only just less
socialist than Labour and that's as good as it gets for them.

As for Mass-d-baiter, well I'm not sure anyone knows what he wants or
is about, including him/herself.

Cheers

Mike Gordge
Berend de Boer
2003-10-03 03:39:52 UTC
Permalink
Michael> Act
Michael> claim the state must stay involved in the education of
Michael> OUR children,

Not true, with ACT you will at least get vouchers. That's a good first
step. Better than ridiculous proposals that have no way of ever
becoming accepted anytime soon.
--
Regards,

Berend. (-:

*** Visit the Regional Ratepayers Rebellion website:
http://www.ratesrebellion.org.nz/
Morrissey Breen
2003-10-03 12:11:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Berend de Boer
Michael> Act
Michael> claim the state must stay involved in the education of
Michael> OUR children,
Not true, with ACT you will at least get vouchers. That's a good first
step. Better than ridiculous proposals that have no way of ever
becoming accepted anytime soon.
Berend,

Have you formally apologized yet for your gullible support for the
pirate invasion of Iraq? I mean, now that it's been established
beyond doubt that Bush and Blair lied, you will be apologizing, won't
you?

I'm assuming you are a man of honour.
Berend de Boer
2003-10-05 19:24:32 UTC
Permalink
Morrissey> Have you formally apologized yet for your gullible
Morrissey> support for the pirate invasion of Iraq? I mean, now
Morrissey> that it's been established beyond doubt that Bush and
Morrissey> Blair lied, you will be apologizing, won't you?

We've found torture chambers, mass graves, and a population that
overwhelmingly supported the forcible removal of Saddam, saying that
without that he never would have gone, and you ask me to apologize?


Morrissey> I'm assuming you are a man of honour.

What about you Morrissey? Already apologized to the Iraqi people that
you wanted them to continue living in fear and terror?
--
Berend.
Gregory Shearman
2003-10-06 00:25:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Berend de Boer
Morrissey> Have you formally apologized yet for your gullible
Morrissey> support for the pirate invasion of Iraq? I mean, now
Morrissey> that it's been established beyond doubt that Bush and
Morrissey> Blair lied, you will be apologizing, won't you?
We've found torture chambers, mass graves, and a population that
overwhelmingly supported the forcible removal of Saddam, saying that
without that he never would have gone, and you ask me to apologize?
Thousands dead, a country in ruins, no free elections, no
freedom, protesters shot dead by US military, little kids
getting blown up by unexploded US ordnance....

Yep. We want you to formally apologise.

Torture chambers? You talk hypocrisy... close down Camp X-ray
and Bagram Base in Afghanistan before accusing others of having
"torture chambers".

Mass graves? More hypocrisy. How many mass graves are needed to
bury the victims of the US invasion? Thousands.
--
Regards,

Gregory.

"Ding-a-Ding Dang, My Dang-a-Long Ling Long."
Berend de Boer
2003-10-06 18:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Morrissey> Have you formally apologized yet for your gullible
Morrissey> support for the pirate invasion of Iraq? I mean, now
Morrissey> that it's been established beyond doubt that Bush and
Morrissey> Blair lied, you will be apologizing, won't you?
Post by Berend de Boer
We've found torture chambers, mass graves, and a population
that overwhelmingly supported the forcible removal of Saddam,
saying that without that he never would have gone, and you ask
me to apologize?
Gregory> Thousands dead, a country in ruins, no free elections, no
Gregory> freedom, protesters shot dead by US military, little kids
Gregory> getting blown up by unexploded US ordnance....

Gregory> Yep. We want you to formally apologise.

Gregory> Torture chambers? You talk hypocrisy... close down Camp
Gregory> X-ray and Bagram Base in Afghanistan before accusing
Gregory> others of having "torture chambers".

Gregory> Mass graves? More hypocrisy. How many mass graves are
Gregory> needed to bury the victims of the US invasion? Thousands.

Yeah, live under Saddam was vastly better. Ah, those were the
times. Wish they came back.
--
Berend.
Gregory Shearman
2003-10-07 21:18:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Berend de Boer
Gregory> Torture chambers? You talk hypocrisy... close down Camp
Gregory> X-ray and Bagram Base in Afghanistan before accusing
Gregory> others of having "torture chambers".
Gregory> Mass graves? More hypocrisy. How many mass graves are
Gregory> needed to bury the victims of the US invasion? Thousands.
Yeah, live under Saddam was vastly better. Ah, those were the
times. Wish they came back.
Yep... they had water, they had an economy they had work... now
they have shit... they have colonial masters stealing their oil,
they don't have water or electricity... THEY are probably
wishing for the old times.
--
Regards,

Gregory.

"Ding-a-Ding Dang, My Dang-a-Long Ling Long."
Michael Gordge
2003-10-04 02:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Berend de Boer
Michael> Act
Michael> claim the state must stay involved in the education of
Michael> OUR children,
Not true, with ACT you will at least get vouchers. That's a good first
step. Better than ridiculous proposals that have no way of ever
becoming accepted anytime soon.
Berend, here's a copy and paste from Act's Education Policy

"Government's role should be to set minimum standards, inspect schools
and publicly report, and to ensure equal access to quality education
for rich and poor families alike."

Now you tell me where I am wrong to say that Act say the state should
still be involved with education.

Cheers

Mike Gordge
Berend de Boer
2003-10-05 19:26:26 UTC
Permalink
Michael> Act claim the state must stay involved in the education
Michael> of OUR children,
Post by Berend de Boer
Not true, with ACT you will at least get vouchers. That's a
good first step. Better than ridiculous proposals that have no
way of ever becoming accepted anytime soon.
Michael> Berend, here's a copy and paste from Act's Education
Michael> Policy

Michael> "Government's role should be to set minimum standards,
Michael> inspect schools and publicly report, and to ensure equal
Michael> access to quality education for rich and poor families
Michael> alike."

Michael> Now you tell me where I am wrong to say that Act say the
Michael> state should still be involved with education.

I understood your claim as "ACT only wants public schools",
i.e. forced education by state appointed teachers.

I'm not against minimum standards. A society is more than a number of
individuals as the libertarianz like to see it.
--
Regards,

Berend. (-:

*** Visit the Regional Ratepayers Rebellion website:
http://www.ratesrebellion.org.nz/
Michael Gordge
2003-10-07 06:30:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Berend de Boer
Michael> Act claim the state must stay involved in the education
Michael> of OUR children,
Post by Berend de Boer
Not true, with ACT you will at least get vouchers. That's a
good first step. Better than ridiculous proposals that have no
way of ever becoming accepted anytime soon.
Michael> Berend, here's a copy and paste from Act's Education
Michael> Policy
Michael> "Government's role should be to set minimum standards,
Michael> inspect schools and publicly report, and to ensure equal
Michael> access to quality education for rich and poor families
Michael> alike."
Michael> Now you tell me where I am wrong to say that Act say the
Michael> state should still be involved with education.
I understood your claim as "ACT only wants public schools",
i.e. forced education by state appointed teachers.
I'm not against minimum standards. A society is more than a number of
individuals as the libertarianz like to see it.
Berend, surely by NOW even YOU have learnt that ANY MINIMUM standard,
especially those set by the fucking state, instantly become the
"maximum standard", hence why so many illiterate kids are leaving
school. Hence why buildings built to a minimum standard leak, eg the
Building Code, which sets the minimum standards for buildings, should
be called the Barely Legal Code and NO amount of tinkering or
adjusting the buildinmg code will EVER stop people taking short cuts
to meet a "state set minimum building code."

Minimum standards become maximum standards and dont ever forget it.

Minimum standards, set by the state, leave no room and no incentive to
do better and they also give a distorted and unrealistic value of the
services provided.

BESIDES Berend, (and this is FAR more important its called a
"principle")

IT is NOT up to YOU to tell me what is a good education for MY fucking
kids Berend, and for the identical reasons, it is NOT up to ME to tell
you what are good standards for YOUR kids and for the IDENTICAL
reasons, neither is it up to a fucking GROUP of YOU, to tell me or
tell ANYONE what is good for THEIR kids education.

Who the fuck are YOU Berend AND who the fuck are a group of you, to
fucking well tell another parent how to educate THEIR children? Mind
your own fucking business Berend.

This IS the biggest fault with Act, they do NOT have any fucking
principles, NOR any fucking philosophy. They are a bunch of fucking
freedom frauds, WHO, especially freedom loving people, just can NOT
and should NEVER fucking well trust.

Act's pragmatic, compromising, contradicting history is ample proof of
that.

Cheers

Michael Gordge
Redbaiter
2003-10-03 20:23:58 UTC
Permalink
Michael Gordge says...
Post by Michael Gordge
Act want socialism just as much as socialists do.
I know I am right because Acts policies confirm I am right, eg Act
will keep the RMA, Act want to keep state welfare, Act want to make
Superanuation compulsory, Act claim the state must stay involved in
the education of OUR children, Act claim the state must stay involved
in Health, Act would NEVER privatise the roads, just about every Act
policy is socialist based.
Act just want to USE capitalism as a means to achieve a socilaist end,
just ask that lieing scum bag prick Prebble, he even wrote a book
about it.
Act are only less socialist than National, who are only just less
socialist than Labour and that's as good as it gets for them.
Michael has taken upon himself the role of Libertarianz
spokesman and at least in volume and words, does his political
party proud. Pity about the accuracy of his claims, but you
can't have everything I guess.

His passionate criticism of ACT gives rise to an interesting
question. What are the political party the LibertariaNZ actually
doing in NZ and what impact do they have on political direction?

ACT for instance have the best representatives in parliament at
the moment. Apart from a couple of standouts in the Nats, like
McCully, Katherine Rich perhaps and I can't think of another,
(Brash is a stodgy non performer) the main opposition to Labour
has come from ACT. Hard workers like Rod Hide, Deborah
Coddington, Stephen Franks and Muriel Newman stand head and
shoulders above most other opposition MPs, and their impact on
government in NZ (from an oppositional stance) has been pretty
effective. One only has to watch question time to see how
effectively they get under the skin of Labour's nomenklatura.

ACT also have a well organised political structure and a clearly
defined political strategy for remaining in parliament and
possibly increasing their vote.

Perhaps Michael Gordge can tell readers a few things about the
LibertariaNZ.

Who is the leader this week? Creswell or Watkins, or someone
else? What happened to Creswell's plans to stand in Coromandel?
What are the projections for membership growth? What are their
funding projections? What is their strategic plan? When will the
first Libertarian be elected to parliament? Are they going to be
able to file an election bond this year?

When will Ken the "small business" panelbeater, swamped with
government red tape and taxed and regulated to death, be
introduced to the enlightenment of Ayn Rand? What else, beside
plugging "Atlas Shrugged" are the LibertariaNZ doing to help
Ken?
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
Redbaiter
2003-10-03 20:26:25 UTC
Permalink
Michael Gordge says...
Post by Michael Gordge
Act want socialism just as much as socialists do.
I know I am right because Acts policies confirm I am right, eg Act
will keep the RMA, Act want to keep state welfare, Act want to make
Superanuation compulsory, Act claim the state must stay involved in
the education of OUR children, Act claim the state must stay involved
in Health, Act would NEVER privatise the roads, just about every Act
policy is socialist based.
Act just want to USE capitalism as a means to achieve a socilaist end,
just ask that lieing scum bag prick Prebble, he even wrote a book
about it.
Act are only less socialist than National, who are only just less
socialist than Labour and that's as good as it gets for them.
Michael has taken upon himself the role of Libertarianz
spokesman and at least in volume and words, does his political
party proud. Pity about the accuracy of his claims, but you
can't have everything I guess.

His passionate criticism of ACT gives rise to an interesting
question. What are the political party the LibertariaNZ actually
doing in NZ and what impact do they have on political direction?

ACT for instance have the best representatives in parliament at
the moment. Apart from a couple of standouts in the Nats, like
McCully, Katherine Rich perhaps and I can't think of another,
(Brash is a stodgy non performer) the main opposition to Labour
has come from ACT. Hard workers like Rod Hide, Deborah
Coddington, Stephen Franks and Muriel Newman stand head and
shoulders above most other opposition MPs, and their impact on
government in NZ (from an oppositional stance) has been pretty
effective. One only has to watch question time to see how
effectively they get under the skin of Labour's nomenklatura.

ACT also have a well organised political structure and a clearly
defined political strategy for remaining in parliament and
possibly increasing their vote.

Perhaps Michael Gordge can tell readers a few things about the
LibertariaNZ.

Who is the leader this week? Creswell or Watkins, or someone
else? What happened to Creswell's plans to stand in Coromandel?
What are the projections for membership growth? What are their
funding projections? What is their strategic plan? When will the
first Libertarian be elected to parliament? Are they going to be
able to file an election bond this year?

When will Ken the "small business" panelbeater, swamped with
government red tape and taxed and regulated to death, be
introduced to the enlightenment of Ayn Rand? What else, beside
plugging "Atlas Shrugged" are the LibertariaNZ doing to help
Ken?
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
Michael Gordge
2003-10-04 01:54:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Redbaiter
Michael Gordge says...
Post by Michael Gordge
Act want socialism just as much as socialists do.
I know I am right because Acts policies confirm I am right, eg Act
will keep the RMA, Act want to keep state welfare, Act want to make
Superanuation compulsory, Act claim the state must stay involved in
the education of OUR children, Act claim the state must stay involved
in Health, Act would NEVER privatise the roads, just about every Act
policy is socialist based.
Act just want to USE capitalism as a means to achieve a socilaist end,
just ask that lieing scum bag prick Prebble, he even wrote a book
about it.
Act are only less socialist than National, who are only just less
socialist than Labour and that's as good as it gets for them.
Michael has taken upon himself the role of Libertarianz
spokesman and at least in volume and words, does his political
party proud. Pity about the accuracy of his claims, but you
can't have everything I guess.
Oh mass-d-baiter, stop being such a silly dork, I am NOT and NEVER
have been a "spokesman" for Libertarianz.
Post by Redbaiter
His passionate criticism of ACT gives rise to an interesting
question. What are the political party the LibertariaNZ actually
doing in NZ and what impact do they have on political direction?
Oh, as a libertarian, IE. A REAL FREEDOM FIGHTER, mass-d-baiter, its
my job to keep Act in touch with their founding principles, which
clearly they have abandoned in the name of pragmatism and compromise,
they'll do anything to stay in the fucking beehive, eh mass-d-baiter?

Go back and read Act's founding principles mass-d-baiter and then
maybe you'll understand where I am coming from. From a founding
principle of aiming for zero taxation, they are now up to 20% because
they found the "philosophy" of zero taxation too hard to sell.

You forget or perhaps dont even know, that the person who helped write
the founding principles of Act, abandoned Act, when the lefties got
too much say and their way, he then helped write the constitution of
the Libertarianz. (Please note, there is NO capitals at the end of
Libertarianz)
Post by Redbaiter
ACT also have a well organised political structure and a clearly
defined political strategy for remaining in parliament and
possibly increasing their vote.
"political strategy", is that what you call it, I call it, compromise
compromise and even more compromise
Post by Redbaiter
Perhaps Michael Gordge can tell readers a few things about the
LibertariaNZ.
Mass-d-baiter, STOP trying to shift the debate away from Act, Act are
the ones who are fooling their members into thinking they are all
about individual freedom, personal responsibilty and private
enterprise, freedom of choice etc etc and then turn around and support
compulsory superanuation and a rehash of the most fascist Act in NZ
today, the RMA.

For fucks sake mass-d-baiter, not even Richard Prebble knows how to be
honest, eg at a meeting in Tauranga at the beginning of the last
election, Prebble said, "Act will abolish the RMA" I challenged him on
that because that is NOT what Act say at their web site, he said, and
I quote,

"I wrote Act's policy on the RMA, I know what it says, Act WILL
abolish the RMA if it became government" by this time he was shouting.

Just 14 hours later on Radio Pacific Prebble says, "Act will take out
all the bad things of the RMA and will leave in all that is good about
it."

So I phoned Radio Pacific to challenge him on that, I asked him, "when
were you lieing Richard Prebble, last night in Tauranga or now to the
listeners of Radio Pacific," the phone went "click"

I also asked Prebble, at the Tauranga meeting, if Act supported the
right of peaceful individuals to carry concealed weapons, he said NO,
I asked him, would Act dedriminalise drugs, I asked would Act ever
call taxation theft, he answered NO, to all my questions.

So, come on mass-d-baiter, admit it, Act are nothing but freedom
fraudsters.
Act want to use the philosophy and means of capitalism to achieve a
socialist end, even Prebble admits, that deep down, he is still a
socialist.


The rest of your attempted diversion away from Act, I have snipped.

Cheers

Michael Gordge
Redbaiter
2003-10-05 05:40:48 UTC
Permalink
Redbaiter says...
Post by Redbaiter
Michael Gordge says...
Post by Michael Gordge
Act want socialism just as much as socialists do.
I know I am right because Acts policies confirm I am right, eg Act
will keep the RMA, Act want to keep state welfare, Act want to make
Superanuation compulsory, Act claim the state must stay involved in
the education of OUR children, Act claim the state must stay involved
in Health, Act would NEVER privatise the roads, just about every Act
policy is socialist based.
Act just want to USE capitalism as a means to achieve a socilaist end,
just ask that lieing scum bag prick Prebble, he even wrote a book
about it.
Act are only less socialist than National, who are only just less
socialist than Labour and that's as good as it gets for them.
Michael has taken upon himself the role of Libertarianz
spokesman and at least in volume and words, does his political
party proud. Pity about the accuracy of his claims, but you
can't have everything I guess.
His passionate criticism of ACT gives rise to an interesting
question. What are the political party the LibertariaNZ actually
doing in NZ and what impact do they have on political direction?
ACT for instance have the best representatives in parliament at
the moment. Apart from a couple of standouts in the Nats, like
McCully, Katherine Rich perhaps and I can't think of another,
(Brash is a stodgy non performer) the main opposition to Labour
has come from ACT. Hard workers like Rod Hide, Deborah
Coddington, Stephen Franks and Muriel Newman stand head and
shoulders above most other opposition MPs, and their impact on
government in NZ (from an oppositional stance) has been pretty
effective. One only has to watch question time to see how
effectively they get under the skin of Labour's nomenklatura.
ACT also have a well organised political structure and a clearly
defined political strategy for remaining in parliament and
possibly increasing their vote.
Perhaps Michael Gordge can tell readers a few things about the
LibertariaNZ.
Who is the leader this week? Creswell or Watkins, or someone
else? What happened to Creswell's plans to stand in Coromandel?
What are the projections for membership growth? What are their
funding projections? What is their strategic plan? When will the
first Libertarian be elected to parliament? Are they going to be
able to file an election bond this year?
When will Ken the "small business" panelbeater, swamped with
government red tape and taxed and regulated to death, be
introduced to the enlightenment of Ayn Rand? What else, beside
plugging "Atlas Shrugged" are the LibertariaNZ doing to help
Ken?
Wow, the garrulous and gormless Gordge, who spends a lot of time
chastising other posters for failing to answer questions, has
apparently found plenty of time to post on other issues but not
to respond to the queries here...

Such a no show is an answer in itself really, isn't it?

Windbag...
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
steve
2003-10-03 06:36:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Redbaiter
I have always been ambivalent about the war in Iraq, concerned
about what the long term outcome might be, but realising that
the US was bound to take proactive action against thugs and
murderers who had previously been acting with virtual impunity.
Hussein's turfing out of Kuwait and the UN sanctions on Iraq for over a
decade disprove your assertion that he got away with anything.

"impunity" does not describe the state of affairs for Iraq between 1991 and
2003.
owend
2003-10-03 07:44:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by Redbaiter
I have always been ambivalent about the war in Iraq, concerned
about what the long term outcome might be, but realising that
the US was bound to take proactive action against thugs and
murderers who had previously been acting with virtual impunity.
Hussein's turfing out of Kuwait and the UN sanctions on Iraq for over a
decade disprove your assertion that he got away with anything.
"impunity" does not describe the state of affairs for Iraq between 1991 and
2003.
The sanctions against Iraq didn't hurt Hussein. The ruling class there
appear to have managed okay (probably helped by their French mates). And
Hussein didn't get "turfed" due to any actions from the left's venerated UN.
Denver
2003-10-03 13:39:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by steve
Post by Redbaiter
I have always been ambivalent about the war in Iraq, concerned
about what the long term outcome might be, but realising that
the US was bound to take proactive action against thugs and
murderers who had previously been acting with virtual impunity.
Hussein's turfing out of Kuwait and the UN sanctions on Iraq for over a
decade disprove your assertion that he got away with anything.
"impunity" does not describe the state of affairs for Iraq between 1991 and
2003.
Iraq is not Hussein, Hussein is not Iraq.

An obvious truth, but one you apparently missed nonetheless.
John Cawston
2003-10-03 22:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denver
Post by steve
Post by Redbaiter
I have always been ambivalent about the war in Iraq, concerned
about what the long term outcome might be, but realising that
the US was bound to take proactive action against thugs and
murderers who had previously been acting with virtual impunity.
Hussein's turfing out of Kuwait and the UN sanctions on Iraq for over a
decade disprove your assertion that he got away with anything.
"impunity" does not describe the state of affairs for Iraq between 1991
and
Post by steve
2003.
Iraq is not Hussein, Hussein is not Iraq.
An obvious truth, but one you apparently missed nonetheless.
And an extremely important one for the future of Iraq.
Saddam racked up several hundred billion dollars in known loans plus probably
a good chunk on the side as well. Most of this money was used to fight Iran
and also to build up his war machine. In the oil for money deals under the
sanctions he also creamed off plenty for himself, his (reduced) war machine,
WMDs and the like.

When discussing repayments of this money, there is a reasonably strong
feeling among Iraqis and many in the western countries that these are
Saddam's and the Ba'ath Party's debts, not Iraq. So it could be that Iraq is
forgiven "odious debt" related to war making and genuine debt where benefit
accrued to Iraq restructured.

This would have the rather elegant effect of also punishing those who
supplied Saddam with money and material for war by having their repayments
canceled.

If this quite old concept of forgiving debt is taken up, along with the
losses imposed on Saddam's war creditors it will be interesting to see who
squeals. Interestingly, Bush's request for US$20 billion to aid in the
reconstruction of Iraq is running into resistance from both sides of the
political fence in Washington as some senators believe it should be a loan,
not a grant. Perhaps they need to be reminded of the benefits that accrued to
America from its far sighted Marshall Plan after WW2.

JC
David Pears
2003-10-04 06:51:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Cawston
When discussing repayments of this money, there is a reasonably strong
feeling among Iraqis and many in the western countries that these are
Saddam's and the Ba'ath Party's debts, not Iraq.
Perhaps any international loans to a dictatorship should be deemed to
be to the dictator, rather than to the country itself? Let the lender
try and collect their repayments off the person they foolishly lent
the money to, or foreclose on the weapons.

That would be one way of cutting off the supply of funds and weapons
to dictatorships, unless the dictator had cash.

David
Peter Metcalfe
2003-10-02 21:35:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
I don't like the terms "left" and "right". They are vague and
largely unhelpful. I think that when Redbaiter, for instance,
launches into one of his tirades against the "left", he really has no
idea of what he is really talking about.
We might be better advised, when discussing the likes of American
mouthpieces like Holmes, to use terms like "fascist" or
"proto-fascist" or "uncritical dupe of American propaganda".
Left and right are vague but fascist isn't?

--Peter Metcalfe
Jason M
2003-10-03 04:51:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
Post by Jason M
Post by Morrissey Breen
Holmes is implacably anti-union, he's one hundred per cent behind the
rogue Bush administration, he's virulently pro-Israel, he's a crude
racist. All of these things, I would suggest, indicate a right wing
point of view....
Do you or anyone happen to have a list of what views are considered
right-wing or left-wing?
I don't like the terms "left" and "right". They are vague and
largely unhelpful. I think that when Redbaiter, for instance,
launches into one of his tirades against the "left", he really has no
idea of what he is really talking about.
We might be better advised, when discussing the likes of American
mouthpieces like Holmes, to use terms like "fascist" or
"proto-fascist" or "uncritical dupe of American propaganda".
In that case, how about a list of what policies NZ political parties
like or don't like.
Maybe it should be in the form of a policy plus a string of parties,
e.g.
anti-union: Nat ACT
etc
Joe Citizen
2003-10-01 10:48:36 UTC
Permalink
Get a hobby loser.

Joe.
Morrissey Breen
2003-10-01 16:09:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Citizen
Get a hobby loser.
Joe.
Didn't I just kick your asssss on another thread? Why the hell are you still here?
David Lloyd
2003-10-01 11:03:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country. 
Enough is enough old bean, you're turning into a mouse potato. Leave the leftover lentil and tofu
stew in the refrigerator, strap on your hemp strapped sandals and head to the nearest burger bar for
a feed. The carbo's will do you good. Perhaps you should consider a hobby? Photography, angling or
skydiving. Why not sign on for a couple of Community Education classes? Creative writing sounds
ideal. Forget about Paul Holmes and George W. Bush at least for an hour or two. Are the loathsome
duo worth all of this aggravation?
Nathan T
2003-10-01 21:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morrissey Breen
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country. 
See, now THAT'S satire
Brian Tozer
2003-10-01 23:31:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nathan T
Post by Morrissey Breen
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
BOOK PAUL HOLMES FOR YOUR CHRISTMAS FUNCTION!!!!!
Television's most controversial personality, Paul Holmes has changed
the face of news reporting in this country.
See, now THAT'S satire
And brilliant with it........
MB, you can give up your day job.

Brian Tozer
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...