In her regular interview with Paul Holmes this morning the Prime Minister decided to turn the Libertarianz' pledge-card court-case into another secret funding conspiracy. Describing the Libertarianz as a "small right-wing outfit" she asked, "Who thinks the Libertarianz can afford this?"
And again, just to make sure you get the message, "The question is, who is paying for this?"
My question is, will PC be sending HC a sermon on why the Libertarianz are not right-wing?
Update; Latest NewstalkZB headlines reporting that the PM is now suggesting National is behind the "plot".
Mum jailed for letting a 10 year old go for a walk
50 minutes ago
4 comments:
In some ways they are. Certainly they are over run with people with authoritarian personalities. But he couldn't mention that could he?
Rest assured, Lindsay, said epistle would already be on its way if I thought there was the merest hint of a skerrick of a shred of any sign that Helen gave a shit about the truth.
In the absense of her being able to adequately respond to the charge that she stole the election, I look forward to Libertarianz joining the Exclusive Brethren, John Yelash, Timberlands's Kit Richards, the Berrymans, the "haters and wreckers" and Uncle Tom Cobley and all on the list of people Helen Clark would prefer to smear instead of answering the charges against her.
But as Bernard told Paul Holmes this morning, it's easy to divert attention from your guilt when you're just answering questions in the media, but much harder to do when you're answering them in the High Court.
Bring it on!
Considering they have almost no members, and no funds, and campaigned only at taxpayers expsense exactly where did they get the money? They are avoiding that question and PC, his master's poodle, has avoided answer the questiion above. Helen ought to pay the money back and resign but PC ought to actually answer the question as to who funded this case.
ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Anonymous, I count at least five factual errors in just one short paragraph of yours. That's some sort of achievement, isn't it. No wonder you prefer anonymity.
You ask, how is the Libz case being funded? I say again, by voluntary donations. By people who have been so offended by the corruption of this Government they have queued up to help bring it down.
Meanwhile, how is Labour's case being funded? How are they finding the funds to defend the charge that they've been ticking the till? YOu know what: the thieving bastards are putting their hands in the till again.
So I'm not just helping pay for Bernard's case against Labour, I'm also being made to pay for Labour's defence in that case.
So you see, Anonymous, that's the chief difference right there between Libertarianz and your own masters: We ask nicely. You steal.
Post a Comment