Skip to Content »

Bradford’s free speech

  • January 28th, 2008

Sue Bradford wants Family First prosecuted for its weekend ads listing Police threats to parents. She claims Family First have spent more than the $50k in total that a referendum promoter can spend letting citizens know about a citizens initiated referendum.

This is the same Sue Bradford who thought the Government’s spend of $11.5m on propaganda for the Greens “Buy Kiwi Made” campaign was not enough to get the message across.

$50k today would not even  launch a campaign for a new dog roll. Marketing experts say people need to see an ad six times before the topic starts to register in public consciousness, let alone understand any detail. Bradford knows that. 

There’s a simple explanation for her screeching on this issue. She wants political debate confined to politicians, or under the control of the media gatekeepers. She believes most of the media share her views of what is “appropriate”.

For Bradford paid advertising  must be stopped by the Police even when it is paid for by thousands of concerned working families, because paid advertising bypasses editorial control of what should get public oxygen.

Some young people support the Greens as a  fashion statement. But without Rod Donald they are not just fluffy-minded reminders of what politics might be if the world worked as children wish it did.

Sue Bradford can be pleasant. She is dedicated. For her,  marxist toughmindedness is a duty.  The ends justify the means even if that meant lying about what her law meant. She would regret trashing free speech, but denying the masses the right to communicate with each other their misguided concerns about what their political masters are doing is just an unfortunate price to be paid for ensuring they are not misled by bad elements.


  • George
  • January 28th, 2008
  • 4:31 pm

I fail to see why you ascribe pleasantness to this woman. It is akin to a bird being fascinated and mesmerized by the pretty colours of an approaching snake. She and her overpowering philosophy are a complete threat to freedom and democracy in this country.

And a screecher to boot.

  • Lindsay
  • January 28th, 2008
  • 5:20 pm

I understand Stephen’s attitude. Sue Bradford will hear your submission to a select committee politely. She does not attack or bully like some I have witnessed. I entirely agree that her ideas are a threat to freedom but that doesn’t give licence to misrepresent her manner as an MP.

  • Edwin
  • January 28th, 2008
  • 9:52 pm

It still disappoints me to remember Nationals response to this appalling bill.

I note John Key still considers his pact with the devil as his finest hour. What I think is probably the most depressing in my view is that this shows such a serious lack of understanding of how NZ’ers view this bill. It doesn’t bode well with other initiatives they have planned for the 2008.

Leave your comments:

* Required fields. Your e-mail address will not be published on this site

You can use the following HTML tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>