My Mission

Jameson's picture
Submitted by Jameson on Sat, 2008-09-06 03:31

I have a single-minded objective: to help bring an end to the most corrupt government New Zealand has ever seen.

In June this year Prime Minister Helen Clark issued a statement on the Mugabe regime in which she urged “the United Nations Security Council, regional organisations in Africa, and Zimbabwe’s neighbours to work for the holding of free and fair elections; and call on President Robert Mugabe to step down for the good of his country.”

That she said this without blushing demonstrates just how deep the corruption has seeped. She sees no vice in stealing money from the taxpayer to fund an 11th hour campaign that saw her retain power by the narrowest of majorities. She has justified within herself the bullying of the judiciary to drop charges on a prima facie case of the public money. She sleeps soundly at night in the knowledge that she took the unprecedented step to rewrite the law to make the aforementioned theft legal so as to avoid being taken to court by Libertarianz leader Bernard Darnton.

Two years later her government followed up this Mugabean act with the EFA, singularly the most draconian, anti-freedom legislation ever written in New Zealand: the act that works to dissolve the first and last right of a citizenry in a civilised country – that is, the right to criticise one's government.

When I took the role on the marketing team for the National Party I knew I’d have to suffer the enmity of most of you here. I also knew I'd be roundly criticised by my peers for a campaign that was always going to have fewer teeth than its predecessor. I don’t blame Cresswell & Co. for their mockery, outrage and sense of betrayal; they will never see the light that exists between National and a party that is truly corrupt.

I want to see the restoration of free and fair elections in New Zealand, and since Helen Clark refuses to step down for the good of her country I’m doing everything in my power to make her. John Key has promised to end the EFA. It’s my job to make sure he has the chance to do so.


( categories: )

As I said, Robert...

Jameson's picture

If National fails to restore our right to criticise them in the next election year (or any subsequent one for that matter) I will concede that I was guilty of gullibility and gladly cast the first stone.

At about...

Robert's picture

7min and 30 seconds in, after he declares that National will repeal the EFB, we hear him say that he will replace it with something else...

And that's the stinking red herring you are about to swallow. Sure, they MAY repeal a piece of legislation called the EFB. But what will it be replaced with?

It's called Bait and Switch and it works every time - because people focus on the short term consequences and don't think ahead. So while you crow about defeating the burglar breaking in your front door, John Key, Nick Smith et al. will be sneaking in the back door and raiding your liberty.

You will be duped Jameson, but it may take you four years to notice.

That Bill would be easy to ditch surely

gregster's picture

The EFB is hardly contentious. If Key can't rip it up- he is hopeless.

Delighted to hear it,

Elijah's picture

Delighted to hear it, Glenn.

Pleased you are not on some naive 'blind loyalty' sojourn...and yes, if these chaps are fibbing (they probably are) you will feel conned and get stuck into them.

http://www.nzcapitalist.blogspot.com/

Now that I'm free to speak

Jameson's picture

Robert's assertion that "many of the statist policies that afflict NZ now were introduced under National, and the free-speech limiting EFB law was supported by National from the opposition's benches," is completely unsupported by fact.

John Key was absolutely clear about this unconscionable attack on our Freedom of Speech: he said, "We will repeal this law."

If National fails to restore our right to criticise them in the next election year I will be the first to rail against them, for I will have been duped.

To those...

Olivia's picture

who have sent me private messages on Solo in the last few days, please be aware that the reason I have not replied is because I'm having trouble with my blasted Safari... when I click on the messages it crashes my system.

If you want to contact me privately, please PM either Kasper or Glenn and I'm sure they will be happy to pass you my private email address.

Liv

I thought Ron Paul was for a

Duncan Bayne's picture

I thought Ron Paul was for a while, but that didn't last.

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Duncan, you are definitely

Lanza Morio's picture

Duncan, you are definitely on to something there.

The chickens are coming home to roost. For decades, the Republicans have maintained power by promising everything to everyone. Their advantage was that they stood, rhetorically and when it suited them, for small government. Even into the mid-90s that was their main line.

Well, it was never true on principle. Today it's not even convincing rhetoric. I recall that McCain mentioned it in passing in his speech at the Republican Convention. Mostly though, McCain talked about how virtuous it is to sacrifice the things you love for your country. What a principled leader he would be!

Obama is principled. He is a principled socialist. He says clearly in his speeches, "We are our brother's keepers."

What else do you need to know about the guy?

But at least he is honest.

Supporting either candidate is impossible. There is no answer this time.

McCain and Small Government

McCain may be running on small government and lower taxes, but only as campaign slogans not on principle. The only area of difference between McCain and the Messiah is the latter's lack of experience in anything but community agitation and running a presidential campaign. The government under either will grow and take more freedoms away.

Wm

And as I've stated - and

Duncan Bayne's picture

And as I've stated - and Glenn and Claudia have yet to post anything to contradict me

And that's fair enough too, as it turns out, because as it turns out they can't discuss such matters publicly until their current gig is finished.

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Oh yes it does

Lindsay Perigo's picture

But that doesn't mean they're wrong about Reagan.

Oh yes it does.

Some of us who were around at the time are very grateful Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter, and then the "evil empire." Some of us even remember Rothbard cheering the fall of Saigon, and supporting Bill Clinton. Saddamite scumbucket.

There's a lot I don't like

Duncan Bayne's picture

There's a lot I don't like about the Rockwell / Rothbard camp - in particular Rothbard's anarchism (he proposes a 'cure' that's worse than the disease) and Rockwell's willful ignorance of the threat posed by Islamism and, earlier, communism (you'd think he'd learn; he was preaching detente while the Comintern was literally plotting to take over the world).

But that doesn't mean they're wrong about Reagan.

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Ah!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Rothbard. Rockwell. I get it all now.

Sure - no argument there.

Duncan Bayne's picture

Sure - no argument there. But what will they accomplish in practice, regardless of their rhetoric? Reagan made all the same good noises as McCain (I wonder if the same person is responsible for writing their speeches?) but in practice was a disaster.

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Or

Robert's picture

armed revolt!!!

Or...

atlascott's picture

"It would be like having to choose between Obama and Ralph Nader."

Or suicide?

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

NZ politics

Robert's picture

has been dominated in recent (is last 20ish years) by the proportional representation provision in its electoral laws. Under those provisions, any party that either wins 5% popular vote gains a proportion of the seats in parliament set aside for that purpose. The balance of the seats in parliament go to those who've won right to represent their electorate.

It is historically very difficult for any party to win an outright majority in the popular vote and the electorate seats have in recent times been shared equally between both main parties so that neither can gain a clear stranglehold in this upcoming election. As such since the introduction of proportional representation, the current Prime Minister has had to form alliances with smaller parties in order to keep her position.

This means that small parties can wag the dog and that Libz has a unique opportunity to bring libertarian polices to central government.

The problem is that NZers - even after 20ish years - still haven't woken up to that fact and those who should be Libz allies won't band together and turn Libz from a long shot into a sure shot for a minor party position in the house. Unfortunately the leftie minor parties have never wanted for committed, well-heeled, supporters but Libz has. For reasons I'll never understand, would be libertarians (and there are a number of them) ~always~ try for short term relief of corrupt parties on the 'right-wing' of NZ politics instead of biting the bullet and digging in for a longer campaign more in keeping with their professed principles.

It is useful to highlight the fact that many of the statist policies that afflict NZ now were introduced under National, and the free-speech limiting EFB law was supported by National from the opposition's benches. Thus Jameson's contention that National will rid NZ of the EFB isn't founded in solid ground at all. He is voting for the party of pragmatic power-lusters and I speak as someone who personally knows a couple of underlings to National MPs.

These are the reasons for the heat in this argument. Glenn and Olivia ~do~ get it philosophically but have decided to side with the Statists for temporary relief. In effect trying to relieve their headache by banging their heads against the opposite wall.

But unlike the US election, where there is a sliver of daylight between the candidates positions. National and Labor don't differ by degree, they differ by minutes and seconds. It would be like having to choose between Obama and Ralph Nader.

"rejected by Peter" "loyalty oaths" and such.

Robert's picture

Ahem,

Perhaps we can let Peter speak to the reasons why he did or did not cross Jameson off his Xmas card list? He's big enough and ugly enough to speak for himself yes?

From what was published on SOLO, I seem to recall it was a public act of goading and Peter's wish not to waste drinking time arguing the toss about the worthiness of National that is the root of the argument. Hostilities sprouted from there.

I consider myself among Peter's friends and I've never signed a loyalty oath or any such bullshit.

If there were such a thing it would be to Irish Whiskey, Lou Reed and Frank Lloyd Wright before something as capricious as a political party. Peter is the personification of the desire to be interested in politics only to speed the day when he no longer has to be. And those who suggest different clearly do not know the man.

If you put a gun to my head and asked me to guess why Peter hates Nationalites, I'd suggest it has something to do with the fact that Peter the Architect is often called upon to navigate the consultant and regulation filled moat - of National's creation - that surrounds Peter's customers. You know, those evil productive bastards who'd like to destroy the world by getting Peter to design them a house for their own land.

Imagine, as an honest person, attempting to explain to laypersons why they must pay thousands for a permit to paint their house or why they must employ a licensed tree-surgeon to prune their own fucking shrubbery. That is only my guess.

Peter's true reasons for not burying the hatchet are his own. Leave it at that if for no other reason that it is none of your fucking business.

I share Peter's frustration for those who support national, but that is their business and I'm content to let reality convince them of the error of their ways. It is an unfortunate trait in humans that the lessons we learn best are those we learn from personally fucking up.

Regardless of Glenn's & Olivia's respective talents the fact remains that this is National's election to loose. And Libz would be better served spending their effort chipping away at the whole Labor and National machine rather than two minor cogs in them.

Wow...

atlascott's picture

"...and although I have occasionally pointed out etiquette mistakes, generally speaking there is no grubby 'Middle Class' Shocked gaucherie you would expect from a National party social function...or working class eating with fingers you would expect from a Labour party function. "

Goddamnit, Elijah, you drive me crazy. If I were PC, I'd keep you locked in a closet any time I was trying to explain why they should vote Libz.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Duncan, please reconsider

atlascott's picture

"There would be no functional difference between a McCain presidency and an Obama presidency."

I am going to refrain from listing the obvious differences in government that would result. I agree that a viable 3rd choice is sorely needed in America. But that does not change the fact that McCain is running on smaller government and lower taxes, and Obama is running on 'the government will do it all for you.'

I think you are wrong about this.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Can someone bring me up to speed?

atlascott's picture

The Libz are, in actuality, despite Mr. Cresswell's good work, a very tiny party in NZ, with virtually no chance at being voted into power, correct?

The Nats have a real shot and are less reprehensible than Labor? (Obviously open to debate).

No brainer. Same analysis that will have me voting for Republicans, who want to nationalize the tort system, criminalize abortion, legislate their religious morality. The alternatives (Libertarians with no chance of winning; Democrats, who are a Socialist nightmare waiting to happen) are no alternative at all.

We all would love to see Libz in power but Glenn has no magic wand beyond his pen--and his pen cannot singly change reality in such short order. And he has to be paid for his productivity.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Luke has once again summed

Elijah's picture

Luke has once again summed things up well...gosh! (who would have thought? Eye ha ha!)

The Libz are the party party and everyone is a splendid chap....and although I have occasionally pointed out etiquette mistakes, generally speaking there is no grubby 'Middle Class' Shocked gaucherie you would expect from a National party social function...or working class eating with fingers you would expect from a Labour party function.

You chaps are probably not such students of political history as to have an encyclopedic knowledge of British politics from the civil war ...(no, the other one, the English one)...until World War 1 like I do, but I should point out the Whigs..(and I consider the NZ Libz to be a natural heir to the Whig party circa 1800).. spent the best part of THREE DECADES in opposition rather than compromise over principles.

I say it again in case you missed it....the Whig party spent three decades in opposition rather than compromise on their principles.

http://www.nzcapitalist.blogspot.com/

Libz and altruism

Luke H's picture

Very altruistic of them.

It's pretty ironic really.  With little chance of profit to ourselves, we donate fairly large amounts of time and money devoted to changing the environment of New Zealand politics to make things better (in the freedom sense) for all.

It is fairly altruistic, although I expect a barrage of messages about why it is rational to stand up for our rights, defend what is morally good etc, etc. Sticking out tongue

Personally I get quite a lot of social enjoyment out of it (the Libz being the Party party).  How selfish of me.  Smiling

Oh, groan!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

No difference between McCain and Obama? What utter crap. Obama is a Saddamite. And that's just for starters. McCain is seriously flawed—see the press release below this thread. But the idea there's no difference is nonsense on stilts.

Agreed but

gregster's picture

Osama is the candidate of freedom's enemies. Economically he would set America in reverse to a greater degree.

He's with the eco-nazis and is an appeaser. (Bush wasn't tough enough for me also.)

There would be a measurable difference in their respective economic results. That's plain.

No difference between McCain and Obama

Duncan Bayne's picture

There would be no functional difference between a McCain presidency and an Obama presidency. Consider that the Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac nationalisation has taken place under a Republican Government; what makes you think Obama would manage to do any worse?

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Duncan

gregster's picture

I see what you're saying and that the Libz have professed not being in it to win anything (rather PC isn't it?) but to influence people. Very altruistic of them. Won't stop me voting Libz though.

So you reckon Americans won't be any better off with McCain than Osama? That is what you have implied.

"Galt help us when pettiness

Kasper's picture

"Galt help us when pettiness masquerades as principle and principles are a rationalization of mean-spiritedness."

Worse, who would have known that an innocent friendship starting with house parties and attending barbecues would have resulted in Glenn having accumulated a debt all that time. Glen - who expressed honest opinions and started a worthy debate on Solo - was excommunicated from the libz 'barbie' event and rejected by Peter like a bad debtor who never paid up with his loyalty, commitment and labour to the Libz party.
Everybody around Glen thought that the terms of the two's friendship was a mere affinity of their company. Not so - entering a friendship with PC and spending time, Glenn unknowingly was signing a treaty of loyalty and commitment to a party which he had nothing to do with officially. Voting wise, professionally or even financially.

I personally think the failure of friendship between Glenn and PC was undue and rests on PC's shoulders.

kkulak

It's about the message not the votes

Duncan Bayne's picture

And as I've stated - and Glenn and Claudia have yet to post anything to contradict me - New Zealanders won't be any better off under National/ACT than they would under Labour. In fact they'll be worse off because they'll have been hoodwinked into believing that there's a difference.

A vote for National in the hopes of change represents the failure of one of the core Libz messages - that both National and Act are socialist, collectivist, authoritarian parties based on false philosophies, and that they're functionally equivalent when in power (remember the RMA?)

New Zealanders who want a change of Government should be voting Libz across the board.

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

We are forgetting I think -

gregster's picture

The Libz would only (in these times, or if ever?) be elected above the 5% threshold if National and/or ACT looked a shoo-in.

If it becomes too-close-to-call at election time, swinging voters will make sure of the downfall of Helengrad by voting ACT/National.

Agreed

Duncan Bayne's picture

 Glenn Jameson:  He's Not the Devil.

 Agreed - and neither is Claudia.  They're just wrong about this issue, and as a consequence are undoing a lot of the past work of the Libz; in fact they've set themselves up in direct opposition to the Libz for this election which has pissed a bunch of people off (myself included).  That said, if I were in New Zealand I'd love to take the opportunity to spend an evening at Galbraith's convincing them they're wrong.

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Well said, Mark and

Jeremy's picture

Well said, Mark and Lindsay.  Not hard to note that the most strident protests come from the hurt feelings of certain Libertarianz.  Understandable, sure.  I might be angry too.  But were I deeply involved in getting Libertarianz into the NZ government, I would not lay that burden solely upon Glenn Jameson and Olivia.   I would hope the merits of my party's platform would do that for me.  Not fancy billboards.  If billboards do win your elections, I say get the fuck out now. Run for your lives! 

I have a new billboard idea.

 Glenn Jameson:  He's Not the Devil.

Not mine! Galt help us when

Mark Hubbard's picture

Not mine! Galt help us when pettiness masquerades as principle and principles are a rationalisation of mean-spiritedness.

 

Second that. This is a damned shame: I know Glenn and Olivia are not the enemy - but then, as I've said on other threads, I place people before ideology right up until the last minute.

Still, SOLO comes into its own as the one place left we can all 'speak'. I hope no one stops doing so here.

Galt help us ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I do not think Peter, Julian or anyone else, has lost a 'friend' over this....(but you and Glenn have)

Not mine! Galt help us when pettiness masquerades as principle and principles are a rationalisation of mean-spiritedness.

Duncan

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I'm pleased and reassured to note your reborn solicititude for "the work done by Libertarianz since its creation" given your professed embarrassment at the Nanny State dominatrix and your support for the flounced Dinther's campaign for weasel-wordery a few months back! Eye

Destroyer indeed

Duncan Bayne's picture

or else they will be seen as a destroyer to the friend's work

But by supporting National - not just with your votes but with your minds & productivty - that is exactly what you are doing

Every time you convince a New Zealand voter that a National Government would be  different to a Labour Government, you are destroying the work done by Libertarianz since its creation -the painstaking effort to explain to voters the similarities between National and Labour, & the fact that their underlying philosophy is identical.

By trying to convince New Zealanders that they'll be better off under National than Labour, you are lying to them, and every New Zealander you convince represents material damage to the acceptance of Libertarian ideas in mainstream society and politics.

You're right when you say the Libz won't win the next election. But - at this stage - seats in Parliament isn't what it's about. It's about spreading ideas, good ideas. And you are doing the exact opposite  - you are helping cement a philosophy that is pure poison, just because you prefer one bunch of political charlatans to another near-identical bunch.

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Better?

Olivia's picture

Would they be a better government than the Libertarianz Olivia?

The Libertarianz have the best ideas, no two ways about it.
Them *being* the government is not a serious question relevant to me for this election. I was booked a few weeks ago - and even got up at 7am on a Saturday - to campaign with them handing out brochures, just to let the public know of their existence along with some of their ideas, but it was rained off. Haven't heard a sausage since.

I do not think Peter,

Elijah's picture

I do not think Peter, Julian or anyone else, has lost a 'friend' over this....(but you and Glenn have) 

On election day...tick the LIBERTARIANZ box...

Julian...

Olivia's picture

I just want to clarify something here with you regarding this statement you've made.

He is therefore actively working to destroy the work of people who had considered him a friend.

This is twisted, in a way that I believe, is malevolent and rationalistic. It makes me wonder if you've really given it much thought.

If people want friendship on the BASIS that another should agree wholeheartedly with their values, offer their professional expertise free of charge in support of those values (even though the "friends" who want those services don't ask outright for them), never criticize or challenge those values and certainly never be paid to give their services to any form of competition to those values... or else they will be seen as a destroyer to the friend's work. I ask you, does that really sound like a friend to you? Those terms of "friendship" are based more on the values of the obligation-driven altruist camp, not ours. In fact, that is what I would call a very, very, very Fair Weather Friend, my friend.

National ~= Labour

Duncan Bayne's picture

National will not be significantly better in Government than Labour. Even their pledge to repeal the EFA is half-arsed; they want to "... retain measures that provide greater transparency in political donations."

I'd be interested to see how they plan to "reach out to all the parties in Parliament to find a genuine consensus on electoral law" - is the plan to repeal the EFA, then put together nonpartisan legislation to replace it which will include said measures? Or will they keep the EFA in place until such time as an accord is reached bteween all the parties in Parliament - some time after hell freezes over presumably? Or, even more ominously, will they 'retain the measures' by passing their own partisan equivalent of the EFA? Enquiring minds want to know.

The only alternative to the collectivism and statism on offer from both National and Labour is the Libertarianz.

By helping National, you are effectively diverting voter support away from the Libertarianz towards National. You are helping to exacerbate the problem in two ways: by convincing the population that National is a real alternative to Labour (which it isn't) and in doing so hurting the party that is.

Getting rid of Clark is indeed a noble endeavour but only if she's replaced with someone better. The man still intends to prevent anonymous political donations, still intends to kneecap the economy with an ETS (even if it's different to Labour's), doesn't have the balls to undo any of Labour's key legislation ...

Personally, I like both you and Glenn from what I know of you. But you are making a terrible mistake by spending your precious talents in the support of a gutless wonder of a politician in charge of a party that's just the same as (almost) all the others.

 

National will be a better government than Labour

 

Would they be a better government than the Libertarianz Olivia? Glenn? That is the issue that has P.C. & others so riled - and has me shaking my head in disbelief.

 

---
Buy and wear InfidelGear - 100% of all InfidelGear profit goes to SOLO!

Is there such a thing as a

Richard Wiig's picture

Is there such a thing as a left that isn't loony???

"If this applies to me also,

Peter Cresswell's picture

"If this applies to me also, on behalf of Glenn and myself, I say get fucked."

And so you shall be.

"..I have been Glenn's

Elijah's picture

"..I have been Glenn's creative partner on the National campaign team for this election..."

Oh Olivia Shocked ...gosh...this is awful news.

I was giving you numerous suggestions for trading shares and commodities for months in order for you to earn large profits (which you would have); and so you did not need to do this...join with the Tories and their deceit...to earn a living.

On election day...tick the LIBERTARIANZ box...

Julian and Peter

Olivia's picture

I have been Glenn's creative partner on the National campaign team for this election.

I was clear from the beginning that two reasons motivated me to pitch for the work. Earning a living and getting rid of Helen Clark as our PM. Those are two good reasons and I would've thought someone who runs a blog with the message "Promoting Capitalistic Acts Between Consenting Adults" would understand this.

If you're going to damn Glenn, you can damn me along with him. I do not have a guilty conscience because of this... as far as I'm concerned, though clearly not a bastion of Objectivism, individual freedom or capitalism, National will be a better government than Labour.

and in so doing he is undermining and belittling the work of genuine advocates of capitalism, freedom, and individual rights.

I don't see how this conclusion is drawn, other than you guys are taking it very, very personally. You obviously feel betrayed. But did any of you go to Glenn at the outside of an upcoming election and ask him for his services in advertising... I mean officially ask? Mitch did a few months ago, but by then we were well and truly ensconced in the campaign for National.

Peter:

But to those with a turd for a brain...

If this applies to me also, on behalf of Glenn and myself, I say get fucked.

Bit of a feeding frenzy ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

As indeed it is...

Robert's picture

But given the fact that your new employers are two-faced lying gits, I'd insist on being paid in cash. Any cheques they promise you might bounce - just like the election promises you are promoting in your ad campaign.

I personally don't hold any animosity for Glenn, like all other alchemists before him, he to will find out that no matter how hard you polish a turd, it will not turn into a nugget of gold. But I imagine that he will be much better for the lesson reality will teach him when John Key, Nick Smith, et al. take the reigns.

PS: this isn't soothsaying either. You only have to look at the way they behaved the last time they were in power...

The 'mistake' was deliberate

Lance's picture

The 'mistake' was deliberate and all this extra attention it has generated appears to have made the minor embarrassment worth it.

Well I hadn't seen it until now Smiling. I was also previously unaware of any Nat sentiment toward thinning the ranks of DHB bureaucracy. Do they have an actual policy on it though (yeah right)?

Not that I'm feeling any particular urges to vote Nat all of a sudden, but that may be because of the deep loathing I feel toward them and that I lack the faith that those on the left do that the Nats have a secret, radical, free market agenda. Sticking out tongue

My Business

Jameson's picture

And my client's. I won't be discussing this any further until after the election.

Julian

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I agree with everything you say about National. As you well know. It was I who called them "National Socialists" on radio. I have had Nats walk out on me for calling them Nazis. I have had National leaders berate me for my beratings of them for their lack of principle. In good faith, Glenn believes otherwise. I'm not going to ban him from barbecues or damn him on a Labour Party website because of it. As I recall, he thought better of his belittling of Libz, even though they deserved a kick in the ass, and apologised for it. I struggle to comprehend the singular urge to ostracise and demonise this one individual, whom I know to be sincere and honourable, especially when calling the fatwa episode to mind. Perhaps Glenn would have been safer working for Labour.

Point of Clarification

JulianD's picture

Lindsay,

Glenn has not used “making a buck” or “keeping himself afloat” in his justification for actively helping the National Party. His justification is based solely on his opposition to corruption and the Electoral Finance Act.

Neither did he have the choice of Labour v National. In NZ – unlike the US – we have the Libertarianz – a group who opposes the same things that he claims to oppose. He has, however, chosen to support National – and in so doing he is undermining and belittling the work of genuine advocates of capitalism, freedom, and individual rights. He is therefore actively working to destroy the work of people who had considered him a friend.

And he is doing this by working to bring to power a gang of morally corrupt power-seeking individuals. A gang who have not said what will replace the EFA – for you can be sure – what will come out of any “repeal” of the EFA, will not be what any principled advocate of freedom will be able to stomach.

In the minds of some, there will always be a reason or a special circumstance, not to support and vote for the principle of freedom. The 2011 election will be no different – except you can be sure that whatever the outcome of the 2008 election - we will have less freedom in 2011 than we have today.

Julian

There's room on the right

gregster's picture

The best we can expect is National to compromise with ACT who, with any luck, could take some ideas from the Libz.

The objective is Labour out (landslide) and I hope Glenn's successful with this. I look forward to a celebratory tipple when the job's done. Or else it's travel agent here I come.

It's easy for those who

Mark Hubbard's picture

It's easy for those who don't have to go out and make a buck to pass judgment on those who do.

 

Yes. That's exactly the point I was making in the first thread.

Still, National! Heart-breaking. Glenn's going to need an awful lot of vomit bags to get through this election Smiling

Thoughts

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Glenn does not have to justify himself. It's easy for those who don't have to go out and make a buck to pass judgment on those who do. I knew about this early on. I said it wasn't something I would do, given my view of the Nats as filth, which is still my view, but since he had decided otherwise he should come up with some decent slogans that the scum would have to live up to.

Let's remind ourselves that there's wide divergence within Objectivism about voting. It's not that long ago I was fighting almost single-handedly against the view from the top that in America one should vote Dem-scum across the board because of a looming Republican theocracy. There were a number of brave silences maintained about that. I can't see the merit in demonising Mr. Jameson for helping the Nats when in good faith he thinks there's good reason to, quite apart from keeping himself afloat.

Linz

But

gregster's picture

you'll be speaking freely from your cave (hyperbolically speaking).

What does a citizen have

Jameson's picture

if he has no freedom to speak?

Glenn

Mark Hubbard's picture

Referring to my two questions below again, I've just finished listening to the idiot Nick Smith on Agenda, warbling on about National's plan for their ETS.

One can't trade free speech off against a ruined economy, but, well ... jeez

Charlie Wilson's War

Jameson's picture

Thanks for your support, Ben, Sandi, Mark, and Reed. Much appreciated given that my expectations of any support were almost nil.

"... they will never see the light that exists between National and a party that is truly corrupt."

"Whereas you can never demonstrate it."

I think the onus is on you, Peter, to demonstrate National's corruption, and by corruption I mean on the Banana Republic scale where Labour's stolen election and EFA rank alongside the worst of them.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

Big Ben's picture

 The enemy of my enemy is my friend argument does apply in this case. As long as Labour is in power freedom inclined voters will see National as the answer, the Libz hay day was during a Nats government and I think its next one (hopefully a better one) will be too.

Best of luck Jameson.

 

 

"We reserve the right to live"

Benjamin Netanyahu former prime minister of Isreal

Glenn - two questions: 1)

Mark Hubbard's picture

Glenn - two questions:

1) Are National on record to get rid of the EFA? And replace it with nothing else?

2) The ETS is the biggest economic issue today, and I think the biggest threat to our economy since Muldoon almost bankrupted us. Yet Key is going to bring in an ETS in some form? How does this sit with you?

I was far more comfortable with your backing of ACT than I am with National. They seem to be way too far over on the dark side to be saved.

And once

gregster's picture

National dumps the EFA there's the RMA, ETS etc. ad infinitum. But they're not talking of dumping anything. Unless pocket-rocket Rodney has any sway? Smiling

Added: But we've seen the ACT policies and they're rather socialist too!

The most important thing

reed's picture

The most important thing this election is that Labour loses.

Good luck.

webhost101.net - Websites made easy.

FFS

Peter Cresswell's picture

"When I took the role on the marketing team for the National Party I knew I’d have to suffer the enmity of most of you here."

Add it to the existing sum, chum.

"I also knew I'd be roundly criticised by my peers for a campaign that was always going to have fewer teeth than its predecessor."

Or for a campaign that looks increasingly like sabotage by ineptitude.

"I don’t blame Cresswell & Co. for their mockery, outrage and sense of betrayal..."

O really, that's very big of you.

"... they will never see the light that exists between National and a party that is truly corrupt."

Whereas you can never demonstrate it. But to those with a turd for a brain -- who have clearly 'seen the light' -- no explanation is necessary?

"John Key has promised to end the EFA"

To replace it with ...

Perhaps you could send me the details when they emerge of EFA-Lite, and realise in the meantime that any statement from any politician that isn't nailed down is worth less than the stuff you wipe off your shoes after talking to ad-men.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.