Did Margaret Thatcher change the world for the better?
Yes, but socialism won in the end.
No, but she might inspire the next generation.
Other (please explain)
Total votes: 19
EFA: Some Thoughts, Some Quotes ... PS—Don't Vote National
Submitted by Lance on Wed, 2007-12-19 10:38
It's safe to say the passing of the Electoral Finance Act has left a foul taste in my mouth. The dirty damned lies that have led us to this point are on a par with, if not more disgusting than, the act itself. There is the 'laughable were it not a tragedy' supposed consistency that the EFB had when it was first checked against the Bill of Rights. Remember this was when it said that $1 spent on advertising meant registration with the state. There is the exposure of Greens as nothing more than unprincipled political whores. A supposedly principled, youthful, rebellious even, activist party that sold its soul to the gray, banal, life-sucking, joyless, evil of statism and proceeded to swallow political dick for votes. I think invoking the 'Rod Donald grave-spin' is in bad taste, but one can't help but wonder what he would have made of it. There is the perpetuated lie that money spent to reach people with a message, a communication between free and private citizens, for Galt's sake, is the same as buying votes or buying elections. Influence is not a dirty word. People, private fucking citizens Helen, can and do influence each other. It's called interaction. And when people spend money to interact with as many people as they can, to say, "Hey, the Labour government is sucking the life out of us. Good god wake up they're stealing our souls and eating our children," any influence that has is under no goddamn circumstances "undue."
"We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people."
But what sticks out in my mind, beyond the sickening arrogance of Labour, beyond the dangerous rhetoric of Winston "our censorship laws are perhaps too liberal" Peters, beyond the hideous stench of corruption of the whole damned process, is the smug, snide look on the face of John Key and Bill English when they first started speaking out against the bill in the media.
National are not our saviours—they cannot be trusted any more than Labour can. To them this wasn't an all-out assault against free expression. No, this was a golden opportunity. I'll never forget the overjoyed look on John Key's face while describing just how draconian the EFB was. Smiling and laughing the whole way. These are evil, evil, pricks. Suckers of Satan's cock, to invoke the late great Bill Hicks. Do not for one second think that they are any more conducive to liberty in New Zealand than Labour. They are exactly the same brand of evil fucks. If Labour are the type to launch a "dramatic assault" on liberty, then National are the type to give her a quiet back alley raping, then tell us that she was asking for it. Voting National just to dislodge Labour would be votes wasted.
There is one party and one party only that is conducive to liberty in New Zealand and that is the Libertarianz. Can we expect our votes to get them in in 2008? No, I don't expect it, but they deserve our support. They deserve as big a number as they can muster, if only to give them the will to carry on. The only vote wasted, would be any vote NOT given to the Libertarianz. Parties that get voted for get noticed.
That is all... for now.
More SOLO Store
The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand