Thursday, September 11, 2008

Eight more reasons to dump Clark

Garth George today says stories from the past week have given us all eight more reasons not to vote for Uncle Helen- and they have nothing to do with Winston Peters!
Theres the ETS, jobs for the Liarbour lackeys, 400 deaths a year due to hospital bed shortages, parental donations still needed for schools, our (un) armed services, police no longer allowed to run for council, Labour pushing for taxpayer funding of parties and its constant nannying.
I'm surprised there were only 8 reasons.
Can you think of any others,
But as Garth says:
Roll on November!

15 comments:

Inventory2 said...

"I'm surprised there were only 8 reasons."

Homepaddock made the same comment on my post on this - but as I replied, Garth George only writes a column, not the whole newspaper!

But as usual, he is right on the money.

Anonymous said...

Big Reason #9

Helen as good as killed that cop

They should have been armed - with machine pistols, not fucking glock pea-shooters or nothing at all.

What headline would you rather wake up to?

Two Policemen shot by crims in South Auckland, One dead

Or

Two crims dead, one police wounded


It really is that simple.

Xend Krazley said...

Roll on November?
Do people still believe there's going to be an election?
I wonder why this idea isn't being floated on I Predict.

Ackers said...

I thought Garth George had retired to the provinces. What a tosser.

Easily the worst thing about granny Herald when I last resided in the country.

Lucyna Maria said...

The unfortunate thing is that if we throw out Labour, will anything really change if National gets in?

homepaddock said...

Lucyna - being led by a party whose leader isn't corrupt, with policies which will promote economic growth and thereby support the social initiatives we want will be a great improvement on what we've got now.

Alan said...

Gath George is a good man, with
morals. He writes common sense
articles, which cannot be said of
knackers comments.

Psycho Milt said...

Homepaddock: Those would be a great improvement - pity we're not going to get them from National.

Lucyna actually has a very valid question. Look at those 8 points:

ETS: National was planning one too.
Jobs for Labour lackeys: Will become jobs for National lackeys.
400 deaths a year due to hospital shortages: Was also a feature of the last National govt, and will be a feature of the next one.
Parental donations still needed for our schools: will only become worse under National, who believe parents should be paying for their kids education.
(Un) armed services: were run down under the last National govt, and there's no reason to expect anything different from the next one.
Labour pushing for taxpayer-funding of parties: on this one, there is a difference: National is presumably quite happy with its current approach of anonymous donations by businessmen shopping for policies. Can't say I find that preferable.
Labour's constant nannying: the nannying will be of a different flavour under National, but still nannying.

In other words, they may be reasons not to vote Labour, but they're certainly not reasons to vote National.

And as for Anonymous Fascist's "Helen as good as killed that cop," hands up all those who really think National would have routinely equipped our cops with automatic weapons if they'd been the govt the last 9 years. Anybody?

Sus said...

Ackers: I can take or leave Garth George, myself, but that's not the point. Refute his points, if you can. Good luck.

Lucyna/HP: Welcome to what some of us have been saying since the day Key was made Nat leader. I'd love to have faith in him to seriously change things, but he's said nothing to date to make me think so. In fact, *what* he's said makes me think precisely the opposite!

Milt: Agreed (see above) with most of that. Disagree - obviously - with two; education and political donations. Education should be privatised as a matter of urgency; to hell with the statist bastards; and who gives what to whom is not my business.

Not yours, either. Nobody should be able to stop you from putting your hand in your pocket and vice versa.

Sus said...

Correction: there *might* be fewer poor souls languishing on the die-while-you're-waiting lists if the Nats follow through with more privatisation. Big 'if', of course, with the dynamically-deficient Tony Ryall in charge.

Actually, they'll probably bugger it up by keeping their noses firmly *in* it, so scrub that.

Nah. Probably no change at all, mores the pity.

Falafulu Fisi said...

I agree with Garth George that National shouldn't even concentrate on having any ETS if they win the election.

It is amazing how National criticizes Labour's ETS but they intend to implement one themselves similar or just slightly different in wording to the current one that Labour is pushing thru. Are voters being too stupid to see that? I guess so.

I hope that Rodney will drag a few MPs into Parliament with him, so that they can pressure National to drop/water-down or completely kill any future ETS all together.

Lucyna Maria said...

Sus, you don't need to welcome me as I've had many of my own doubts and blogged about some them ever since the last election. I've also never been a vocal National supporter.

Homepaddock, unfortunately I can only go on what politicians do rather than what they say. And so far, the image of John Key grinning like he was in with the big boys now when he did that deal over the anti-smacking bill has confirmed my assessment of him when I saw him in a debate before the last election I keep hoping to be proved wrong, yet somehow that hasn't happened yet.

Sus said...

Lucyna, I believe you live on the Kapiti Coast, yes? Did you by any chance attend Key's meeting in Levin a month ago? (A Sunday a/noon).

I heard about it quite by accident the next day. JK was very well received and apparently spoke - without notes - for a couple of hours about what National planned to do in its first term and then a second, if they won it. There was seating for 500 which filled really quickly, with many others standing. Doubt if those numbers have been seen since the days of Rob Muldoon.

Admittedly I was talking to a National party stalwart, but an honest chap - and very nice nonetheless!! ;)

Just wondered if you'd heard about it & popped in.

Anonymous said...


And as for Anonymous Fascist's "Helen as good as killed that cop," hands up all those who really think National would have routinely equipped our cops with automatic weapons if they'd been the govt the last 9 years. Anybody?


Routine? Or do you mean on and undercover mission outside a fucking "P" lab?

All cops on undercover or drug duty need to be able to return fire as a matter of course. And, yes, "Psycho Milt" - under national they certainly would have been

Psycho Milt said...

All cops on undercover or drug duty need to be able to return fire as a matter of course. And, yes, "Psycho Milt" - under national they certainly would have been

They would? What do you base that belief on? National's demonstrated commitment to providing cops with automatic weapons last time they were in office? Hardly. National's declared policy of arming cops with automatic weapons? Haven't seen such a policy. Your personal fantasy? Sounds more like it.

Still, if any senior National types are reading this and actually are planning to train up the Police tech support unit in urban warfare using automatic weapons, do feel free to leap in...