About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 6:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Bob's right on the money. Him and I agree. She won't be remembered as a great PM because she has only ever aspired to to be the leader of the pack & a merchant of pull.

Adios & good riddance.

Ross

Post 1

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 6:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The way you go on people are going to get the impression you don't even like Helen Clark.

I know it's a mixed blessing, but I would rather have a PM with some ball barings than a sissy weaselly dithering fop with the gravity of a particularly light-weight planetoid such as had become the tradition until Clarkster stepped into her Prime Ministerial jackboots.
 But that's me.


Post 2

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 6:30pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Exactly what is about Helen Clark's jackboots that you like, Rick?

Post 3

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 7:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm just sayin'....if someone's going to have their jackboots on my exquisite floppoly doppolies better it be stark evil and measured malevolence than pandering and spinning Jenny or chucklehead Jim.

Post 4

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 7:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
More to the point, show me a politician who doesn't have a grander vision of and for themselves, than for the country!

And while I'm on the NZ poltician rant, here's a definition of a psychological disorder I found:

"...can also participate succesfully in the political process and can emerge as leaders or patriots "who wrap themselves in a flag of convenience and enrich themselves by callously exploiting ethnic, cultural, or racial tensions and grievances".

Tell me that isn't Winston Peters or practically any of them!

By the way the definition is that of a Psychopath!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Post 5

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 8:56pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Rick: you're not making any bloody sense, mate.

Daniel: sure, shameful self-aggrandisement applies to most politicians but Clark and her old university buddies are political pack animals whose collective character, raison and demeanour will always define them as a species apart. They have no love for humanity, only for a bankrupt philosophy, & a megalomaniacal desire to see it implemented. Their whole beings are consumed by it.

Clark for one, will suffer not only a defeat at the polls, but a severe crushing of her very soul out of all proportion to the election loss. Most politicians who experience defeats are not crushed. She will be. The others go back to their former lives. To Clark, peddling pull *is* her whole life. That's what makes her so pathetic and so dangerous all at once.

Ross

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 6

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 9:54pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I said I'd rather have a cold hard bitch than a warm soft turd
Sooner take on a real fighter than a Nazi dodo bird
Rather be bossed around by a mountain climber than a castrated girly lier
Or messed with by a vertebrate than a beach ball from Rakia
If disposed to beating back a chick who seeks to rob and farm me
I'd rather go up against a gnarled old oak than a tortured willow tree
An instrument worthy of messing with our lives
Is ever so much more galling if it's dead behind the eyes
I know Helen Clark is mad and bad and wrong
But on top of all of that you cannot say she isn't strong
I don't like what she says but at least she takes position
Better someone who can call some shots and make a damn decision!
Someone who is bad but can look me in the eye,
Someone worth spitting on before she makes me die.

Post 7

Monday, September 12, 2005 - 11:43pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Rick, sadly, you're dumping a trail of bullshit that would fertilise the Canterbury plains :-)

So what if she makes decisions? So did Hitler!

So what if she appears strong? So did Stalin!

Now (and here's the thing), she ain't Hitler & she ain't Stalin but that's *only* because of geographical and temporal displacement. Chuck her in a Tardis and send her back to Germany circa 1937 and she'd be goose-stepping, Deutschland Uber Alles-ing & Jew-baiting with the best of them.

Jeez, judge someone by their *ideas* & their SOL, not by their strength of conviction or the forcefulness of their actions.

Ross
Voting Libertarianz on Saturday.

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 8

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 1:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think Rick might be saying what is said in this article...
 
http://solohq.com/Articles/Perigo/The_New_Zealand_Election_-_Statism_or_Selfhood.shtml
 
As Helen Clark says, you won't die wondering what she thinks about something, whereas with Don Brash, and previous National party leaders.
 
Actually, come to think of it, Bob Jones is wrong.  Helen Clark and her party are the ones that "do" have the vision for New Zealand, exemplified by their recent budget and policy announcements that aim to turn the whole country into beneficiaries.  It's National who see themselves as the "natural party of government" and spend their whole time whether in or out of power trying to follow public opinion.
 
Look how Don Brash stalls on virtually everything he is asked, National aren't going to change anything, just 'review'.
 
Hayden
 


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 9

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 2:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Check it out, Hayden.

I'm not saying that Brash & the Nats are in any way champions of the market or of property rights but if you can't see the danger inherent in a continuation of Clark's Marxist agenda, then you're deluding yourself.

Brash may be a Babe in the Woods and a neo-conservative but at least National has a stated set of principles that you can disparage them for compromising on.

What are you gonna do with Labour? Oh, Helen! thanks for the beating! It was wonderful! You're so strong and decisive! Oh, the joy!. Hit me again!

Fuck that. I want to see her gone. She and her government are *more* inimical to freedom in NZ than a Brash-led coalition ever will be. You take what you can get until something better comes along. It ain't compromise--it's call reality.

I'm voting Libz but by Christ Almighty, I'll cheer every bastard who votes against Clark whatever their creed!

Ross

Post 10

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 3:21amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
 
I'll cheer every bastard who votes against Clark whatever their creed!

You and me both Ross.


Post 11

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 7:13amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"Rick, sadly, you're dumping a trail of bullshit that would fertilise the Canterbury plains"

So what else is new?

Robert

Who has already voted for Libertarianz. Vote early and vote often!!!


Post 12

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 4:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Robert:

"Vote early and vote often."

With my altered & photocopied voting cards, I think I can get at least 8 votes in before the polls close :-)

Ross

Post 13

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 5:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Gods help me...
Jeez, judge someone by their *ideas* & their SOL, not by their strength of conviction or the forcefulness of their actions.
Am I not?

 You tell me, ceteris paribus, would you sooner go to war against spineless jellies or lions like us?

 It makes some difference to me, but if not to you then leave the Clarks & Trotters to me and I'll leave mopping up pomposity and toadying brown-nosers to you.

ps Thanks Hayden, yes.


Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Post 14

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - 1:28amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Rick has a point. There is a trade off between ditching the commie bitch and voting in the spineless conservatives.

In the UK election, I argued that Labour wasn't that bad, and the Conservatives were too spineless to vote in their favour. It's not quite so clear in the NZ election because the Bitch is much worse than Blair, and Brash is much better than whoever the Tory leader was.

There's also a short term/long-term trade-off. If you think the Bitch is really that bad you had better vote National. If you think she isn't quite as bad as say, Stalin, then you should support the long-term cause for freedom and vote Libz.

I voted Libz.


Post 15

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - 3:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I've heard NZ doesn't have preferential voting - it's first past the post. With preferential voting, you can give your first vote to a minor party and then preference the major party that has a much stronger chance of being able to win.

Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Post 16

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - 3:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm not saying that Brash & the Nats are in any way champions of the market or of property rights but if you can't see the danger inherent in a continuation of Clark's Marxist agenda, then you're deluding yourself.

Brash may be a Babe in the Woods and a neo-conservative but at least National has a stated set of principles that you can disparage them for compromising on.

Hi Ross,

I think you might have just contradicted yourself here.  When you talk of Clark's Marxist agenda then you are agreeing that she does have a grand vision, a Marxist one, which means that Bob Jones's quote is wrong when it says that she doesn't.  What is also important is that the party behind her share that agenda and also want to see it put into practice.

Secondly, National doesn't have a stated set of principles, at most Don Brash does.  Behind him I can't think of too many that share his vision but I can think of many that don't.  National is the party of Doug Graham, Nick Smith, Tony Ryall, Lockwood Smith, etc etc.

Look at it this way.  When Helen Clark goes, her creeping socialist agenda will continue in the Labour party.  When Don Brash goes I very much doubt that National will continue his agenda.

Lastly, I didn't mean to imply that you supported National.  I'd love to see her gone as well and in 48 hours I'll be voting Libz as well.

Regards,

Hayden


Post 17

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 5:47pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hayden

Subsequent comments on this thread have moved away from the import of the original quote. My point was (along with BJ) that statists, while appearing to be selfless devotees of the common good are, in fact, nothing but narcissistic megalomaniacs.

Clark & her cohorts are indeed Marxists. But that doesn't necessarily mean they possess any grand vision for New Zealand other than as a vehicle for their own glory.

My point about the Nats having a set of principles you can call them on is true.

From their website:

"The National Party was founded on principles of individual responsibility, private enterprise, and reward for individual effort. These principles are the only sure path to a society of personal freedom and rising standards of living for all."

Now, that's a political statement and as such needs to be taken within the context of realpolitik but at least, until they rescind it, you can call them on it. You'll find no such statements on the Labour site. I'm not defending National's neo-con, "kindler-gentler capitalism" mutterings, I'm simply suggesting that individuals find hope where they can.

I've said many times on this site that the reason the statists keep advancing, victorious, is that they never take their eyes off the ball. Despite their often infantile squabbling, they seem to possess a strong flocking instinct or groupthink mentality that sees them triumph incrementally. I therefore take your point about the loss of Clark not stilting the prevailing ideology within Labour but remember this: collectivists love a demagogue. Enter Clark. An embittered political animal if ever their was one. She and her close buddies are part of a wave of Marxist devotees that became emboldened during their university days in the late sixties-early seventies *and* the apostasy of Douglas, Prebble, et al in the eighties. Deal *that* bunch a hard blow with say, two terms in the wilderness, and you achieve a small victory.

Labourites are on a holy mission. It's a semi-mystical calling. That's why they speak of "The Fourth Labour Government!" as if proclaiming the end of slavery or the fall of the Berlin Wall. They need a reality check & I'm pretty sure they're gonna get one come Saturday.

A related point re National. I'm voting Libz because it's simply the right thing to do. My Sense of Life demands I do. To do other would to be untrue to myself. Yet, I fully realise that me voting Libz will do nothing to oust Clark. Well, that's just as it is. You have to pick your fights. Sometimes you fight the fights you can win & sometimes you fight the ones that are worth fighting.

Ross




Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.