My (Only) Comment on #PonytailGate | #Partisanship #LecretiaSearles #Media #Drink

… The only words I will write on the nonsense surrounding New Zealand’s Prime Minister pulling a waitresses ponytail:

Twitter still pretty unbearable. Everything gets turned to a partisanship as null-think as the old nationalism wars were fought over.
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) April 22, 2015

@MarkHubbard33 I'm partisan only to ideas, not identity.
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) April 22, 2015

@MarkHubbard33 The Judean's People Front vs. the People's Front of Judea.
— Mat Vaillancourt (@MVLibertas) April 22, 2015

@MVLibertas Yep. And the most vicious partisans star the Left coz they're so wrapped up in identity bound tribalism.
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) April 22, 2015

I further find it sadly unsurprising that all blogs other than myself and Jo Holmes are so wrapped up in identity politics trivia, not one has seen fit to write up the most important court battle in New Zealand at the moment: Lecretia Searles High Court battle to die with dignity. There can be no more important rights case than this, and currently nothing more ignored by the petty partisan political pundits.

Mind you, our cowardly politicians are sitting out the euthanasia debate also, leaving the entire weight of it on the shoulders of a dying woman. And that is beyond shameful to being a comment on the failure of our democracy.

If you want to know my opinion on #ponytailgate, it’s conflicted. The inappropriate touching - because no consent - is obfuscated by it being reported on hard Left The Daily Blog: that reportage puts it something between sexism and agenda, meaning, unknowable. And then of course there’s my post Retrieving the Corpse of Roger Sutton from the Cross of Shesus: that’s in my opinion somewhere also. But I really can’t be bothered.

Finally, from 105 kgs at end of last September, to this fine morning I’m 87.2 kgs, so operation flat stomach and occasional sobriety achieved. Albeit social media and the MSM have combined into a huge compunction to drink recently.

Instigating The Uninformed To Take My Income From The Emoting Booth.

Warning: This piece contains Reactionary triggers.

 

As with every election year, there is started that campaign by the Left to get those to vote whom don’t normally, because they can’t be bothered; particularly youth.  No doubt this due in no small part to the Left thinking they know where this uninformed vote will go; and I’m afraid they may be right – that is, follow my money.

 

5 ways to immediately lift voter participation in NZ elections  - See more at: http://t.co/iEERUI50mE @actionstation
— TheDailyBlogNZ (@TheDailyBlogNZ) May 26, 2014

 

As usual in our age of Reality TV, the message goes right to that pseudo nouveau intelligentsia at the top, celebrity; because as we all know, singing tunes and learning lines gives one instant access to all scienpoliteconophilosophial knowledge:

 

@publicaddress cc #rockenrol - i went and spoke to youth enrolment about why young votes are important a few weeks ago, should be out soon!
— Lorde (@lordemusic) May 26, 2014

 

Two thoughts; I apologise now before you read on:

 

If someone can't of themselves be bothered to get informed and vote, I don't want them voting.
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) May 26, 2014

@MarkHubbard33 & there is currently a big push by Left to get youth to vote, because they know where the uninformed vote goes #EmotingBooth
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) May 26, 2014

 

Regarding the Daily Blog Post: no, this libertarian definitely does not want 16 year old high school children voting on how ‘I’m allowed’ to live my life, and how much of my income is to be taken for the privilege. Let them earn an income first. And while teaching civics in school sounds good, when 95% of our teachers belong to hard-line Left union the PPTA, excuse me for being terrified.

 

Bloody democracy: the Left would turn the voting box into an emoting box for the idealistic young who have not lived in reality sufficiently to understand they can only vote themselves a free lunch on my income, with consequences that frighten we adults who have a keen grasp on the history of the state, a state, and how it has always consumed our freedoms and our right to be left alone. I want people voting who have thought about these issues for some good deal of time, not just lunch-time before the bell rings.

 

Clarifications in the way of Excuses, Regarding this Reactionary and Celebrity:

 

I love and respect what Lorde has done for herself: her burgeoning career is an example of talent with confidence coming together into the best a human being can be. However, the conundrum is - with Keisha Castle-Hughes Green activism in mind, (remember before her and her boyfriend trashed that landlord’s house they were living in?), and the over thirty causes Justin Bieber promotes, (and no I'm too timid to go and look) - I am ‘over’ celebrity teenagers thinking they have the world so sussed, they should have any sort of a say in my life via calling policy at the Fortress of Legislation. Then again, with Lucy Lawless in mind, and Barbra Streisand, I’m over all-knowing celebrities and their busy-body ways, period – the only exclusion I can think of being Brigitte Bardot (animal welfare – um, albeit I’m selfishly leaving the orthodoxy on that one). Although that’s not quite it either: I’m just over everybody thinking they have a right to have a say in what an individual does when that individual is going about their life, minding their own business, doing no harm.  That is a right no one has, but which is unfortunately the ruling ethic of our collectivist times as we are all forced to live the Lives of Others, our freedoms sacrificed via the tax surveillance state to the manufactured needs of complete strangers.

 

Perhaps I’m being childish myself. On a Twitter thread some years ago Sacha Dylan once accused me of being like a spoilt child who was immaturely anti-authority: I tried to debate him rationally on it, as adults do, however, he threw a tantrum in pretty short order before doing the Lefty thing of re-writing history by wiping out the entire timeline. No, I don’t think I’m being childish, and certainly not selfish:

 

 

 

Rambling. Sorry.

 

Long live free speech, unless you’ve got your thieving paws on my wallet, or you’re a kid: in which case, bugger off ... please. My life is the one always-place your life has no right to be: we need a constitutional minarchy which protects only the rights of the smallest minority, the individual, and no vote to then emote that away, for it's time we stopped living bound lives, held down with a taxboot against our neck on someone else's bargaining table in an auction room. Though until we do, if there must be a vote, then I'll vote for a minimum voting age of 40, I think, perhaps deferred for those males still not through that little crisis we have around that age.

 

Now I’m off to that wonderful product of capitalism: iTunes.

 

Climate Change Against Free Speech - Moderation at *The Daily Blog*

Why is the Left so arrogantly intolerant of free speech and dissent to the theocracy they assume of themselves? Their willful blindness to any ideas outside their perceived truths means that even on any point they might be right, they are still wrong. At heart it's an emotional immaturity, arising from their truths being the product of emoting, not thinking. For example, every sane human being wants to see an end to poverty, the Left have no monopoly over compassion; but no reasoned solution will include theft, the destruction of rights and freedoms, and creation of dependency on the state that leads into a cycle of poverty which the cult of redistribution gives. Though what concerns me is, once free speech is gone, there is only violence left. More on that soon; first the latest litany of proof.

I am always respectful when commenting on other blogs, yet my comments seldom make it past moderation on most Left-centric sites. I've not tried to comment on The Daily Blog for six or seven months, but over the weekend decided a comment was warranted on a post talking about what a disaster Peter Dunne's Psychoactive Substances Act is, because I agreed with it. That Act is a disaster from the toxic, psychosis forming sludge it legalises, to the barbaric animal testing it authorises. My point to the blog post was, however, that due to the nanny state mentality of all our governing parties, and central to the Left ethic, we are treated as children, hence non-toxic, harmless, medicinal, even, cannabis remains criminalised. That comment never made it past moderation.

My blog is not moderated because I believe absolutely in free speech. The Daily Blog has every right to moderate their blog, but once they start choosing who is allowed to comment, and what they're allowed to say, that begins saying more about them, than their blog's content. Once you start moderating you may as well simply switch off comments, as No Right Turn does, and then you can pretend you are the alpha to omega of truth, while ignoring the illusory truth of the free lunch.

And moderated blogs also undermine themselves, as Mark Steyn makes plain in the climate debate:

The fact that 'climate change' is not secure enough to tolerate dissent, helps explain why it's going nowhere.'

This is not a post on climate change, I'm not sure enough about the science either way, (or overly interested), but the manner in which the 'alarmist' camp are playing roughshod over free speech, is putting me firmly in the camp of the deniers, even if they're wrong, given free speech is far more important than man-made climate change, if that is, indeed, occurring. There certainly seems to be a new era of McCarthyism:

At the heart of the current, poisoned debate about global warming lies a paradox. Thanks to the ‘pause’, the unexpected plateau in world surface temperatures which has now lasted for 17 years, the science is less ‘settled’ than it has been for years.

Yet, despite this uncertainty, those who use it to justify a range of potentially ruinous energy policies have become ever more extreme in their pronouncements. Their latest campaign is an attempt to silence anyone who disagrees.

This reached a new and baleful milestone last week, with a report from the Commons Science and Technology Committee saying BBC editors must obtain special ‘clearance’ before interviewing climate ‘sceptics’.

Yes, that. The advocates of global warming, as with too much of the blinkered, conservative Left politick, need to grow up. And don't pretend some type of compassionate, moral superiority that gives you a right to run my life: the reality is far removed from that. Plus like Steyn, my mind remains, always, firmly onside of the free society: I'm a free speech absolutist, because the alternative is only violence:

I've always been in favor of freedom of expression, but lately I've become a free-speech absolutist. It takes all sorts to make a world and I've met a lot of them over the years, and I can stand pretty much anything anyone says about anything — until someone says to me, "You can't say that." At which point my inclination is to punch his lights out. I do this not just because I'm a violent psychopath with a hair-trigger temper, but to make the important point that in societies where you're not free to speak your mind — to argue and debate — the only way to express disagreement is through violence.