Mocking Colin Craig and his Numpty Lawyer

Ben Uffindel has responded to the legal threats by Colin Craig.

Good to see he has some stones.

Dear Mr. McKay,

Thank you for your email. The Civilian was horrified to learn that it had misquoted Mr. Craig in the article in question, and if you visit our website, you will see that we have taken urgent action to rectify our terrible mistake.

We would never dream of making Mr. Craig look ridiculous. Indeed, we’re quite content to leave that up to him.

I have attached to this email the retraction statement you requested, along with my signature, which we hope you will find satisfactory:

retractionstatement

Colin Craig just looks like a tool now. What is he going to do?

Tell you what though, if Colin Craig wants the $500 I will help fundraise that to assist The Civilian.

The mainstream media will be all over this. Suing a blogger for defamation is stupid in the first place, suing a satirical blogger is just plain dumb.

Based on the evidence to date Colin Craig is clearly dumber than a sack of hammers.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • maninblack

    I had never heard of the original incident until this defamation act came about.. so welcome to the Streisand effect Mr ‘Crag’.

  • Pete George

    An obsession with bottoms and Colin Craig – binding referendum on satire

    • Gayguy

      It does seem that those opposed to homosexuals have the biggest obsession with what we get up to. Even us queers do not put in the amount of thought that Colin and his kind do when it comes to our sex lives.

  • peterwn

    Colin Craig and his lawyer had better get au fait with Lange v Atkinson – this makes it harder for a politician to sue for defamation, unless Colin can argue that he is yet to be a politician.

  • Sym Gardiner

    Maybe Colin is trying to run the principle of ANY publicity is good publicity. I think he is wrong if he is thinking this.

  • Steve Taylor

    Satire site or not – Craig seems to be sending a none-too-subtle message to the MSM regarding accuracy, which I suppose is fair enough – goodness me, how often have the MSM helped themselves to material and legwork from this website, not attributed any of it to the author, or simply mis-quoted context in the “material lift”? If I was a Journalist who was anti-Conservatives, I might make fun of Craig publically, but in a professional and private capacity, I would be more mindful that if I was to mis-quote Craig in the media, then I’m most likely up for a meaningful act of correction. One letter from a Lawyer equals this publicity – cheaper than an ad I guess: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10879437

    • unsol

      I agree – but didn’t Ben respond perfectly! Well played indeed!!!

    • Satire or not? You can’t just dismiss it like that.

      Satire. End of story.

      The man is not very smart or poorly advised if he thinks he can extract a genuine apology from someone who wrote a satirical piece.

    • Pete George

      But Craig didn’t send a message to the MSM, this was a quiet letter to a relatively small website. Their reaction and the reaction on social media has blown it up into an MSM story. I’m not sure that this is what Craig intended, I very much doubt it.

      No media takes kindly to being slapped with legal letters. It’s possible MSM may take note and take more care reporting Craig, but it’s also likely that they will just be more careful but with increased scathingness at any opportunity.

      There are easy ways of ridiculing someone without satirical made up quotes – for example by using Craigs actual quotes.

      Steve, are you acting for Craig or the Conservative Party with your comments?

      • Justsayn

        The reaction from the blogger and MSM interest in that was entirely predictable. Especially if one was to tip off the MSM when the blogger jumps as expected.

        Out of all proportion, yes. Free advertising, yes. A wider warning, yes. Good value for money, yes. Silly… maybe not.

    • Gayguy

      He needs to be careful what he asks for.

      Accurate quoting will not be his friend. The fact that a piss take came across as something that Colin would actually say kinda screams volumes.

      • Steve Taylor

        Volumes of……

        • Gayguy

          How crazy he is. How little he knows. How he has no policies on anything. How he talks all the time about bumsex.

          • Steve Taylor

            According to…………..what source are you citing?

          • Gayguy

            His own words and his lack of policy.

            So basically, Colin.

          • Steve Taylor

            Oh, I think any reasonable observer would assess Craig as being quite confident in the positions he holds. I suspect your source of your arguement is simply your opinion – nothing more, nothing less – which is fine: just doesn’t qualify as evidence – that realm is reserved for outcome – and we’re not there yet.

          • Gayguy

            Well given that he has no policies on anything, and talks about bumsex all the time, is proof enough of his position.

            But hey, far be it from me to convince you to take the mans actions and words as proof of his position. You carry on projecting onto Colin anything you like. Me, I’ll take what the guy says and does as proof of his position.

          • Steve Taylor

            Oh, someone is certainly projecting, GG………….we shall await the outcome then.

          • Gayguy

            The outcome has already happened.

            The post on the Civilian is still there, along with the fake quote, now in bold print, this Ben fellow has pseudo apologised and taken the piss out of Colin in the apology, and old Colin has come away looking like a total fool and the Civilian has had some amazing positive free press.

            What more do you think is going to happen?

          • Steve Taylor

            Oh GG, you’ve missed the point………………I guess that’s the trouble with entrenched ideological positioning – it’s just so……….well, entrenched….Ok, in words of minimal syllables: It is now very unlikely that any Journalist is going to deliberately mis-quote Craig again. The Civilian can dress up their apology in any clothes they desire – they complied to a level of legal satisfaction that suited the Plaintiff and the Plaintiffs legal team. A goal that goes into the net, and a goal that bounces off the post, and then goes into the net, is still a goal. The main outcome I am referring to is in 2014 – THAT is when we will know as to whether Craig secures a constituency that will get him and his Party into Parliament. Until then, all we have is opinion, speculation, and “guess”.

          • Gayguy

            The thing is though clever boy, Colin was never misquoted, They took the piss and Colin got upset because a few people thought he said it (which shows him in a not too flash light to start with). It was never a real quote, and it was on a satirical blog.

            So you can dress it up any way you like, but nothing has actually been removed on the website, and now Colin looks like an even bigger fool to those with brains.

            Now, I am going out to enjoy the sun for a while and take a walk in the botanical gardens. So I will pop back in later to see what PR spin you have put on poor Colin’s stupidity later. Sure hope he pays you well.

          • Steve Taylor

            Think in the abstract, not always the literal, GG. The test will be this: when the next Journalist attributes (misquotes) Craig, Craigs response, and the attributors decision. In Law, it’s called ‘Precedent”, the Precedent” has been set – and the message has now resonated in every mainstream media source in NZ – so, if anyone wants to test Craigs resolve again, then I guess it’s now a case of “batter up”.

          • Gayguy

            Given there is a whole thread on this site about “Things Colin might have said” the batter is already up and swinging and Colin is not biting.

            So run along now and point this site out to your boss and tell him he needs to threaten Whale Oil with legal action. That should be fun to watch.
            Oh and for the record, the precedent set is, it is open season on mocking Colin Craig.

          • Steve Taylor

            “Might have said”: No legal action neccessary, GG, and Cameron will know this, hence the carefully considered wording of the post title. Hardly a “bat”. And I’m self-employed – I don’t therefore have a “Boss”. Wow, you are one angry, anonymous person………..

          • Gayguy

            And yet on a satirical non news site Colin got upset by a fake quote.

            What a silly little man.

          • Steve Taylor

            You’re not that sharp on Law either, are you GG?

          • Gayguy

            Oh please educate us all Colin’s PR man.

            Earning your money today aren’t you.

          • Steve Taylor

            Wow: I take a position of an alternative opinion, and I get myself a job? That’s a better strike rate than Seek!

  • The Civilian just got some heaven-sent free advertising.

    • Sarrs

      I visited it and I never would have otherwise.

    • Mediaan

      Precisely. Craig is a bit better known, but looks silly. Civilian is better-known and thought clever and witty.

  • LesleyNZ

    NewstalkZB have already had this guy Ben on this morning. He writes stupid stuff really. Is Colin Craig becoming a bit of a threat or something? Seems he is really hated by the liberal minded.

    • Colin Craig is the only threat to Colin Craig’s credibility

      • unsol

        Truer words have never been spoken!

      • Dave

        And, he freely confirms his stupidity every time he writes or opens his mouth.

        • “speaking out of his mouth?” (if I speak Labour)
          or
          “speaking out of his arse/ass” (if I speak normally)

      • Gayguy

        He is good for a laugh though.

        • Just don’t put quotation marks around the laugh.

          • Gayguy

            LMAO, that’s true. He is so thin skinned he might cry then sue me.

          • Steve Taylor

            He would need to know your name to do so :)

          • Bunswalla

            Haven’t been round here for long, have you Steve?

          • Steve Taylor

            Oh, I’m sure I’ll catch up eventually.

        • spollyike

          just like you.

          • Gayguy

            Except when I make you laugh it is because you are nervous about truths and facts that cannot be disputed. When Colin makes you laugh it is because he is a clown.

    • Gayguy

      Well given how the right have reacted to Labour and the Greens and their power thing one could ask the same of National and all the blogs that support them. They have flown into attack mode, especially with the polls from the weekend to fuel them.

      And before anyone starts in, I am not saying I am for Labour/Greens power plan. It is perhaps a bit toooo grabby for my liking. Truthfully I have not had a good look at it, and really should. If it is just about keeping the price down, hmmm ok, but anything beyond that seems like a trip back to Muldoon type control.

    • Steve Taylor

      Ben’s piece on the fixing of the Novapay system I found incredibly entertaining and funny: http://www.thecivilian.co.nz/novopay-debacle-solved-by-restarting-computer/

  • Steve Taylor

    A useful reference on media law: http://www.medialawjournal.co.nz/?page_id=273

    From the website: Can humour be defamatory?

    “Yes. Humour, satire, sarcasm, cartoons and spoofs that make fun of people can be defamatory, by holding people up to ridicule unfairly. But it can be difficult to predict whether a court will say “although dressed up as a joke, the barb is defamatory and damaging” or “no-one would take this seriously, it’s obviously just a bit of fun”. Decisions have gone both ways”.

    • I’d like to see what would happen if the fool tried to sue me.

      • Steve Taylor

        I would imagine that any party that Craig named in an action would summon a defence, possibly file an Interlocutory application to slow things down a wee bit, be referred to a Judical Settlement Conference if the IA didn’t stick, possibly settle, or proceed to a formal Hearing?

      • Gayguy

        I would imagine a very public show which Colin does not come out of looking too flash no matter the legal outcome.

        • Steve Taylor

          Hmmm……I wonder who might be the first to be willing to test your theory? The Civilian has said “no, thanks all the same” – it can’t be you, because you’re anonymous – who then?

          • Gayguy

            They have yet to remove the post or quote. They have gone as far as to bold the quote and taken the piss out of Colin when saying “sorry”.

            Colin Craig has come out of this looking like a total fool.

          • Steve Taylor

            According to……

  • Steve Taylor

    “No media takes kindly to being slapped with legal letters. It’s possible MSM may take note and take more care reporting Craig” – yes, I suspect so.

    • James

      Hopefully they take note and stop reporting him at all.

    • Pete George

      Steve, you have posted a couple of what seem like un-subtle warnings to media and bloggers.

      You say “simply mis-quoted context”, and “in a professional and private capacity, I would be more mindful that if I was to mis-quote Craig in the media, then I’m most likely up for a meaningful act of correction.”

      But here you have taken half of one of my sentences and quoted it out of context (using quotation marks) which misquotes me out of context.

      Perhaps you should practice what you preach.

      • Steve Taylor

        Hi Pete, there are two pre-supposed contexts in your post – I simply responded to one of them. No preaching to be had – merely a personal observation of a likely outcome, based on the information currently available to me regarding the issue at hand.

        • Pete George

          The second context is clearly linked to the first.

          You’re guessing at one outcome, I doubt whether it will have made much if any difference to how media report Craig.

          And it’s also possible that Craig will have taken note and take more care complaining about satire in the future.

          • Steve Taylor

            Oh, I think all we have available to us at the moment Pete is opinion, speculation, and “guess” – ultimately, the wisdom of any position is proved right (or wrong) by what results from it.

          • Sponge

            What a pompous prick you are.

          • Steve Taylor

            I think I would have to be in a different income bracket to qualify for a title such as this…………….

          • Sponge

            Are you not sure if you qualify as a prick or as pompous?

          • Steve Taylor

            What is the criteria for either?

          • Sponge

            Being a giddy god bothering apologist.

          • Steve Taylor

            Your description doesn’t match the accepted definition of the term – have another go perhaps?

          • Sponge

            No thanks – having read some of your previous comments my first go is enough for me.

          • Steve Taylor

            Yes, only having enough powder for one shot (and then missing the target completely) would indeed lean itself towards conserving resources – good for you.

    • Lawyer, PR, or cult follower of Mr Craig are we?

    • Gayguy

      Why should they? Colin is a hate filled nutter. I say take the piss out of him for as long as he gives them materiel to work with.

      • Steve Taylor

        Perhaps so – although I note that you do so anonymously…………….

        • Gayguy

          Yawn.

          • Steve Taylor

            I assume that this would be one of those responses that the “smart people” you were telling me about give?

          • Gayguy

            It is a condescending reply to a rather stupid comment.

          • Steve Taylor

            Hmmmm…….stating that you will have a go at Craig from a position of anonymity is a fact – where’s the stupid bit?

          • Steve Taylor
          • Gayguy

            Yawn. Trolling again.

          • Steve Taylor

            Run out of puff, GG? So, what did you say your name was?

          • Gayguy

            Intimidation does not work.

            Oh and be warned, a particular poster will throw up names, he is not as clever as he thinks.

          • Steve Taylor

            Asking a question, and advancing an invitation for a level playing field, is defined by you as intimidation? Calling George Orwell, calling George Orwell……

  • The Conservative party is little more than a cult; for the first couple of years of its life it only had a single policy – get tough on criminals.

    Craig is like most people whose day to day life involves preaching to the choir and consequently getting effusive reactions; the moment they meet or talk to anyone else it jolts them off balance quite severely.

    I have seen Craig on television a couple of times recently about gay marriage; the moment he gets someone criticising him (an unknown experience from his sycophants) he blushes, his voice rises an octave and I was wondering on Breakfast last week if he would burst into tears.

    He is going to find things considerably tougher from now until the election – and Colin, if you are reading this, no one likes a cry baby.

    • unsol

      So what you’re saying is that he has less emotional maturity of a toddler….and is liked by equally silly people :-)

    • LesleyNZ

      You are getting a bit nasty here. Maybe he is the only one left who I feel I want to vote for in the next General Election. I can’t not vote. My great-great grandmother marched for the right of women to vote. I have this coaster to remind me to vote.

      • spollyike

        OMG! No wonder NZ is fucked today then!

      • Gayguy

        A vote for Colin is a vote for the lowest level of intelligence and morals.

        • Steve Taylor

          Is there such a thing? I’ve never seen the chart that denotes the levels.

          • Gayguy

            All you have to do is listen to the man to know the people who support him are not the smartest.

          • Steve Taylor

            According to……………

          • Gayguy

            People who have brains and realise that this man has no actual policies on anything beyond bum sex is bad.

          • Steve Taylor

            Yes, yes, but according to……..

          • Gayguy

            For a start read the thread. It is a small hint.

          • Steve Taylor

            Ok, I have read the thread – so which source are you citing specifically so that I may identify the “smart, brainy” ones?

          • Jeez Steve, are you Colin Craig’s secretary or something? If he wasn’t such a homophobe I’d think you had the hots for him.

          • Steve Taylor

            Hi Melinda. Ahhh, the whip-word “homophobia”: In 1969, George Weinberg defined this term as “a fear and loathing of homosexuals, or a homosexuals deep self-loathing”. Having an alternative opinion to homosexuality isn’t “homophobia” Melinda: it’s simply having an alternative opinion. No doubt being the tolerant sort, I am sure that you will not be quick to pass any judgment on the alternative opinion of others? That wouldn’t be homophobia either -that would simply be philosophical hypocracy. My observation of Craig in the media is that he doesn’t seem to be afraid (phobic) of anyone, or anything – which seems to pose a wee bit of a problem for those who attack him – no-one can seem to get a lasting hit on the guy – because he seems to be willing to front anyone. Personally, I admire his courage to speak his mind in public, and not be intimidated by his opponents (both known and anonymous), and that display of courage alone may well attract my vote in 2014. See Melinda, here is the question for me: are there (approximately) 99,999 other people in NZ who might have the same or a similar response to me come 2014? There are already 45,000 – 55,000 odd already (given recent polls), so if the answer to my question is “Yes” – then the Parliamentary landscape may well drastically. Again, as I have said previously in this post – all any of us have right now is speculation, opinion, and “guess” – the wisdom of a position will be proved right (or wrong), by what ultimately results from it.

          • ER, my observation was that Colin Craig was so afraid of what people might think about him discussing rainbows and Noah’s ark, that he rang in the lawyers. So I’m not sure what display of courage you’re talking about.

            As for no one getting a lasting hit on the guy, well it seems to me that a little known satirist made a major hit on Mr Craig this week, and that all the MSM took huge pleasure in reporting it – and that now Colin Craig is a bit of a laughing stock. The very thing he was trying to avoid in his ill-advised legal action.

            As for your question: no, I don’t think there are approximately 99,999 other people in NZ who might have the same response to you come 2014. Look at this thread. You have come out in loud support for Colin Craig, but everyone else has laughed at him. Now yes this is a blog and it’s not an election booth, but, let’s face it, Whaleoil gets a million hits a month so the comments are possibly indicative of the views of the population as a whole….. in fact, if anything, WO’s readers are mostly right-wing, and we all know the left wouldn’t vote for Craig regardless.

          • Steve Taylor

            Then you may need to re-focus your observation, stop mixing your contexts, and stay on the issue at hand. Obfuscation simply isn’t helpful. Wrongly attributed statement = Threat of Legal action = Attributor Compliance = Threat of Legal action dropped. It’s not a complicated equation Melinda. A “lasting” hit on Craig would be to take him out of the political equation for good, and until his party stops registering on every poll in the country, with more votes than a cluster of Parties currently in Parliament, that “hit” has yet to be claimed. You are right, this blog is not an Election booth, and doesn’t claim to be, however you forget that most viewers of blog sites view posts – they don’t all comment on posts, so unless the blog host was able to poll all of his readers, then there is no way of knowing who stands where, on what, and why – that is a realm set aside for Election day.

          • Indeed, Steve, obfuscation isn’t helpful. But I’m not certain where or when I engaged in this; I merely responded to each of the points YOU raised.

            I think you missed the point though, in your “uncomplicated equation”. Attributor compliance would suggest that the Civilian removed the “offending” post, as per Colin Craig’s request. But they didn’t, they have actually drawn more attention to it. Colin Craig hasn’t withdrawn due to their compliance; he has withdrawn because he is EMBARASSED at the resulting publicity and being made a laughing stock.

            You are correct in stating that a lasting hit would take a politician out of the political equation for good. However, you are erroneous in assuming that Colin Craig had actually BEEN part of the political equation in the first place and, so far, he’s never managed to beat the 5% threshold to get elected.

          • Steve Taylor

            The Civilian complied to a point to which the legal action was withdrawn – it doesn’t matter as to whether the post is still featured as a reference to the action -what matters is the acknowledgement and correction made by the attributor – that was the point of the legal action, and has been succesful, as every MSM organisation now knows not to do likewise. Regarding the 5% – Craig doesn’t need to “beat it” yet, he needs to “beat it” in 2014 – as every Political Leader in the country has said at one time or another “Election day is the only poll that counts”. And given the result of the last Election where “hadn’t beaten the 5% threshold yet” NZ First romped in, I’m not prepared to bet against the Conservatives. Since I also can’t tell what the future holds, I am blown away by how many people in this post claim to be able to do just this.

          • Apolonia

            13 parties contested the last election and the Conservatives were the 5th highest polling party. They received more votes than 4 of the parties currently in parliament. Recent polls suggest they remain NZ’s 5th most supported political party and since the last election they have trebled their party membership.It is highly likely that the Conservatives will be in parliament in 2014.

          • Steve Taylor

            Now THAT’S an evidence-based summary.

        • LesleyNZ

          What morals? Morals according to Gayguy? You are so judgemental on those who might happen to vote for Colin Craig. I think you need to take a look at new Greenlabour Party first when you talk about intelligence.

          • Gayguy

            Morals that say we are all equal, not just some of us. Colin is not the nice smiling man he pretends to be. He is a bigot.

          • Steve Taylor

            How exactly are we all equal?

          • Gayguy

            Sigh, go away troll.

          • Steve Taylor

            Hey – that’s MY line! I do empathise with the difficulty to be had in a debate when one has run dry of global statements, assumption, opinion-as-fact, and rancour, I really do – a pity you are cutting and running – I was just getting warmed up :)

          • Gayguy

            Oh I am not running anywhere. But when you spout nonsense on liners like you have, then do not expect anything back except condescending accurate replies.

          • Steve Taylor

            A pity: I was hoping for intelligent, evidenced replies. Being condescending is simply an act of thinly disguised contempt, and accuracy is simply opinion until credibly evidenced. If your modus operandi is to be contemptable, and to position opinion-as-fact, then that is not a debate: that is a tantrum. What is it with those who are contemptable of others who do not share their worldview?

          • Steve you are hardly one to advocate for intelligent, evidenced replies. Your behaviour in Helensville is contemptible, especially threatening people. Though you did seem to pull your head in once the police came knocking on your door.

            Don’t try and do the bully thing on me, it simply won’t work. Now pull your head in.

          • Steve Taylor

            Hi Cameron: I’m not sure where you feel I have been acting in a bullying manner towards you? I am assuming by the “Helensville” comment you are referring to this? http://www.grantnormanking.com

          • Dropping you conspiracy theory website links will just get you banned. You haven’t yet, but I know your MO, you will get there eventually so just a warning to you to lay off because I smack back a whole lot harder than some people.

            Drop your link in again and the ban hammer drops. You don;t get to insult my close friends and expect to come here and get away with it.

          • Steve Taylor

            Goodness, you obviously haven’t read the blog, or the evidence of same. Having said this, I acknowledge your loyalty to your friends. If you don’t wish me to comment on your blog, you simply need to say so – there is no need to revert to threats or host standover tactics. I believe that I have been quite civil and respectful in my dialogue to date, in accordance with the rules of the site. A simple “stop commenting on my site” will suffice.

          • Steve Taylor

            I have re-read my posts, and am now utterly perplexed by your comment about bullying – a reasonable observer would surely say that I have conducted my dialogue in this post respectfully? Or is there an issue with me that you may have, and wish to bring to my attention, unrelated to this post?

          • Gayguy

            If you troll then I will give you contempt. If you try harder and use your brain, I will give you a considered reply, otherwise do not expect anything but contempt. And given Whales revelations about your past in Helensville, I now see why you behave as you do.

          • Steve Taylor

            It’s that alternative opinion issue again for you, isn’t it GG? I tell you what: let’s level the playing field. You post under your real identity, as I am posting under mine, and we will go from there.

          • People are not all equal – the idea that some stupid, ignorant, drug taking, booze guzzling, illiterate solo mother is equal to me who has built a large export company in 20 years from nothing – is absurd.
            I think if I walked into the local WINZ office the last thing which would occur to me is “Oh clearly this is a meeting with my equals”

          • Gayguy

            We are all equal before the law. More so now since last Wednesday.

          • Yes the gay marriage thing was great; about bloody time too

      • unsol

        What silliness Lesley. I suggest you might be better off abstaining, That would have more meaning. It would achieve nothing, but it would make you feel like your tantrum was worth it.

        Colin Craig has no policies except to harp on that he will push for a referendum on something that would have been law for over a year & which will have had no impact on ANYONE but the people whom the law actually addresses.

        Further, voting for Colin Craig wont mean you will get your referendum, it will just mean that National may have a coalition partner – he is far too right for Labour & the Greens to ever consider so what is it you think you will achieve?

        And do you know his policy on education, welfare, the economy, public transport, immigration, health, company taxation structure (he’s clearly been creaming it), his definition of marriage vs the true definition of traditional marriage (something Graham Caphill was clearly in favour of)?

        I do – zero. He has no policies. He is full of bluff, bluster & bullshit & is using whatever hysteria he can to muscle his way into govt.

        Which is fine by me – I don’t care if he gets in & if he does it will most certainly mean the Nats get in for a 3rd term. But he has no leverage. And guaranteed he will back away from his so-called hardcore stance against the LGBT too…..he is a rich man after all and well, you know what they say about rich men & heaven vs camels & the eye of a needle.

        • Congrats Unsol – had been waiting for someone to reply to Lesley in a coherent way.

          You are correct in that he has no ‘real’ policies because any that he would have on bread and butter issues have either already been implemented by National, or are in the process of being implemented – ie: low taxes? – already done Colin; productive export industries booming? – done that, too; education? – done that; health? – Tony Ryall is on it; Transport? Steven Joyce is doing it etc…etc

          Therefore Craig seeks visceral issues (hanging criminals, attacking gays, Chinese farmowners etc) to get votes because he can always blame everything on these easy targets – “the reason you are suffering from _____ [write imaginary wrongdoing here, drought, ill health, high cost of living etc] is because of those pesky _____ ” [write imaginary villiains here; gays, Asians, murderers etc]

          It is cheap populism a la Winston circa. 1996 (and how full of shit did he turn out to be once he was Deputy PM?)

          • unsol

            “visceral issues”

            Nicely put. And so very true.

            Cathy Odgers – aka Cactus Kate claimed in an opinion piece for NBR last year that he is “confusing right wing political brands with social conservatism that seeks to impose deplorable value systems on women, homosexual people and a Winston Peters populist style of Nationalism. He’s trying to out-Winston, Winston”

          • LesleyNZ

            I wish there were more Tony Ryalls in the National Party. He has done a fantatsic job. Steven Joyce – he is good too.

          • Gayguy

            Naaa, more MPs like Williams. That’s what National need.

          • Steve Taylor

            Hmmmm……I think National needs to consider the very strong possibility that they most likely won’t be “governing alone” in 2014. Labour & the Greens have worked this out, and all credit to them for doing so.

        • LesleyNZ

          Tantrum? LOL. Yes I do know what the Bible says about rich men & heaven vs camels & the eye of a needle. Who are we to judge? I am not certain who I will vote for now. Who knows .

    • Justsayn

      Sounds like you are describing the sensible sentencing trust. Are the two linked in any way?

    • Patrick

      I cannot believe people are pushing this guy as a coalition partner for the Nats at the next election – it is a Don Brash Exclusive Brethren banana skin just waiting for someone to step on. Far better ploy would be to resuscitate the ACT party, clear out the muppets & put a credible face to them – not J Banks. Use ACT to capture the right wing conservatives. Move National even more to the centre pushing Labour even further to the commie left exposing more of the stupid ideological commie policies like the recent electricity policy. Discard any thoughts of Peters being viable he is a wrecker & hater, Maori Party are also going to fall Labour’s way.

      • Justsayn

        If it can be done then great, but I’m worried that ACT are past resuscitation and going it alone is short term thinking.

      • unsol

        Completely agree.

    • Mr_Blobby

      The only policy I did not agree with was raising the drinking age to 20. That is only because you can vote, join the army, join the police etc at the age of 18.

      • unsol

        I think they should all be moved up to 20 – more so in this day & age of helicopter parenting where 18 year olds are nothing more than pimply self-absorbed delinquents.

  • Justsayn

    Whatever you do don’t let uncertainty interfere with reaching conclusions!

    In this instance he may have been smarter than you give him credit for. An in any event, who knows whether or not he is following the advice he got (don’t get why you are attacking the lawyer).

    Steve’s most likely correct: a genuine apology may never have been expected. Sending the “don’t misquote me” message to the wider audience may have been the point, and that seems to have got though at a very reasonable cost (just heard it on the radio news!!).

  • Red

    Isn’t this what Judith Collins anti cyber bully law will quietly cover as well? No one seems concerned with what’s “between the lines” of that little bit of sneaky legislation… til it’s too late. Her words….”post material online that is grossly offensive, indecent, obscene…..” and so on….. Isn’t this what bloggers and journos do 10 -12 times a day? Offensive etc is all in the eye of the beholder and if the beholder is the NZ Govt – that’ll root a few peoples day. But, Pahhhh…. democracy and free speech – who needs it ay? http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/time039s-cyber-bullies

    • peterwn

      I doubt it. It is going to be difficult to argue that a politician is being ‘bullied’- they are supposed to be of sterner stuff than that. If the bill does seem to be over-reaching, then this can be remedied at the Select Committee stage.

  • Pingback: Conservative warning to media? | Your NZ()

  • Dave

    “If Colin Craig wants the $500 I will help fundraise that to assist The Civilian” Brilliant idea, count me in for a donation, as long as Mr Craig’s pettiness is further spread throughout the blogosphere and all over social media. Oh, and as long as the $500 is paid to his office in 10 cent pieces, counted and a receipt provided. Pity “Donations” to political parties are not tax deductible ?

  • spollyike

    I would like to know who people here think National will form a coalition with to have any chance of forming a government after the next election. I suggest that given the alternatives i.e. none, there is a very real chance that National would go with the Conservatives. After all the conservatives have more in common with Nationals core constituency than the part-maori racist party (who will just go with whichever party offers the part-maori blood quatum the most koha/privileges), or NZ First. Act is dead in the water and the old cup-o’-tea isn’t going to work again. So for arguments sake i would suggest that Conservative is probably the best match for national, afterall we know most National voters didn’t want gay marraige, didn’t want the smacking legislation passed, want binding referendums, want equality for all regardless of blood-quantums, want a tougher justice system. So what is there to disagree with? All this shows on this blog is that the MSM lefty media have done a number on Colin Graig so well that even the right wingers of this country are shooting in the foot/heart any chance the right has of re-election in this country next term. I am i wrong or is there some logic here? Other alternatives?

    • Gayguy

      I do not see National being in government after the next election.

      Colin’s nuts will not be there. Nor will ACT. Peter Dunne will be, maybe one Maori Party MP. National will have no one to work with, Labour and the Greens will have the numbers between them (unless one or both of them commit a MAJOR fuck up, which is not out of the question with that lot).

      • Steve Taylor

        If National don’t find someone to “work with”, then your summary in terms of Nationals position is a distinct possibility – unfortunately for National, they don’t seem to believe that this possibility exists.

        • Gayguy

          Now see you do have the available brains to put together a normal post. Well done you.

          And this is where the left will always do better, in the long run, with MMP style government. There will be a main party, but lots of little parties that they can work with. The right, seem to always clump together in one big group, or create far right nutbar groups that almost no one votes for. Thus National is going to find it VERY hard to regain power after the lose in 2014.

          • Steve Taylor

            Oh GG, you are only applauding my post on this occasion because I have found some semblance of agreement with you on this issue – see my previous response. This affirms my hypothesis: agree with GG = person is worthy of respect; disagree with GG = person is worthy of contempt. Mighty tolerant, diverse, and inclusive of you, GG.

          • Gayguy

            Wrong. You actually used your brain and posted more than 2 words. I do not care if you agree with me or not, it is all in how you put it out there. If you use your brain and form real sentences, then that is good.

            Stupid 3 word troll answers are bad.

            Oh and just so you do not get any wrong ideas, I still think you are a Colin Craig suck up idiot.

          • Steve Taylor

            Right: so an anonymous person with an invisible opinion does not care for me: just as well my self-esteem doesn’t rest in your hands then, isn’t it? You no doubt “came out” once before in your life – time to do so again GG – let’s now be having your real identity, so we can level the playing field?

          • Gayguy

            Interesting attempt to intimidate and stand over someone there.

          • Steve Taylor

            Interesting attempt to avoid the invitation there…..goodness me, you are not going to get into any strife by simply telling us all your real identity – where’s the harm to be had? So…….who are you?

          • Steve Taylor
          • Gayguy

            Yawn. Trolling again I see.

          • Steve Taylor

            GG, its the anonymous ones that are the trolls – haven’t you been keeping up to date with international best posting practice protocols?

          • Gayguy

            Gosh I did not know you made the rules on Whale’s blog troll.

          • Steve Taylor

            On the contrary – I do my level best to comply with host rules (which are different from site to site). And your name would be….?

          • Gayguy

            Well given WO is one step away from banning you I would call bullshit on that.

    • James

      Alternative is to try and resurrect ACT or Libertarianz so that you don’t have to try and do a deal with a humourless egomaniac. I would rather Labour/Greens had 3 years of power than a National / Conservative coalition formed as at least then National would be able to come in and fix the damage … whereas one coalition with Conservatives and you legitimise Craig as a “serious” politician.
      Indeed if there were a “cup of tea” between Key and Craig my vote would go from National to ACT.

    • unsol

      There are no alternatives. CC is the only possible coalition partner & if he gets the votes he will go with National….there is no way that Labour & the Greens could ever work with him. For a start, a good proportion of them are gay so how on earth would that work with Craig’s homophobe supporters? It wouldn’t.

      So the net result would be Nats with Craig getting some silly portfolio that means nothing. He’s happy as he gets to stick his snout in the taxpayer’s trough & really live it up as a rich prick & the Nats are happy as they get a 3rd term/resume business as usual.

      And what’s even better is that a call for and cost of carrying out a referendum in 18 months time or more will have NO baring on anything. LGBT will have been able to get married for over a year, they sky wont have caved in, those with good marriages will still have good marriages (provided they dont spend all their time blogging!) & people will see it really is none of their business.

      Which means all those who threw their toys out of the cot to vote for a cultish twat who has no policies on the table whatsoever, who thinks prayer groups make for a successful business, will find they threw their vote away for nothing.

      But all this underestimates ACT – John Banks may have made a few enemies re ME, but he will have made a heap more friends. Same with Paul Goldsmith – and he voted for ME too.

    • Kacanga

      Conservatives (misnamed) are just another bunch of religious Fundies a la Destiny, Christian Heritage, Christian Democrats, Future New Zealand and whatever Larry Baldock is into this week. They never have and never will get more than 2 or 3%.

  • Justsayn

    I suspect that most of on here us want National to govern after the next election. They need a party to team up with, and ACT seems stuffed. The Conservatives may be a bunch of God-bothering nut-jobs, but it would not be the end of the world if they got a foothold.

    It that impossible? Winston has proven that targeting your message to a small and incredibly stupid part of the spectrum is workable under MMP.

    • The are a cult, based on the largesse and personality, such as it is, of Colin Craig. The man is a political fool, he has no values, oh sure he has policies but his continual use of dodgy polling which always says he will win is nothing short of dishonest.

      He has spent probably the thick end of $4.5 million coming at best third. Proving along the way that money cannot and will not ever buy a stupid person an election.

      • Justsayn

        Apart from the last bit that could be NZ First or Mana (or to a degree many political parties for that matter).

        I think National needs a minor party that is stuck with it (not one that can credibly threaten to go both ways).

      • Steve Taylor

        Money seems to do pretty well within the legal professions political arena: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1009671

        Although I am also aware that some local analysis has been conducted on $ per vote for NZ Political parties (from memory, the “winner” in terms of highest cost per vote was ACT?). David Farrar has some data on this, I believe.

  • flashman

    There’s a bit of wishful thinking going on here. Craig has deep pockets and he could make life pretty hot for Uffindel if he felt like it. And he might just win in court. Mallard and Little got a slap off the Crusher that showed them just because you disagree with someone, or even don’t like them very much, you can’t just say anything you like about them. This could get interesting. (I’m a huge fan of satire by the way, Private Eye subscriber for 25 years).

    • Gayguy

      No matter how deep his pockets he would have looked like an amazing fool if he had have gone all out on this. Lucky for him someone has spoken common sense to him and he has called off the dogs. So he has only had to look like a total idiot for 2 days, as opposed to looking like and idiot for however long a court case would have been.

      • Steve Taylor

        Ummmm…….the site host complied with the Lawyers demands – so naturally Craig would drop the action? That is kind of how the whole “legal” thing works?

        • Gayguy

          It has complied in such a way that it has continued to mock Colin. Just now it is an even more public mocking than if Colin had of said nothing.

          This is why Colin will not succeed in politics. He has no understanding of how to limit damage to himself.

          • Steve Taylor

            “It has complied”: Yup.

          • Gayguy

            LOL, if that is what you think you run with that.

            Everyone else will carry on taking the piss out of Colin.

          • Steve Taylor

            Yes, I think I’m comfortable “running with that”. “Everyone” is a high number – you must know heaps of people? Some may mock Craig, GG, but I’m picking that few if any with any credible journalistic position or nous will now mis-quote him: the correction has been made – those corrected simply now have to make friends with disappointment. After all, its only disappointment, isn’t it GG?

          • Gayguy

            LOL, are you sure you do not work for Colin. Orrrrrr maybe, you are Colin and you are trying to repair the damage that you have done to yourself.

            Tell me “Steve” is it a good thing or a bad thing that so many people really believed that the fake quote was something that Colin would actually say, hence why it was believed to be from him?

          • Steve Taylor

            I know who I am GG. I post under my real name.

          • Gayguy

            And yet, I doubt that very much.

          • Steve Taylor

            Google my name.

          • Yes the bully from Helensville who delighted in threatening a pregnant woman. How did you go with the Police visit?

          • Steve Taylor

            Hi Cameron, you mean this? http://www.grantnormanking.com/2012/12/05/regan-camp-king-cunnliffe-the-helensville-community-facebook-page-moderator-tries-to-defend-the-indefensible/
            I am aware that you are good friends with the Cunliffe’s, however it might be useful for you to talk to me and get what appears to be absent from your dialogue: that being the other side of the story? Over to you however.

          • I don’t care for side of you extremely wonky story. Fuck off.

            Link again and you are gone.

          • Steve Taylor

            Asked and answered.

          • Steve Taylor

            Which Police visit :)

          • Gayguy

            Done.

            So which one is you? The American christian singer, the Barrister from the Hutt, or the lecturer of Mathematics at Auckland Uni?

          • Steve Taylor

            You’re just not that onto it, are you GG?

          • Gayguy

            Or perhaps people do not give a rats arse who you are and you have an over inflated sense of your own importance.

            Going by what WO has said, in real life you are a nasty petty bully, however upon taking your advice and googling you, you do no rate much in the world seeing as your “realness” is not up there in Google results.

            But by all means, continue your ego trip. Post links to your FB page, your twitter account, any media clips you have appeared in. So we can ALLLL get to know the sweet darling that you are.

            Yawn.

          • Steve Taylor

            Clearly not a fan then. What name would I use to Google you? Quid pro quo and all of that…………..

          • Travis Poulson

            No point justifying yourself to GG, he uses several names on this blog and still thinks he’s anonymous. I guess teachers from Kokopu school aren’t that smart…

      • flashman

        That may well be true, but it doesn’t have much to do with what I said. I didn’t say it would be a smart idea, just that he could, “if he felt like it”.

38%