https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I
am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >government.
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I
am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>government.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), TonyThere is no potential government of the "Right", only the centre right!
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I
am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for
delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working
government of the Right . . .
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I
am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for
delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working
government of the Right . . .
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), TonyThere is no potential government of the "Right", only the centre right!
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>government of the Right . . .
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >Parliament.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 20:06:29 -0000 (UTC), TonyUp to you to prove it Rich.
<lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), TonyThere is no potential government of the "Right", only the centre right! Prove it!
<lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>government of the Right . . .
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>A vast improvement on the Marxist and loony Labour government still grifting off the taxpayer!
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by Parliament.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 20:06:29 -0000 (UTC), TonyWhat? You imbecile.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), TonyThere is no potential government of the "Right", only the centre right!
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>government of the Right . . .
Prove it!
the abuse [Winston] gets back from the Nasty Nats will just
increase his price for delivering policy support if that becomes
essential for a working government of the Right . . .
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>I referred to "Nasty Nats" - what is so hard about understanding that?
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>Parliament.
So who are you actually referring to and what is your point?
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
the abuse [Winston] gets back from the Nasty Nats will just
increase his price for delivering policy support if that becomes
essential for a working government of the Right . . .
Rich is right, Crash's small-mindedness, emblematic of the Nat
mindset, is exactly why Winston dealt with Labour in 2017. And yet,
Nats are still doing it, bizarre! Good thing Luxon is different.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:45:08 GMT, willynilly@qwert.com (Willy Nilly)
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
the abuse [Winston] gets back from the Nasty Nats will just
increase his price for delivering policy support if that becomes
essential for a working government of the Right . . .
Rich is right, Crash's small-mindedness, emblematic of the Nat
mindset, is exactly why Winston dealt with Labour in 2017. And yet,
Nats are still doing it, bizarre! Good thing Luxon is different.
Luxon made it clear that he would prefer not to have to form any
arrangements with Winston,
but is more sensible than many National
supporters, and some National candidates/MPs. He has however done
little to curb those who cannot forgive Winston for breaking from
National in the first place, let alone going into government with
Labour, and despite embracing Peter Dunne being similarly prepared to
work with any government . . . . Some of those who most regard
Winston as a traitor to the National Party probably cannot remember
him being a member of National from 1978 to 1993. It is easier for
Luxon to pretend than it would have been for their past few leaders .
. .
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >Parliament.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:17:38 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>You really are the limit. Nobody has deleted any part of this thread.
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>Parliament.
Irrelevant to my original post - where I was referring to Winston's >>demonstrably false accusations against Ardern in the minutes just
prior to the mosque attack in Christchurch. I am hoping that Luxon
deals with Winston firmly because of this.
Your original post has long since been deleted by a poster that
prefers their own agenda over rational discussion and decency.
MyThat quote is in fact the original post in this thread - unchanged and not deleted.
comment was however relevant to the post that said: "Winston will not,
if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I am never wrong.
Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number 1. Take note Mr
Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of government."
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>Parliament.
Irrelevant to my original post - where I was referring to Winston's >demonstrably false accusations against Ardern in the minutes just
prior to the mosque attack in Christchurch. I am hoping that Luxon
deals with Winston firmly because of this.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:17:38 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>Parliament.
Irrelevant to my original post - where I was referring to Winston's >>demonstrably false accusations against Ardern in the minutes just
prior to the mosque attack in Christchurch. I am hoping that Luxon
deals with Winston firmly because of this.
Your original post has long since been deleted by a poster that
prefers their own agenda over rational discussion and decency. My
comment was however relevant to the post that said: "Winston will not,
if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I am never wrong.
Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number 1. Take note Mr
Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of government."
On 2023-10-27, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Winston is playing his game, he always has a plan whether we like it or not.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:45:08 GMT, willynilly@qwert.com (Willy Nilly)
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
the abuse [Winston] gets back from the Nasty Nats will just
increase his price for delivering policy support if that becomes
essential for a working government of the Right . . .
Rich is right, Crash's small-mindedness, emblematic of the Nat
mindset, is exactly why Winston dealt with Labour in 2017. And yet,
Nats are still doing it, bizarre! Good thing Luxon is different.
Luxon made it clear that he would prefer not to have to form any
arrangements with Winston,
Why have 3 parties in your coalition when 2 will get you the numbers to >Govern? A no brainer.
but is more sensible than many National
supporters, and some National candidates/MPs. He has however done
little to curb those who cannot forgive Winston for breaking from
National in the first place, let alone going into government with
Labour, and despite embracing Peter Dunne being similarly prepared to
work with any government . . . . Some of those who most regard
Winston as a traitor to the National Party probably cannot remember
him being a member of National from 1978 to 1993. It is easier for
Luxon to pretend than it would have been for their past few leaders .
. .
In a MMP situation it is expected that some party(ies) will form a coalition >with "opposite" sides in each election. If the above attitude exists we
might as well get back to FFP. Labour/Greens National/Act on the other and >cancel all the rest.
Ceratinly looks like that after 30 years of MMP the MPs are not up to speed. After several hundred years of the so-called Westminster system of government we have learned one thing. MPs are never up to the game except in times of war and then it is more often the case that we forgive them if we win the war. Cynical? Not really.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 10:04:04 AM UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>A vast improvement on the Marxist and loony Labour government still grifting off the taxpayer!
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/msr25uefYes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I
am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number
1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of
government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse
he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for
delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working
government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both
National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by
Parliament.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>"Dirty tricks"to many refers to the last six years of an increasingly stupid and despotic pack of liars called Labour! The only shit is that being spread by our left wing media and pos like you Rich!
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>Parliament.
So who are you actually referring to and what is your point?I referred to "Nasty Nats" - what is so hard about understanding that?
If I referred to "Dirty Tricks" as well, you would understand the
group that included Slater and Farrar and many others, spewing their
lies and venom to all parties that are opposed to the National Party. Winston Peters is obviously aware that some in National do not like
him, and indeed have not only actively campaigned against him, but personally dislike him and who will work against him even if he does
come to an arrangement to assist National form a government. Is it so surprising that putting up with shit from National may affect his
price for cooperation?
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:17:38 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon -
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>Parliament.
Irrelevant to my original post - where I was referring to Winston's >demonstrably false accusations against Ardern in the minutes justYour original post has long since been deleted by a poster that
prior to the mosque attack in Christchurch. I am hoping that Luxon
deals with Winston firmly because of this.
prefers their own agenda over rational discussion and decency. My
comment was however relevant to the post that said: "Winston will not,
if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I am never wrong.
Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number 1. Take note Mr
Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of government."
On 27 Oct 2023 02:22:01 GMT, Gordon <Gor...@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-10-27, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:17:38 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>><lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of
government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon - >>>>the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>Parliament.
Irrelevant to my original post - where I was referring to Winston's >>>demonstrably false accusations against Ardern in the minutes just >>>prior to the mosque attack in Christchurch. I am hoping that Luxon >>>deals with Winston firmly because of this.
Your original post has long since been deleted by a poster that
prefers their own agenda over rational discussion and decency. My
comment was however relevant to the post that said: "Winston will not,
if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I am never wrong.
Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number 1. Take note Mr
Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of government."
So when are we going to hear from Labour that thaey were wrong about the >Covid vaccaines?In what way were they wrong?
Politicians of of colours seldom admit they are wrong.
On 2023-10-27, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:In what way were they wrong?
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:17:38 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:03:11 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:30:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:25:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:36:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>https://tinyurl.com/msr25uef
Yes please.
Winston will not, if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I >>>>>>>>am never wrong. Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number >>>>>>>>1.
Take note Mr Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of >>>>>>>>government.
Winston does not care about pushing lies about Labour - but the abuse >>>>>>he gets back from the Nasty Nats will just increase his price for >>>>>>delivering policy support if that becomes essential for a working >>>>>>government of the Right . . .
Yet again a response that contains 100% anti-National rhetoric. Both >>>>>National and ACT are reported as not responding to Peters' claim:
https://tinyurl.com/bdhyk9fj
So, Rich, your accusation of abuse from National is indeed a lie.
I was not referring to an official response from Christopher Luxon - >>>>the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>Parliament.
Irrelevant to my original post - where I was referring to Winston's >>>demonstrably false accusations against Ardern in the minutes just
prior to the mosque attack in Christchurch. I am hoping that Luxon
deals with Winston firmly because of this.
Your original post has long since been deleted by a poster that
prefers their own agenda over rational discussion and decency. My
comment was however relevant to the post that said: "Winston will not,
if he remains true to character. Rule number 1 - I am never wrong.
Rule number 2 - if I am wrong, refer to Rule number 1. Take note Mr
Luxon. If you have the choice, cut this snowflake out of government."
So when are we going to hear from Labour that thaey were wrong about the >Covid vaccaines?
Politicians of of colours seldom admit they are wrong.
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>Parliament.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BRthe Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become
common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general; it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually
fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most
understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with -
and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most
of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not
have views that many would disagree with - having such views does
distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite
what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what
was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald
Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are
also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well
known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer
Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >distance himself from them . . .
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament or supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become
common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually
fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most
understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with -
and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most
of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not
have views that many would disagree with - having such views does
distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite
what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what
was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald
Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are
also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well
known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer
Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >distance himself from them . . .
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament or
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become
common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually
fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with -
and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most
of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not
have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite
what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what
was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald
Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are
also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well
known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>distance himself from them . . .
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:05:02 -0000 (UTC), TonyThat is a lie.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament >>or
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become
common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
this being one of them. You have on numerous occasions asserted thatAnd that is another lie.
your opinions do not need any support from either written or verbal
views of others.
In this you are at least consistent in your fantasy,I do not have fanbtaisies - I am pragmatic and beloieve in scienec - unlike you.
but it does not make those fantasies any more believable.
There is an updated commentary written prior to the 2023 election hereNothing to refute - it is obvioous;y nonsense and has been shown to be many times.
that may be useful to you Tony. You may not like it, but apparently
you have no evidence to refute it either . . . >https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
And for those that may wish to understand a little more, look at andMore nonsense of coutrse.
read the commentary regarding the 2020 USA presidential election: >https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020
Now watch and see if Tony throws his toys out of the cot and deletesYou are beyond childish. The only stuff I delete is your abusive sarcasm and sometimes for brevity.
truths he finds unpalatable . . . . Over to you, Tony! (but also see
below)
No test was set and will not be - what an idiotic notion.it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually
fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with - >>>and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most
of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not
have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite
what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what
was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald >>>Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are
also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well
known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>>distance himself from them . . .
And to return to the Subject of this thread:
Christopher Luxon has passed his first test to be allowed to join with >Winston Peters and David Seymour in an NZ1ACTNat government
- he hasYou and the helpers to Luxon will learn who is the boss - Luxon will be and no one else. You really do live your fantasies. You need help.
declined to criticise Winston for his Trumpist lie about Ardern not
having disclosed to the public the day after the Mosque shooting that
she and others had received the shooter's manifesto and that a call
had been made to police minutes prior to the shooting. Luxon may not
have a clue about many things, but he knows that it is never
appropriate to disagree with the boss, and that the truth sometimes
have to give way to more important issues . . .
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:05:02 -0000 (UTC), TonyThat is a lie.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament >>>or
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR >>>>- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become >>>>common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
this being one of them. You have on numerous occasions asserted thatAnd that is another lie.
your opinions do not need any support from either written or verbal
views of others.
In this you are at least consistent in your fantasy,I do not have fanbtaisies - I am pragmatic and beloieve in scienec - unlike you.
but it does not make those fantasies any more believable.
I will compliment you on one thing however - you are without question the most >abusive person in this newsgroup, and constently so. Well done for pproviding a
guaranteed laugh every post.
Back to the topic.
There are no far right postere here, and in many years there has not been a >single one - that is a fact.
All people are entitl;ed to express opinions despite your desire to suppress >that right - after all that is a right that you exercise - this thread is an >example of that - lots of opinions from you and no evidence of value - you are >entitled however and so are we all (do you follow? I doubt it!).
Nothing to refute - it is obvioous;y nonsense and has been shown to be many >times.
There is an updated commentary written prior to the 2023 election here
that may be useful to you Tony. You may not like it, but apparently
you have no evidence to refute it either . . . >>https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
More nonsense of coutrse.
And for those that may wish to understand a little more, look at and
read the commentary regarding the 2020 USA presidential election: >>https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020
You are beyond childish. The only stuff I delete is your abusive sarcasm and >sometimes for brevity.
Now watch and see if Tony throws his toys out of the cot and deletes
truths he finds unpalatable . . . . Over to you, Tony! (but also see >>below)
I can understand why someoine as sociopathic as you would hate to see their >oh-so-precious words removed, but that is part of the illness - suck it up.
No test was set and will not be - what an idiotic notion.
it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually >>>>fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>>>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with - >>>>and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most >>>>of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not >>>>have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>>>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>>>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite >>>>what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what >>>>was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald >>>>Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are >>>>also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well >>>>known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>>>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>>>distance himself from them . . .
And to return to the Subject of this thread:
Christopher Luxon has passed his first test to be allowed to join with >>Winston Peters and David Seymour in an NZ1ACTNat government
- he hasYou and the helpers to Luxon will learn who is the boss - Luxon will be and no >one else. You really do live your fantasies. You need help.
declined to criticise Winston for his Trumpist lie about Ardern not
having disclosed to the public the day after the Mosque shooting that
she and others had received the shooter's manifesto and that a call
had been made to police minutes prior to the shooting. Luxon may not
have a clue about many things, but he knows that it is never
appropriate to disagree with the boss, and that the truth sometimes
have to give way to more important issues . . .
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:05:02 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <bl...@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament or
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become
common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
this being one of them. You have on numerous occasions asserted that
your opinions do not need any support from either written or verbal
views of others. In this you are at least consistent in your fantasy,
but it does not make those fantasies any more believable.
<further mindless highly coloured political bullshit also snipped>it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually
fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with - >>and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most >>of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not
have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite >>what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what
was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald >>Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are >>also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well >>known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>distance himself from them . . .
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:31:33 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become
common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general; it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually
fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with -
and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most
of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not
have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite
what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what
was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald
Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are
also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well
known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>distance himself from them . . .
So which Nats are nice and which Nats are nasty?
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:05:02 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament or
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become
common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
this being one of them. You have on numerous occasions asserted that
your opinions do not need any support from either written or verbal
views of others. In this you are at least consistent in your fantasy,
but it does not make those fantasies any more believable.
There is an updated commentary written prior to the 2023 election here
that may be useful to you Tony. You may not like it, but apparently
you have no evidence to refute it either . . . https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
And for those that may wish to understand a little more, look at and
read the commentary regarding the 2020 USA presidential election: https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020
Now watch and see if Tony throws his toys out of the cot and deletes
truths he finds unpalatable . . . . Over to you, Tony! (but also see
below)
it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually
fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with - >>>and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most
of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not
have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite
what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what
was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald >>>Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are
also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well
known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>>distance himself from them . . .
And to return to the Subject of this thread:
Christopher Luxon has passed his first test to be allowed to join with Winston Peters and David Seymour in an NZ1ACTNat government - he has
declined to criticise Winston for his Trumpist lie about Ardern not
having disclosed to the public the day after the Mosque shooting that
she and others had received the shooter's manifesto and that a call
had been made to police minutes prior to the shooting. Luxon may not
have a clue about many things, but he knows that it is never
appropriate to disagree with the boss, and that the truth sometimes
have to give way to more important issues . . .
On Sat, 28 Oct 2023 02:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:05:02 -0000 (UTC), TonyThat is a lie.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR >>>>>- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become >>>>>common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
or
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
this being one of them. You have on numerous occasions asserted thatAnd that is another lie.
your opinions do not need any support from either written or verbal
views of others.
In this you are at least consistent in your fantasy,I do not have fanbtaisies - I am pragmatic and beloieve in scienec - unlike you.
but it does not make those fantasies any more believable.
I will compliment you on one thing however - you are without question the most
abusive person in this newsgroup, and constently so. Well done for pproviding a
guaranteed laugh every post.
Back to the topic.
There are no far right postere here, and in many years there has not been a >>single one - that is a fact.
All people are entitl;ed to express opinions despite your desire to suppress >>that right - after all that is a right that you exercise - this thread is an >>example of that - lots of opinions from you and no evidence of value - you are
entitled however and so are we all (do you follow? I doubt it!).
Nothing to refute - it is obvioous;y nonsense and has been shown to be many >>times.
There is an updated commentary written prior to the 2023 election here >>>that may be useful to you Tony. You may not like it, but apparently
you have no evidence to refute it either . . . >>>https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
More nonsense of coutrse.
And for those that may wish to understand a little more, look at and
read the commentary regarding the 2020 USA presidential election: >>>https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020
You are beyond childish. The only stuff I delete is your abusive sarcasm and >>sometimes for brevity.
Now watch and see if Tony throws his toys out of the cot and deletes >>>truths he finds unpalatable . . . . Over to you, Tony! (but also see >>>below)
I can understand why someoine as sociopathic as you would hate to see their >>oh-so-precious words removed, but that is part of the illness - suck it up. >>>
No test was set and will not be - what an idiotic notion.
it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people - >>>>>National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of >>>>>those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually >>>>>fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>>>>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with - >>>>>and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most >>>>>of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many >>>>>nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not >>>>>have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>>>>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>>>>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely >>>>>to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite >>>>>what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as >>>>>they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what >>>>>was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy, >>>>>often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald >>>>>Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are >>>>>also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well >>>>>known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>>>>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>>>>distance himself from them . . .
And to return to the Subject of this thread:
Christopher Luxon has passed his first test to be allowed to join with >>>Winston Peters and David Seymour in an NZ1ACTNat government
- he hasYou and the helpers to Luxon will learn who is the boss - Luxon will be and no
declined to criticise Winston for his Trumpist lie about Ardern not >>>having disclosed to the public the day after the Mosque shooting that
she and others had received the shooter's manifesto and that a call
had been made to police minutes prior to the shooting. Luxon may not
have a clue about many things, but he knows that it is never
appropriate to disagree with the boss, and that the truth sometimes
have to give way to more important issues . . .
one else. You really do live your fantasies. You need help.
I am certainly hopeful that after the special votes have been counted
that National/ACT have a comfortable majority (given that it will
increase by 1 more after the Port Waikato by-election). In these circumstances Luxon may well tell Winston that his assistance in
forming a government is not required.
On 2023-10-28, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Ah, but Rich believes that only he can have unsupported opinions - something he shows several times a day.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:05:02 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament >>>or
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR >>>>- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become >>>>common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
this being one of them. You have on numerous occasions asserted that
your opinions do not need any support from either written or verbal
views of others. In this you are at least consistent in your fantasy,
but it does not make those fantasies any more believable.
Opinions do not need any support. They are by definition what a person >thinks.
One can supply some reasoning to support the view/opinion in which case it
is an unsupprted opinion and it needs to be taken in this contest. There is >no need to cancel the other person because they are supplying an supported >opinion.
Yes a totally non-sequitur piece of trash.
There is an updated commentary written prior to the 2023 election here
that may be useful to you Tony. You may not like it, but apparently
you have no evidence to refute it either . . .
https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
And for those that may wish to understand a little more, look at and
read the commentary regarding the 2020 USA presidential election:
https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020
Now watch and see if Tony throws his toys out of the cot and deletes
truths he finds unpalatable . . . . Over to you, Tony! (but also see
below)
it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people -
National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of
those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually >>>>fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>>>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with - >>>>and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most >>>>of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many
nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not >>>>have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>>>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>>>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely
to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite >>>>what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as
they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what >>>>was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy,
often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald >>>>Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are >>>>also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well >>>>known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>>>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>>>distance himself from them . . .
And to return to the Subject of this thread:
Christopher Luxon has passed his first test to be allowed to join with
Winston Peters and David Seymour in an NZ1ACTNat government - he has
declined to criticise Winston for his Trumpist lie about Ardern not
having disclosed to the public the day after the Mosque shooting that
she and others had received the shooter's manifesto and that a call
had been made to police minutes prior to the shooting. Luxon may not
have a clue about many things, but he knows that it is never
appropriate to disagree with the boss, and that the truth sometimes
have to give way to more important issues . . .
Good grief Charlie Brown! In most threads there is a "flow" of thought. >Exceptions like the one above are pretty darn common.
On Sat, 28 Oct 2023 02:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:05:02 -0000 (UTC), TonyThat is a lie.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You are well known in nz.general for unsupported fantasies, Tony -
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +1300, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:There are no such persons here. There are no far right parties in parliament
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:48:58 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>>wrote:No, first Crash did not post those words - you are being dishonest, BR >>>>>- selectively deleting parts of a thread does seem to have become >>>>>common with some of the "far right" posters to nz.general;
the Nasty Nats are more than just those who are soon to be sworn in by >>>>>>>>Parliament.
So approximately 40% of the populations then.
Bill.
or
supporters of same in this newsgroup. You, however, are a fantasist.
this being one of them. You have on numerous occasions asserted thatAnd that is another lie.
your opinions do not need any support from either written or verbal
views of others.
In this you are at least consistent in your fantasy,I do not have fanbtaisies - I am pragmatic and beloieve in scienec - unlike you.
but it does not make those fantasies any more believable.
I will compliment you on one thing however - you are without question the most
abusive person in this newsgroup, and constently so. Well done for pproviding a
guaranteed laugh every post.
Back to the topic.
There are no far right postere here, and in many years there has not been a >>single one - that is a fact.
All people are entitl;ed to express opinions despite your desire to suppress >>that right - after all that is a right that you exercise - this thread is an >>example of that - lots of opinions from you and no evidence of value - you are
entitled however and so are we all (do you follow? I doubt it!).
Nothing to refute - it is obvioous;y nonsense and has been shown to be many >>times.
There is an updated commentary written prior to the 2023 election here >>>that may be useful to you Tony. You may not like it, but apparently
you have no evidence to refute it either . . . >>>https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
More nonsense of coutrse.
And for those that may wish to understand a little more, look at and
read the commentary regarding the 2020 USA presidential election: >>>https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020
You are beyond childish. The only stuff I delete is your abusive sarcasm and >>sometimes for brevity.
Now watch and see if Tony throws his toys out of the cot and deletes >>>truths he finds unpalatable . . . . Over to you, Tony! (but also see >>>below)
I can understand why someoine as sociopathic as you would hate to see their >>oh-so-precious words removed, but that is part of the illness - suck it up. >>>
No test was set and will not be - what an idiotic notion.
it would be
sad to see that become more common.
Those to be sworn in are a relatively small number of people - >>>>>National looks to have around 50 MPs to be sworn in. Now a few of >>>>>those can reasonably be called "Nasty Nats", but most are usually >>>>>fairly innocuous they may have some strongly held views, but most >>>>>understand the need to at least appear fairly easy to get along with - >>>>>and to be a person whose opinions others value. That is common to most >>>>>of the long standing, and particularly large parties - too many >>>>>nutters does keep party support low. That does not mean they do not >>>>>have views that many would disagree with - having such views does >>>>>distinguish parties from each other; smaller parties may have a higher >>>>>proportion of such people. Having said all that, National are likely >>>>>to lose at least a couple of MPs when they are found to not be quite >>>>>what they appear - they are nearly as new to the National Party as >>>>>they are to the public, and some each term turn out to be ''not what >>>>>was expected" for a variety of reasons
Then there are the plain nasty National supporters - low empathy, >>>>>often low intelligence; if they were in the USA they would be Donald >>>>>Trump supporters. We have a few of them in nz.general, but there are >>>>>also a crowd of them on the outskirts of National. Some became well >>>>>known through Dirty Tricks. New players have emerged - the NZ Taxpayer >>>>>Union has been quite cunning, but something caused Farrar to carefully >>>>>distance himself from them . . .
And to return to the Subject of this thread:
Christopher Luxon has passed his first test to be allowed to join with >>>Winston Peters and David Seymour in an NZ1ACTNat government
- he hasYou and the helpers to Luxon will learn who is the boss - Luxon will be and no
declined to criticise Winston for his Trumpist lie about Ardern not >>>having disclosed to the public the day after the Mosque shooting that
she and others had received the shooter's manifesto and that a call
had been made to police minutes prior to the shooting. Luxon may not
have a clue about many things, but he knows that it is never
appropriate to disagree with the boss, and that the truth sometimes
have to give way to more important issues . . .
one else. You really do live your fantasies. You need help.
I am certainly hopeful that after the special votes have been counted
that National/ACT have a comfortable majority (given that it will
increase by 1 more after the Port Waikato by-election). In these >circumstances Luxon may well tell Winston that his assistance in
forming a government is not required.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 101:04:03 |
| Calls: | 6,659 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,334,859 |