About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

September 22, 2011 4:00pm by David Farrar

Are the Greens now the astro-turfing party?

In my “By the numbers” blog at Stuff, I ask whether the Greens have become an astro-turfing party.

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment55

NZ Politics
astro-turfing
By the numbers
Greens
Stuff

Comments (55)

Login to comment or vote

awb

No, they haven’t. They are trying to win votes, and lack the media power that National enjoys, such as having a featured blogger on the country’s biggest news site.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 4:03pm
Michaels

No they haven’t or….. no they are not??

Oh dear folks, another leftie joins the ranks.

Yes they are.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 4:08pm
thedavincimode

These email alerts don’t seem to be having the desired effect awb.

Your’ve the only one answering the call.

Ooops, nearly forgot

Right wing blogger slams Greens electioneering tactics.

Greens cheated by media bias.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 4:11pm
RightNow

Nope – they’re not. But then in my opinion neither is the Tea Party (and nor is the Tea Party racist).
So the logical conclusion is: it depends on the opinion of the observer.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 4:46pm
YesWeDid

What I’ve always wondered since the first day I started reading this blog, is there a single Green party supporter who actually cares about what David Farrar says about them?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:03pm
awb

thedavincimode – I’m not receiving any alerts. I just read blogs.
Michaels- Actually my 1st post was correct. Read the link that has been highlighted.

Pretty uninspiring stuff from you guys, I expected to at least have my ideas challenged. Disappointing that your party which is completely lacking in original though is running the country.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:08pm
RightNow

YesWeDid – was that meant to read like a dating profile?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:08pm
Ross12

I think you are right David. You just have to read today’s comments on the NZ Herald site for the Greens Job Policy. Fair enough that they use new technolgy , but everyone is to some extent. I think the left side of the political divide are trying it more than others.
The question has to be –how many people read them ? How good is the content ?
I first noticed this sort of organised “advocacy” on AGW blogs. On any anti AGW blog there is always one poster from the pro AGW side and they recite the same stuff as you see from another pro AGW believer on another anti AGW blog. The problem is they don’t get anywhere because they generally don’t understand what has been fed to them. ( I often wondered if they are paid/post !!)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:25pm
Kimble

I expected to at least have my ideas challenged.

Would that be your idea that an individual, long-time poli-blogger who disclosed his identity and affiliations is doing the same thing as multiple anonymous commenters on blog posts and forums running intererence on shallow and stupid policies and making it look like a party has more support than it really does?

Your ideas are challenged enough already.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:30pm
thedavincimode

YesWeDid

I don’t know. What does the research say?

My non peer reviewed anecdotal observation is that there are occassionally sufficient of them who care to come scuttling here when the balloon goes up (they get the automated email).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:31pm
Kimble

If you cant be the most intelligent voice, be the loudest.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:31pm
toad

Using technology to alert self-selecting Green grassroots supporters to blog posts they may be interested in commenting on or giving them some advice via the Green website’s members-only pages on improving the likelihood of letters to the editor being published is not “astroturfing”. It’s just smart use of technology.

The Nats will catch up – eventually! In 2014 they will be probably be attempting to use MySpace and Bebo to do the same sort of thing.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:36pm
Adolf Fiinkensein

I wouldn’t be too tough on them David. They are making a better fist of it all than Labour is managing.

Sure, there’ll be some silly mistakes such as you’ve chronicled but hey, it’s all part of becoming the mainstream party which Labour isn’t, any more.

Will we see Greens 21% party vote in November with Labour 19%?

As every day goes by it seems less unlikely. Political historians will have a ball, fussing over the blame for Helen’s legacy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:39pm
mikenmild

It should come as no surprise that as the Greens mature they become more like the two larger parties.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:39pm
Concentrate

“One local example I use in talking to business audiences on astroturfing was the promiment NZ ticketing company that had someone criticise their website design on a blog. A woman commented that she thought the website was great and really easy to use, and that the blogger must just be a bit stupid if he found the website difficult.

The blogger checked the IP address of the commenter, and found that she was posting from the Auckland office of the company in question. So he exposed her astroturfing, and the company got ridiculed both locally and globally.”

This is called shilling… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill not astroturfing.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:42pm
Brian Marshall

Ross12, I believe their may have been some British govt money spent of advocacy of AGW that lead to some people fulltime doing just that. Could explain how their deficit ever got so big. Green jobs are counterproductive.

Anyway you must have really hit their astorturf buttons from the reaction you got on Stuff DPF. I couldn’t be “stuffed” putting a comment on as I think the pro green commentators including the one who said they voted National last time and will vote for Green this time are either paid Green party workers or just retards who want to vote for the environment and have no feaken idea what they are doing.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:43pm
Kimble

It’s just smart use of technology. … The Nats will catch up

Great just what we all fucking want. More spam from political parties cluttering up the internet. Making forums and comments sections unusable.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:46pm
toad

@Adolf Fiinkensein 5:39 pm

I wouldn’t be too tough on them David. They are making a better fist of it all than Labour is managing.

Guess that is why DPF is now doing many more attack posts on the Greens, and fewer on Labour.

All good from where I’m sitting.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:59pm
wat dabney

“All good from where I’m sitting”

What? Blatently lying to the newspaper about not being a Green activist? Or were you talking about something else?

Because that’s what I thought was the most significant bit in the article. The bit where the Green candidate’s partner lied through her lying teeth.

Did you see that, toad?

I’m not sure you saw the bit where the Green candidate’s partner lied through her lying teeth.

Can you confirm that you saw that?

Toad?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 5:59pm
toad

@Kimble 5:46 pm

Get into the 21st century, Luddite!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:00pm
toad

@wat dabney 5:59 pm

My understanding is that was not condoned and is being addressed by the Green Party. But you can’t condemn the Greens for a supposed (because I don’t know the details) indiscretion by someone who has no position in the party but happens to be the partner of a Green candidate. I don’t even know if she is a Party member – she says she used to vote Labour.

It agree it was a dumb thing for a Green supporter to do, given her partner is a Green candidate, but it was not something orchestrated by the Green Party.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:09pm
wat dabney

“she says she used to vote Labour.”

Er, toad? She lies.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:13pm
peterwn

And the sooner venues stop giving catering and ticketing companies a stranglehold on their venues, the better. One venue seems to have changed caterers recently and the food is even crappier and overpriced. The Wiener Volksoper displays the seating plan and lets you choose your seats (admittedly I last looked some years ago), so why not ticketing companies operating in NZ.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:24pm
Kimble

toad, I am a creature of the 21st century.

I grew up in a digital world where not every discussion was open to being bombarded by n00bs fired from a spam-canon at party HQ. Now we have to worry that genuine discussion, debate, flaming will be interupted by poli-bots screaming the shit over and over again. And the problem will only get worse.

You reckon every party will be doing this? Fan-fucking-tastic. Go to any popular poli-blog and all you will see in the comments is the party-line vs party-line vs party-line. Result? Dead thread.

Spam, banner ads, Green comment-bots. Difference?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:33pm
Manolo

It agree it was a dumb thing for a Green supporter to do, given her partner is a Green candidate, but it was not something orchestrated by the Green Party

I despise, not admire, toad’s blind loyalty in parroting the party line.
He shows neither trace of independent thinking nor the ability to arrive at his own conclusions. No, he just repeat what he’s told by his Luddite masters.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:38pm
East Wellington Superhero

The Green Party. Never been in government.
What’s it like going to ball every year but never being asked to dance?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:41pm
wat dabney

“The Nats will catch up – eventually! In 2014 they will be probably be attempting to use MySpace and Bebo to do the same sort of thing.”

Haha!

“When News Corp bought MySpace for $580 million, that looked like an extremely savvy play by the old media company. But due to mismanagement and Facebook, MySpace stopped growing and then kept faltering. News Corp would be lucky to get $50 million for MySpace now.

AOL makes more than one appearance on this list. While News Corp’s acquisition of MySpace was a good bet that went wrong, there’s no serious explanation for AOL’s acquisition of Bebo or how much it spent. AOL bought Bebo for $850 million and then sold it for $10 million.”

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-11-worst-mistakes-in-tech-history-2011-4?op=1

These are self-interested businesses risking their own futures on technology, and how they made a mess of it. Why would politicians spending other people money be any better do you suppose?

Because the Green Party confidently tells us that there is a fortune to be made in the “green technology” industry, and is willing to gamble hundreds of millions of taxpayers’ earnings on their prediction.

Not their own money you understand. Your money.

They are planning to gamble hundreds of millions of your money on madcap technology schemes which have already cost billions in the United States.

Whilst keeping their own money safely in the bank.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:46pm
Griff

@Kimble

We reserve the right (but we won’t always use that right) to delete or edit posts which:

Are considered likely to provoke, attack or offend others
Are personal or offensive comments about individual members of the public
Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable
Contain excessive swear words or other language likely to offend
Break the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity. This includes breach of copyright, defamation and contempt of court.
Advertise products or services for profit
Are seen to impersonate someone else
Repeatedly post the same or similar messages (‘spam’)
Include contact details such as telephone numbers and postal or email addresses
Contain links to other websites which break our editorial guidelines
Describe or encourage activities which could endanger the safety or well-being of others
Are judged to be blatant or destructive attacks on the Green Party itself with no redeeming value to Green politics (we do have a little bit of self preservation)

TOADS RULES
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:47pm
thedavincimode

EWS

Well actually, they did get asked to dance a little bit by Key, but seemed repulsed by his perceived spots.

They much preferred it when they weren’t asked to dance by Klerkula, but were simply wisked out of the dance hall, put in the garden shed, and then had the lights turned.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 6:51pm
Viking2

John Key has gone quiet on this one. About 115 New Zealand citizens left each day in August to live in Australia. Net migration in the year to August was the worst 12 month outflow since March 2009 just after the last exodus that John Key was so worried about. This is a silent revolt. It’s how the young protest in New Zealand. They buy a one way ticket to Australia and then they stay there. Let’s call it the Quade Cooper effect

Net permanent migration loss to Australia 32,700 in year to August, highest since year to March 2009, Stats NZ figures show
Posted in News September 21, 2011 – 12:52pm, Alex Tarrant
Share

New Zealand recorded a seasonally adjusted net permanent and long-term migration gain of 200 in August, snapping a negative streak since March 2011 following the February 22 earthquake that hit Christchurch, figures released by Statistics New Zealand show.

Unadjusted figures showed a net gain of 300 migrants during the month, down from 900 in August 2010. The main reason for the fall was 1,100 more departures of New Zealand citizens to Australia in August 2011 than in August 2010, Stats NZ said.

There were 3.496 New Zealand citizens who left New Zealand permanently to live in Australia in August, while only 769 citizens returned.

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/55549/bernard-hickey-talks-marcus-lush-radio-live-650-am-about-feds-new-twist-strategy-chris
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:03pm
Mary Rose

>No, he just repeat what he’s told by his Luddite masters.

Which is probably true in this case. Unless the ‘masters’ thought the partner of a candidate could speak in a local newspaper without being outed as such. Wasn’t exactly clever.

‘Get our profile up in the media through letters’ (etc) is the tactics of protest groups and charities. Which is where the Green Party have their roots.

Being a protest group, or in permanent opposition, is easy. You can say ‘we wish for the moon’ and lots of people will say ‘what a great idea’. You don’t have to deliver and the fact no one could can be brushed aside.

A spell in government and their fine ideals would come up against a harsh dose of reality
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:04pm
East Wellington Superhero

When Russell Norman and Nick Smith were on Q&A last week it was funny… to see Norman being owned by John Key. Russell Norman pointed out the great home insulation fund that was put in place and how it’s great to ‘get stuff done in politics’. And Nick Smith agreed too, that it was really good with a slight grin. It was good. John Key cemented in the mind of NZers that he’s nice and central (which is where politics always is) and dealt Labour an upper cut. And secondly Norman has to play nice (well, nicer) with National – all the while knowing that the Greens (in a National-Greens coalition fantasyland) will never get Ministerial roles. Not an upper cut, but perhaps a bitch slap.

Owned.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:06pm
chris

@Adolf

Will we see Greens 21% party vote in November with Labour 19%?

This would be excellent for two reasons 1) we would actually get an effective opposition in the next government term and 2) New Zealand would see what a bunch of freaking idiots these guys are and they’d struggle to get over 5% ever again.

@Mary Rose

Being a protest group, or in permanent opposition, is easy. You can say ‘we wish for the moon’ and lots of people will say ‘what a great idea’. You don’t have to deliver and the fact no one could can be brushed aside.

A little bit what Labour’s like at the moment. They can promise anything they like at the moment but they’re almost certainly not going to be in power after the next election so it doesn’t matter what they promise.

A spell in government and their fine ideals would come up against a harsh dose of reality

Absolutely. There’s all sorts of compromise when you get in power. The problem is, if we do see a Labour-Green (or worse a Green-Labour) coalition in the future, the country is F U C K E D. If you think a lot of people are leaving the country now just wait and see what would happen if the Greens had power. The only upside is after screwing the country over for three years they’d be consigned to political oblivion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:10pm
East Wellington Superhero

‘Toad’ doesn’t quite rhyme with ‘owned’. But close enough.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:11pm
East Wellington Superhero

Anyway, night all.
Better things to do than fight greenies.
Keep on rocking for the kids.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:17pm
Murray

And so the green party will throw you under the bus when you get caught. Don’t get caught and its three stars and a smiley face stamp.

Thanks for clearing that up toad. Good luck feeding off Goffs leftovers.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:45pm
RKBee

Could this be the beginning of a right wing split…
Whaleoil has mentioned DPF’s shot comings on posting this thread…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 7:52pm
niggly

@Adolf “Will we see Greens 21% party vote in November with Labour 19%?”

@ Toad “All good from where I’m sitting”.

The other angle to DPF’s fabulous article is that there is potential for dissent from factions within the Greens (that would be sympathetic to the Bradford / Mana Party “purity” and “message”, and also be not too impressed with the Greens embracing the middle ground etc).

How much will the Green party vote be diluted by election day thanks to Mana?

I think Toad and the Greens wish us all to think “not very much actually” … but I bet not, so how much in reality ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 8:07pm
hj

Opponents of the legislation say the battle over the foreshore is not over with a promise from the Greens that it won’t let the foreshore and seabed issue die as it heads into the election campaign.

Greens co-leader Metiria Turei says the Maori Party has betrayed its supporters.

“I’m very distressed about this, this should not have happened,” she says. “The Maori Party had the power to fix the 2004 legislation, to repeal it and to put in place a just outcome, and they chose not to.”

Ms Turei is furious at the Maori Party.

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyid=193090
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 8:28pm
hj

Of course the truth is that the Greens will ignore their strongest (other than Mana) position on Te Tiritti and the foreshore and seabed until after the elction so they get Muggins votes.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 8:34pm
toad

@niggly 8:07 pm

How much will the Green party vote be diluted by election day thanks to Mana?

The Greens and Mana share a lot of principles in common. Despite your attempt to shit-stir, niggly, I see Mana as a Green ally, not an enemy.

@hj 8:28 pm

Guess I should just ignore you, because you are obviously a NZ First supporter, and they will remain irrelevant.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 8:35pm
niggly

Shit-stir Toad, ya reckon?

More like the truth hurts eh!

Whatever principles are shared, at the end of the day, come the election there can only be one winner.

Hone and Mana will be sharpening their axes, figuratively speaking, whilst the nice Gweens apply the platitudes!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 9:26pm
Grendel

is it not telling like with all lefties, the moment they get caught, the party runs for the hills, throwing the person to the wolves. oh we had no idea, oh she did it without his knowledge.

for a party that tries to control the message as much as the greens they seem to be pretty in the dark when its convenient.

also, where has this idea that they are the most honest party come from? they have been the most duplicitous since before they even officially formed (winston excepted). for some reason they get away with it due to some collective idea that the hippies are too dumb to know any better, and all power to them they play the idiot hippy card well.

every green support i have met tells me they support the greens becuase they are honest and have good policies. when i ask which policies they can never actually articulate them (as they don;t actually know any of them and just like the vibe). when i point out some of their dishonesty they tend to go quiet and just mumble, well i like them, or we need all views in parliament(though they rescind that idea when spitting about act)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 22, 2011 10:48pm
hj

@hj 8:28 pm

Guess I should just ignore you, because you are obviously a NZ First supporter, and they will remain irrelevant.
…………………..
That’s not answering the question Toad.

The question is: will the Green Party make the foreshore and seabed an election issue as promised by Meteria?
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyid=193090

“The Greens support responsible access to the foreshore, which is compatible with Customary Ownership governed by tikanga Maori and the concept of public domain.
“The clearest example is Lake Taupo, where ownership of the lake bed rests with Maori but everyone enjoys recreational access.”
http://www.greens.org.nz/press-releases/denial-customary-rights-unacceptable-say-greens
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 7:24am
hj

@hj 8:28 pm

Guess I should just ignore you, because you are obviously a NZ First supporter, and they will remain irrelevant.
……………………………………………..
Anti-immigration feeling has no place in the Green party Immigration and Population policies released today, Green MP Keith Locke says.

“The Green Party policy is not based on prejudice, but an objective analysis of what level of migration is compatible with a sustainable New Zealand.
[despite such things being described as “excruciatingly difficult”]

The Greens seem to believe that you can have an increasing population and maintain the same quality of life yet as Rod Oram says:

Fast population growth over the past decade has strained infrastructure, boosted house prices and reduced the quality of life in the Auckland region.
http://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/0705/RMA__Oram_Paper_May_2007.pdf

“Immigration and tax breaks for investment in residential property are being cited as the underlying causes of steep increases in the cost of housing over the past decade.

The report added that there was little evidence that immigration boosted local incomes. In fact, the need to build roads and schools meant that net migration contributed to the national deficit. ”

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/4622459/Government-policies-blamed-for-house-prices
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 7:49am
hj

Is it honest to present a one sided election platform while ignoring the drastic (elephant in the room) aspects of your policy such as a commitment to the indigenous version of the treaty of waitangi?:

Kevin Hague
printed in Te Awa, the Magazine of the Green Party of Aotearoa.
Our Charter also explicitly accepts Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the founding document of this country, recognising Maori as Tangata Whenua. Part of the public discussion that has followed from the recent arrests in Ruatoki and elsewhere citing anti-terrorism laws has been an assertion of Tuhoe’s “sovereignty”. The sense of consternation from some quarters that has greeted this assertion must remind us that this preamble to our Charter is not just a form of empty words but rather a commitment to principle that demands our action.

We are moving into a new phase of the collective national discussion about the Treaty, and as Greens we have a responsibility both to be an active and ethical voice in that discussion but also to work to equip others to participate in that discussion from an informed and principled basis, rather than sheer short term self interest.

Discussion to date has focused on the return of usually a small fraction of those resources unfairly taken from Maori as reparation, on reducing inequalities and on the rights of Maori as an ethnic and cultural minority with a threatened language and culture. While some of these issues have been addressed in part through the deliberations of the Waitangi Tribunal, these issues are, in fact, largely unrelated to the Treaty. If there were no Treaty, as there is not in a number of other societies around the world, these would all still be issues that would need to be addressed in a fair and just society.

The phase of the discussion that we now need to move into is one that that focuses on Maori status as the indigenous people of this country and on the actual content of the Treaty: a statement of the terms and conditions for the presence of non-Maori. The Maori right to self-determination pre-dated the Treaty and was not altered by it. What is at issue in understanding the Treaty are the rights of non-Maori.

not that I’m suggesting you’re a bunch of dangerous zealots Toad 🙄
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 8:00am
hj

The State of the Pakeha Nation
by Catherine Delahunty
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0702/S00068.htm
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 8:05am
toad

@hj 8:00 am

Thanks for highlighting that, hj. You are doing a great job yourself in getting the Green position on the Treaty out there, so no need for the Greens to campaign on it.

And, no, the Greens are not interested in trying to dog whistle to Treaty-denying racists. Unlike some Parties, the Greens still have principles.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 8:26am
Elaycee

“….the Greens still have principles….”

Yup – we all saw evidence of that courtesy of the patsy article (and the subsequent apology) in the Waikato Times.

Thanks for the reminder.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 8:30am
Griff

One good thing about this astro turfing is we get to poke fun at green fuckwits.

DPF seems to be whistling for watermelons once a day so they have an equal opportunity to be laughed at on this blog.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 8:56am
YesWeDid

Yes Elaycee the Greens have no principles because 1 person did something wrong. I guess that means National also have no principles because of Patsy Wong’s husband and let me see, this is an easy game to play, ACT has no principles because of Garrett and that stolen identity and I don’t even need to mention Labour and the huge list of why they have no principles.

So who does that leave with any ‘principles’? Whoops no one.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 9:00am
Elaycee

YesWeDid – don’t be silly.

The partner of a list candidate from the Gweens tried to use a regional newspaper (The Waikato Times) to promote their voting preference by claiming to be a neutral interview subject, whilst clearly they were not. They lied. And when the reporter from the WT asked whether said partner had any links to the Gweens, she said “No’ – another lie. Then, when the bollocks ‘story’ was exposed for the fraud it is (by Whale), the same Gweens ran for cover.

But if you think that Pansy Wong’s husband is a liar, then perhaps you could explain to me how this is the case, as I can’t see that suggestion passing the veracity test.

Do tell.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 12:10pm
hj

@hj 8:00 am

Thanks for highlighting that, hj. You are doing a great job yourself in getting the Green position on the Treaty out there, so no need for the Greens to campaign on it.

And, no, the Greens are not interested in trying to dog whistle to *Treaty-denying racists*. Unlike some Parties, the Greens still have principles.
………………………………….
Oh you aren’t going to campaign on it because of me?

Or because it would go down like a dead rat with the public?

“A willingness on the part of Pakeha leftists to be guided by the Maori nationalist advocates of tino rangatiratanga had by the mid-1980s become the litmus test of authentic revolutionary praxis. As proof of their commitment to the cause of the tangata whenua individuals and institutions were required to elevate Te Tiriti o Waitangi to the status of holy writ. In these matters, the Greens proved to be no exception.”
http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2010/05/taking-greens-seriously.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 12:44pm
hj

Toad croaking: racist…..rrrr racist………..rrrr racsit …..racist!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 12:48pm
Pete George

The Green mission seems to be iPredict today.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 23, 2011 1:06pm

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Dim-Post on retrospective legislation

General Debate 23 September 2011 »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.4K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Top Stories

General Debate 23 November 2024
General Debate 24 November 2024
Can we afford such generous research leave?
Guest Post: Response to Max Harris
Who are the major emitters?
RANZ Update
The newest Green MP
A $25 million glasshouse
Secret lawyers
Do the KCs believe in democracy

Recent Posts

A $25 million glasshouse 24 November 2024
General Debate 24 November 2024 24 November 2024
Guest Post: Response to Max Harris 24 November 2024
RANZ Update 23 November 2024
Who are the major emitters? 23 November 2024
A whale on a prediction market 23 November 2024
General Debate 23 November 2024 23 November 2024
Can we afford such generous research leave? 23 November 2024
Secret lawyers 22 November 2024
Do the KCs believe in democracy 22 November 2024
The newest Green MP 22 November 2024
About time 22 November 2024

Recent Comments

General Debate 24 November 2024
pdm
General Debate 24 November 2024
Bridgenag
General Debate 24 November 2024
pdm
General Debate 24 November 2024
pdm
General Debate 24 November 2024
Rodney Hide
General Debate 24 November 2024
pdm
General Debate 24 November 2024
pdm
General Debate 24 November 2024
MCōs
General Debate 24 November 2024
pdm
General Debate 24 November 2024
pdm
A $25 million glasshouse
Bridgenag
General Debate 24 November 2024
MCōs
General Debate 24 November 2024
Don Beckett
General Debate 24 November 2024
MCōs
A $25 million glasshouse
David Garrett

Links

Beautifying the blogosphere
Hompaddock
11.30am Live – Te Huinga Poti – Waatea Sunday Morning Political Podcast with Labour MP Willie Jackson, Jodi Ihaka + Bomber
The Daily Blog
Open mike 24/11/2024
The Standard
Killing The Administrative State
No Minister
Part 3, Australia’s Transition to Renewable Energy
Utopia
Treaty Principles Debate
NZCPR
Much ado about cussing…
Point of Order
Justice in Brazil
No Right Turn
"Seymour is only doing openly what M?ori nationalists and their Pakeha allies have been doing, quietly for the past 50 years."
Not PC
The transgender agenda sunk Kamala
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
What does “reciprocity” mean in New Zealand laws?
Croaking Cassandra
Media Link: “A View from Afar” on the US elections.
Kiwipolitico
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d