Right Thinking: an open letter to the New Zealand Herald

No-nonsense authoritarian libertarian columnist Dr. Frank Shizenhausen is back, with another hard-hitting attack on the media

Dear Sirs

I was hopeful that the New Zealand Herald's "You be the judge" project would help to transform the way we think about justice issues.

Right Thinking: Fight The Facts

Hard-hitting conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen returns after a long break

People have been jumping all over Garth McVicar, head of the Sensible Sentencing Trust, after he claimed in a select committee submission that gay marriage would lead to more crime.

It's shocking the way a good man like McVicar can't even make an argument entirely devoid of evidence, without the usual suspects trying to shut him down.

But the Sensible Sentencing Trust has a valid point about crime increasing if homosexuals are permitted to marry.

Right Thinking: A Stark Choice

Everyone's favourite libertarian authoritarian returns with a hard-hitting column, and reminds readers that it's only a Godwin if the person's not actually a Hitler in disguise.

Watching the national conventions of the two main American political parties these last two weeks has been a chilling reminder to me of the peril the world stands in.

America is confronted with a stark choice: do they support the man who loves his country and was born in his country, or do they re-elect the crazed foreign-born dictatorial lunatic?

Anyone who reads my columns knows that I eschew extremist language of any sort, because it's not conducive to good debate. But anyone who thinks Barack "Hitler" Obama isn't the greatest threat to the security and peace of all citizens of this world is deluding themselves.

Right Thinking: Don't Trust The Reds!

Everyone's favourite libertarian authoritarian returns with a hard-hitting column

I don't watch a lot of Parliament TV, because I find my days are full enough as it is. It's all too easy to lose oneself for up to half a day browsing through the Solo Passion site, so what I don't need are more distractions.

But I have been watching some of the debates on Parliament TV over National's asset sales legislation, if only to confirm in my own mind how low our political system has fallen. Asset sales are a no-brainer, and every respectable economist that I agree with concurs. Instead of debating whether to sell down 49% of four power companies we should be flogging everything off and distributing the money back to the people.

Some people say the money should go back to the taxpayers from whom it was stolen in the first place, but I can't agree with this approach. Thanks to some nifty accounting I haven't paid any taxes for the last five years, so what would be the benefit to me of such a scheme? Remember, don't call it selfishness: I'm exercising enlightened self-interest.

National are right to be turning their guns on Labour, and the appalling and inconsistent record the socialists have when it comes to government. This Labour crowd are responsible for some of the worst catastrophes to befall the human race in the last one hundred years.

If you think I am engaging in hyperbole, then that's probably because you're evil. In any case, you'll be convinced when you understand better just a couple of the many outrages these Labour folk have been directly responsible for.

World War Two

This was quite simply the worst and ghastliest event in the history of humanity, and it happened on Labour's watch.

Not only did we find ourselves involved in a destructive and costly war that claimed thousands of Kiwi lives, but we declared war! And for what? To prevent some Central European people exercising their own form of enlightened self-interest.

Socialist historians will probably try to claim New Zealand played only a minor part in that war, but of course they would say that. Don't believe a word they say!

And don't listen to the current Labour bunch when they tell you they're not to blame because they weren't even born when the war took place. How convenient! Deliberately shirking the war by not being born just to avoid looking bad is cowardly, and it shows disrespect towards all our brave servicemen who fought in that conflict.

I am so disgusted by Labour's vile behaviour that I am quite literally filled with vomit. Excuse me for a moment.

Now I am no longer filled with vomit. However, I now have a new problem. Thanks to the socialists and their oppressive minimum wage legislation, I cannot afford a cleaner, and now I don't know who's going to clean this mess I've made. I fear I may have to kidnap another woman.

The Anti-Smacking Legislation

This ghastly piece of social engineering is possibly the most tragic thing to befall civilisation since the failure of the Crusades, and it happened during the despotic reign of Helen Clark. It will bring about the downfall of society.

It's true that five years after this odious piece of law was passed society has not in fact collapsed, but don't be fooled into thinking no bad will come of it. I give it another eighteen months before we're all living in rubbish heaps, forced to eat the maggot-riddled bodies of our loved ones just to survive.

The new law has forced me to change the way I behave towards kids, and as an authoritarian libertarian I am not favourably disposed towards anything that inconveniences me in any way. I don't have children of my own, but I now worry about being in a public place and feeling the urge to smack a child, because it seems most of the defences I might once have relied upon in such an event (boredom, amusement etc) have been taken away from me.

However, I'm told by my lawyer (and he's become very knowledgeable on crimes of violence against the vulnerable since representing me) that I'm still permitted to use the stern hand of chastisement for the purposes of preventing a child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour. I will remember this if I ever see children present at a socialist protest rally.

So now we know the evil history of the Labour opposition, why would we listen to a single thing they say on asset sales? Remember when you next see one of their red "No Asset Sale" posters that they probably painted it using the blood of kittens.

Right Thinking: My Timeshare Plan

Everyone's favourite authoritarian libertarian is back.

The French have this week again made us wonder why we bothered to liberate them in 1944. They have elected a socialist President, and it seems now that they don't want to take their much-needed austerity medicine.

When I think of all the sacrifices past generations have made in the name of democracy, the actions of the French people make me wonder if those sacrifices were all in vain. If the election of someone I don't like is democracy in action, then it's time for us to all agree that democracy has failed.

New Zealand's version of democracy is little better than the French one. We seem content to throw idiotic amounts of money at welfare beneficiaries, but then put rules in place to make it difficult for decent hard-working forgetful politicians to receive secret donations from German internet millionaires in trouble with the law.

It's ridiculous. If we are to live in a free society then we must ensure that the marketplace for ideas remains an open one. This is why I don't have a problem if people want to spend money to acquire political influence, because you can't have a marketplace unless people are selling. More importantly, if people were allowed to openly buy politicians we would see a lot more business-friendly policies coming out of government. Those lefties are so lousy with money that they'd never be able to compete in any bidding process.

On the subject of lousy things, and lice generally, a word here about beneficiaries. I am deeply concerned about the government's plans to give beneficiaries free contraception. My concern is not that as a libertarian I object to the government attempting to exercise coercion over peoples' reproductive choices. I'm only a libertarian on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. The rest of the week I'm content to judge others for their many moral failings.

Let me tell you why I object. It's a dumb idea because of the cost, and because everyone knows that if you create a system that gives poor people access to free stuff they'll abuse that system. Mark my words, before you know it these bludgers will be taking in boxes of the stuff, melting it down to turn it into P.

"But you can't turn the Pill into P", I can almost hear you laughing. Laugh away then. You won't be laughing when a solo mother and her thirty drug-crazed kids born to ten different fathers are running towards you wielding machetes and samurai swords. Just don't bother calling me for help, and don't expect the taxpayer to pay for your hospitalisation.

If we're going to give birth control to these people (and I hesitate to use the word "people" to describe this particular class of creature), let's at least make it compulsory.  Force the stuff down their throats and tie their legs together. If they don't like it, then they can go off the benefit. There are always alternatives to welfare, and if these women are so determined to spend their days on their backs, they can go and monetise their skills. I will always respect a woman who understands her own worth.

But why are we not making better use of our beneficiaries? We have tens of thousands of them, and they could be working for us, the taxpayer. Instead we give them free money and expect nothing in return. Well here's an idea: as a taxpayer* I ought to be entitled to some labour from these folk. We ought to expect an eight hour day from these bludgers, so lets divide them up among the taxpayers and put them to work. I'm thinking about a timeshare system where I get to do what I want with a bludger for maybe two or three weeks in a year. I have a garden that needs to be dug out, a set of shelves that needs to be put up in the spare room, and a host of unusual sensual needs that my regular therapist just isn't comfortable with satisfying.

If that idea is just a little too radical for you, then here's another: why don't we sell the lot of them to the Chinese? They seem to be keen on buying up all our farms, so lets throw in some human livestock to sweeten the deal. I'm not so sure about milking beneficiaries, though. I can't imagine there would be much of a market for it. Nor can I imagine they would get much good meat out of one of those drug-addled wastrels.

No, don't start feeling all sorry for beneficiaries. Being battery farmed, milked, skinned or processed is more than most of them deserve. Let's not forget that each and every one of them chose to end up on welfare. Whether they chose to be made redundant or to be born to parents with few life skills, or chose as children not to be educated and to surround themselves with poor role models, these bludgers are the authors of their own misfortune.

That's why I refuse to have any sympathy for any of them. Why should the taxpayer have to pay for the mistakes of a five-year old who wouldn't exercise wise lifestyle choices based on long-term rational self-interest?

* Hypothetically. My portfolio of trusts and offshore companies allows me to avoid all income tax.

Right Thinking: Frank's Law

Hard-hitting conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen returns with a powerful new column

There’s a petition under way to demand a toughening of our bail laws.

This is timely, because it has been a long time since we last had a debate on our bail laws—at least a couple of weeks.

Proponents of “Christie’s Law” want to make it harder for people presumed innocent to get bail. If they’ve got a history of violent crime or are charged with a violent offence punishable by more than two years’ imprisonment, bail would be automatically denied. Police would also have the right to veto a judge’s decision to grant bail, and judges would be reviewed on their performance and could be sacked if they were not protecting the public.

I am appalled by this series of proposals. What have we come to as a society when this is the best we can do to address violence in the community?

Why are these measures so weak?

If Christie’s Law were to become actual law, offenders would still be freed by judges, and some of these people would go on to do bad things, like commit robberies, park illegally, and join trade unions. If you allow any sort of bail system to exist then people on bail will occasionally do bad things.

The Sensible Sentencing Trust have said that bail needs to be regarded as a privilege, not a right. But demanding a reversal of the presumption of innocence isn’t the answer, because even presuming someone is guilty until proven otherwise would allow some weasel lawyers to get their despicable clients of the hook.

The problem is not that the threshold for granting bail is too low, but that we are letting people out on bail at all. If we simply incarcerated anyone who looked like they might one day cause trouble (and we may as well include feminists, environmentalists and Hone Harawira in this category) we would see a marked reduction in the number of offences committed while people were out on bail.

Christie’s Law is a weak attempt to deal with the problem of people being unpredictable and doing bad things despite the best efforts of judges. It’s no use just criticising someone else’s effort to deal with the problem , so I have drafted my own set of proposals, modestly entitled “Frank’s Law”. Here are the highlights:

• Bail won’t be granted for anything punishable by imprisonment. Ever.
• Everything will be punishable by imprisonment.
• Offenders can be kept locked up indefinitely if the talkback community deem them too dangerous to release.
• Judges will be given performance bonuses every time they throw someone in the slammer. This might encourage some judges to throw the book at people who don’t deserve to go down, but if we want justice for victims of crime we just have to accept the need for occasional multiple injustices.
• The police veto rights proposed under Christie’s Law will be expanded gradually, so that the court system can be gradually phased out. The cost savings will mean we all pay less in taxes!
• We won’t need to build more prisons to accommodate the vastly expanded prison population. They will just have to squeeze more inmates into the existing facilities. If this means prisoners end up sleeping five to a cell then it serves them right. Maybe if they hadn’t been caught joining a union, reading the Koran or walking on my front lawn they wouldn’t be locked up in the first place.

I expect my proposals will lead to an outcry by lawyers and do-gooder groups, which is ironic considering that under Frank’s Law inmates will have around-the-clock access to legal representation. Because under Frank’s Law lawyers and their clients will be sharing cells.

Right Thinking: On How To Persuade

Everybody's favourite authoritarian libertarian returns with a blistering new column

As a powerful media figure and celebrated columnist, I know something about making a persuasive argument.

My opinions inspire terror in my opponents, so naturally they take every opportunity they can to shut me down. That’s why you won’t find any of my columns in the liberal mainstream media, and why you’ll have to go hunting through the internet to find my work.

But it’s there if you know where to look, and the fact that the liberals work so hard to silence me speaks volumes about the threat I pose.

The MSM’s deceit and contempt for democracy knows no bounds; so instead of reporting on the horrors of compulsory education and public transport, they bombard us with trivia and gossip. It's their way of keeping the populace docile and compliant.

The liberals and their media buddies will do anything they can to shut us down, as I have recently learned to my great cost. They even tried to silence me, framing me for a crime I didn’t commit (again!) so that I could be shut away forever.

They didn’t count on my putting up a fight, though. Nor did they count on the star witness for the prosecution accidentally stabbing himself thirty-two times in the head. Without the evidence of the clergyman the police case against me collapsed and they had to let me go.

It was another lucky escape for me. I’ve spent a lot of time in prison cells and court rooms being accused of knife crimes I didn’t commit, but when you’re a warrior for freedom like I am it’s just another battle in a larger war.

It’s a war we must win. And we will win. If we make our voices heard the sheeple who blindly follow the lies and distortions of the MSM will eventually wake up and taste the sweet air of freedom.

We can all do our bit to win the war. That’s why I am going to share with you some of the most powerful written advocacy techniques known to man. It doesn’t matter whether you’re writing a letter to a newspaper editor or politician, composing a blogpost, or writing a submission to the Parole Board on why you should be released early despite the slaughter you inflicted in that shopping centre.

If you adopt as many of these techniques as you can you will find people looking at you and your ideas in a whole new light.

Write or type?

Modern computer technology makes it a breeze to create and edit documents. But chances are the people you’re trying to influence probably see hundred if not thousands of typed documents every day. If you’re writing letters or submissions your work will stand out if it’s been handwritten. And not in any old ink, but in blood. They’ll know you’re serious if they see that blood has been spilled over the opinion you’re expressing.

A tricky question I’m often asked is “whose blood?” If you use your own you’ll just come across as some nutty self-mutilator, so make sure you attach to your written work a photograph of the donor. It could a good opportunity to deal with any nuisance neighbourhood cats, or nuisance neighbours. Besides, if you’re planning to write that eighty-page missive to the Dominion Post on water fluoridation you’re going to need a lot of blood, and it’s pretty hard to write anything when you’re faint from massive blood loss.

This may sound slightly unpleasant to those of you who are squeamish, but you do get used to it. It's also well worth doing. For example, law students who write their exam answers in blood routinely get higher marks than those who use standard ink. Professor “G” (name withheld) of the Otago Law School has confirmed this to me in person.

Make them work

If a newspaper editor can quickly read your opinion then they can just as quickly dismiss it. Make sure anyone picking up your work has to labour for hours to make sense of it. They may struggle initially to understand what you have written, but while they are doing this they will have no choice but to contemplate the message you’re sending.

That means lots of scribbles, barely legible handwriting and inappropriate! Punctuation%

Shout

Some people claim it’s the height of rudeness to communicate in capital letters. They say that turning on caps lock on your keyboard will make people think you’re shouting.

So shout!

We’re not here to make friends. We just want to be heard.

Don’t listen to their so-called etiquette. There’s a word that describes doing only what you are told to do and only following the officially-sanctioned method. It’s called Communism. If you study all the great wordsmiths of our history you will find that most of them were Marxists. Shakespeare, for example, was a notorious member of the Chinese Communist Party, although you won't find that little fact in any of your liberal-elite history books.

That's why you must not listen to them when they tell you how your should write. Of course they would say that!

Caps lock is there on your keyboard for a reason, SO USE IT!. If you’re not prepared to raise your voice in defence of our precious freedoms, then DON’T BE SURPRISED WHEN THEY COME KNOCKING ON YOUR DOOR IN THE MIDDLE OF NIGHT TO TAKE YOU OFF TO THEIR “RE-EDUCATION CENTRES”! I’M SURE YOU’LL LEARN ALL ABOUT THEIR “ETIQUETTE” THEN! 

Random capitalisation

Sometimes just shouting won’t do the trick, and this is when you need to be more sophisticated with your message. There’s nothing more powerful that an opinion Piece where some of the Word beginnings are randomly Capitalised. it Might be an Affront to those english language Purists, but they are Nothing but Totalitarians with all their Rules and conventions. A Man who will stand up and Defy the totalitarians is a Man of Courage and Integrity, and Your writing WILL CONVEY THIS!! 

Remember who the audience are

Very often the person you’re writing to isn’t really the intended audience. If they're a newspaper editor they're merely a gatekeeper. Ignore their rules about being succinct and to the point, because they aren’t the ones you want to persuade. To a liberal-elite MSM editor your writings may appear like the incontinent ramblings of a madman, but sometimes it can take fifty pages of dense handwritten text with zero punctuation and numerous biblical references to get an important message across.

 Pictures

We all know that most newspaper editors, academics and leftist politicians struggle to contain the multitude of vices swirling about in their morally-diseased bodies. Plenty don’t even bother to make the effort. It’s no wonder that morality, discipline and decency are in such decline.

But we can use this to our advantage. The most important thing when you're writing something to influence someone is to make an impact. People are so bombarded daily with material that if what you have written doesn't stand out in some way they may not even bother to read it.

So make it stand out. A photograph of a woman baring her all to the camera will get the attention of most newspaper editors, so attach one to your letter. But if the people you are writing to are academics (especially legal ones) you'll need to come up with something much much grubbier than just a picture of female flesh. I expect the prospect of having to procure pictures of people undertaking all kinds of appalling behaviour in various states of undress will dismay you, but the price of freedom is a high one.

The good news is that the tools for the job are close at hand. You'll be amazed at the world that opens up when you go looking for this kind of material online, and I have become an expert in online research, sometimes spending up to ten hours a day online finding material I can use. It's exhausting work, and by the end of the day I usually feel drained. But it's an incredibly uplifting feeling when you find something you can use.

Delivery

So you've finished writing your masterpiece, and now the only thing left to do is send it. But how?

The internet is a powerful medium, but those in power receive hundreds of emails every day, and a lot of email is spam that gets junked without even being opened. Don’t send your message via email, because it might just be deleted.

Send it by post. Or, better still, deliver it personally. Find out where the addressee lives and turn up at their house at 3:00am. You can bet they will remember you then.

But some people can be a bit funny about strangers turning up on their doorstep in the middle of the night, and fair enough too, because the world is full of crazy people. So if they won’t open the door don’t stress! Just tie your letter to a brick and throw it through their front window.

See, now you’re getting their attention!

Right Thinking: Is This All Phil Goff's Fault?

Conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen with his take on the UK riots.

So what is really behind the UK riots? It is just too simplistic to blame poverty, social dislocation, misery, unemployment and a sense of hopelessness in the young. Because were those things even remotely to blame for the events of the last few days, the only solution would be tackle those things head-on in a complex way. It would probably require more spending and tax increases.

I'm a strong believer in KISS (keep it simple stupid), so why bother ourselves with such complexity? Simple solutions are always the best. And if we get it hopelessly wrong the generation behind us will just pick up the pieces. 

Thankfully for the well to do in the nicer suburbs of West London, most of the chaos is occurring in the grubbier side of town, and in those distant northern places. It's not a real crisis.

We ought to dismiss outright the merest possibility that decades of neoliberal policies have gutted entire communities and led to an underclass of people who have never known steady work and for whom the police and other authorities are a hostile force, or that in praising the acquisition of wealth over all other things we have in fact sent a perverse message to the young that it's okay to have cool stuff, and it doesn't really matter how you get it.

Isn't the answer likely to be a lot more simple? These people are all just bad. We'll just lock them all up and the problem will disappear.

Yes, that ought to work a treat.

And this shit couldn't happen here, right? Well, provided they don't raise the price of a certain piece of sportswear.

And if an English referee lets some other rugby team knock out the ABs in the World Cup due to a forward pass, I will personally set fire my to my local shopping block. Again.

Right Thinking: Feeding Time

 

Hard-hitting conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen returns after a lengthy break

I cannot believe nobody has spotted the opportunity.

The Herald has been running a campaign focusing on poor and needy children with not enough to eat. The fact that people are going hungry is an inconvenient blot on our nation's reputation, and with the World Cup at hand we need to take urgent action to deal with this problem. We wouldn't want any of those gin-soaked IRB delegates thinking we were anything other than a pavlova paradise, now, would we?

Enter the solution. Whangarei's Zion Wildlife Gardens is in danger of being shut down permanently. One of the problems facing the park is the difficulty in housing and feeding the wild cats. An adult lion when in a hungry mood can get through a power of red meat.

My proposal to combine wildlife parks with foodbanks will bring much-needed competition to the welfare industry. Some pantywaist do-gooders may struggle with the kill-or-be-killed ethos behind the concept, but if people really are desperate enough for food they'll find a way to disable the lions. Of course, we won't make it too easy for them, because the park needs to be self-funded, and the millions of TV viewers who will pay to watch the reality show we make about the park will want to see an even fight. So it will be sticks and spears versus teeth and claws, and may the hungriest animal win.

I hope you like the idea, because everyone else I've mentioned it to raves about it. I bailed up a young fellow on the bus this morning and told him my plan, and he told me it was "quite simply the most appalling, murderous and indescribably callous thing I've ever heard". I was put off at first, but then I remembered a magazine article I'd read somewhere about how young people often use words in an unconventional manner. So, for example, calling something or someone "bad" often means they think the thing or person is good or sexually attractive.

Thus it's pretty clear that "murderous" and "callous" will be the words hip young folk use to describe acts of humanitarianism. It makes me feel good knowing my ideas are ready to be embraced by the younger generation with such enthusiasm.

So if the idea of feeding young people to the lions has the approval of the victims, what exactly is the holdup?

Right Thinking: The Real Minister Of Twitter

Conservative columnist Dr. Frank Shizenhausen has something powerful to say about politicians' use of social media

When the revolution comes they'll announce it on the internet first. The socialists have even set up a site called Red Alert, so that they'll all know when its time for them to rise up and eat our babies.

That's why I keep an eye on the place. As the day of the revolution draws closer I know I'll need to increase my efforts to arm. The bunker's coming along nicely, and the courier should be along any moment now with the rocket launcher I ordered from Trade Me. Here's hoping the Russian MIG fighter arrives in the post before Red Alert announces the beginning of the Terror.

There's no call to revolution going on over there just yet, but they are deriding our finest ever finance minister since Sir Roger, and let me tell you it makes me sick.

All because of this message that Mr English posted on Twitter.

(I'm told that all the kids call these mini-messages "tweets". No doubt a word dreamed up while they were high on P)

I confess that in recent weeks I have myself dabbled in social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. It's all part of my effort to engage more with my allies, and to force my ideological enemies (women, zookeepers, Plunket nurses etc) to cower in terror. I read somewhere that effective social networking was all about sharing a part of yourself with the world. That's why every day on my Facebook wall I post a picture of my morning ablutions. I'm regular as clockwork, am I, thanks to a steady diet of bran, oats and women's panties. Do you like what you see? Am I doing this social networking thing right?

The thing that bugs me the most is that nobody seems to want to converse with me online. Why won't that Justin Bieber talk to me, dammit! I ought to go round there and take a belt to his hide, the whiny little toad.

Frivolous conversation is one thing, but when you're a responsible guardian of the nation's accounts the rules are different. That is why I have to take my hat off to Mr English for showing a suitable restraint and frugality when it comes to his Twitter output. You know someone is doing it all right when the socialists are mocking them.

Some MPs just can’t restrain themselves on Twitter. They tweet every idea that comes into their heads. But the nation can’t afford such extravagance, thanks to nine long years of Labour misrule. All this social networking will end up costing in the end, and we the taxpayer will end up picking up the bill. I wouldn't be surprised if all this incessant social media noise knocks a few planes out of the sky. That's one reason why I never fly. That and the restraining order.

So thank God for Bill English. Just like his financial management, his Twitter account is sensible, conservative and low on interventionism. Instead of going stupid with communicating to the voters and engaging with us, he wisely leaves his officials to regurgitate occasional links to press releases, while he gets on with more important tasks, like finding creative ways to claim a housing allowance.

The English plan of answering one Twitter question a week shows he is up to the task. Politicians from the left are forever clamouring for the government to intervene in the economy, to spend money we can’t afford, and to wade into the market. But National’s Twitter policy shows that this government does have a clear plan, and that frugality and restraint in tweeting are the order of the day. Bravo! Think of the hundreds of thousands of valuable tweets we could be saving every day if we all took Bill English's lead.

A finance minister who takes more than 30 seconds a week to engage with his social media followers is a luxury we simply cannot afford in these difficult times. The notion that political leadership involves listening to others may be the latest fad, but it’s a fad English and his boss John Key are happy to resist. They aren't interested in what we have to say, which is a damn relief. If there's one thing I've learned it's that democracy works best when people just do as they're told.

Right Thinking: Call That Sexism? I'll Show You Sexism

Conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen with another blistering takedown of political correctness.

I don’t know what all the fuss is about. I thought Alasdair Thompson had some good things to say about the modern workplace, but he’s been disgracefully bullied and harassed.

The poor man’s even been accused of intimidating and standing over a woman reporter. What nonsense. I’ve seen the interview footage and it’s obvious what Thompson is doing. He is behaving with gentlemanly and chivalrous intent, attempting to cover one side of the female woman reporter from public view, so that those men who might be looking on from that particular direction are not distracted from their work by thinking impure thoughts and regarding her as a piece of meat to be devoured.

But covering her from only one side was of no use when the camera was pointing from the other direction. What the reporter should have done was lay on her back, so that Mr Thompson could lie on top of her and so shield her completely from the intrusive camera. He may have got it wrong, but his heart was in the right place.

The whole episode demonstrates why women can’t expect equality at work. The presence of women leads to a loss of productivity in the men around them.

Now I should make it very clear that I have a lot of respect for women, and that I do not mean to suggest that they are in any way inferior to men. But they are different, and we should not pretend otherwise. I know for a fact that women take more sick-days than men, and not just because of that unseemly monthly business that I dare not speak of. I know this because I employ a number of women. I should clarify that I use the word “employ” loosely, and not in the “pays money in return for services” sense. I offer something much more valuable to the women I employ than mere cash. What I offer is freedom. Freedom for a few minutes each day from the steel cage I keep them in under my house. What use is money to those girls?

I find that my women employees are constantly sick. Malnutrition, dysentery, scurvy and other diseases are rife amongst my employees, even though I feel as fit as a fiddle. The fact that they’re all female and I’m a male can’t be a coincidence.

Not only are women always sickly, but they drive the menfolk to distraction, and this affects workplace productivity. I speak from experience as an office manager. I spend upwards of an hour each day locked in my office with the blinds down and a box of tissues at hand, all because one of the female office administrators likes to occasionally show an ankle. This is time that could be better spent on more useful tasks, such as discussing the Super 15 with my male colleagues or plotting my election-day bombing spree. But I just can't focus on my work with all that flesh about. I’m not to blame for reacting in an entirely natural way to such environmental stimuli.

But it’s not just women causing problems in the office. I mean this in a totally non-racist way, but we have a serious problem with Jews and Muslims in the workplace. Not only because their religious holidays fall at inconvenient times, but also because I find myself shouting torrents of bilious abuse whenever I see one of them. This is again affecting staff productivity. Usually when I begin to scream abuse at their deviant ways, their evil murderous religions and their smelly foods my immediate vicinity clears out and before I know it the HR people and employment lawyers are descending from every direction. Meanwhile nothing in the office gets done, because everyone’s watching the theatre unfold as I'm led away in handcuffs by a policeman. None of this would have happened if we’d just employed white protestant men.

One thing I’ll say for the Muslims though is that they know how to dress a woman so she doesn’t cause bother in the office.

So it’s obvious that Mr Thompson is the victim of a witch-hunt. I enjoy hunting down witches as much as the next man, and the sound of them crackling on the bonfire is like a symphony to me, but this has got out of hand. We shouldn’t be vilifying a good man who spoke truth and who just tried to do the right thing. He doesn’t need to apologise for anything, and it should be us, society, apologising to him.

Now you’ll have to excuse me, because I’ve got important work to do and have got to get this office supplies order form away tonight. It looks like we’re run out of tissue boxes again.

Right Thinking: Deregulating The Labour Market

Hard-hitting conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen has some ideas for John Key.

I'm delighted to read that this government is planning further changes to labour laws to give more choice to employers and their staff. Deregulation of the labour market means workers will finally have real choice. They can choose to accept the miserable terms being offered by their employers, or they can starve in the gutter.

The other choice they will be able to exercise is to emigrate to Australia, where wages are higher and where working conditions are better.

Choice is good, which is why I support any policy designed to provide the illusion of freedom while driving down wages and entrenching poverty. With the power of unions being diminished, employers will have real choice about what to do with the money they get to keep. And about who to fire at will for no good reason. That will teach her to resist your advances.

John Key won't elaborate on details of the policies to be announced by his government, but a bold government could do a lot to improve the life of the struggling employer. Here are some of the things I want to see:

• Debt bondage. We have a problem with the level of private debt in this country. Debt bondage might just be the answer. Gangs of debtor slaves would be a great source of cheap labour for our businesses, and could be put to work in trouble spots, like the Christchurch CBD and down the mineshaft at Pike River. With a policy such as this our levels of debt are bound to drop.
• Fire at will legislation. By "fire" I mean set on fire. Incinerating a few slack workers on the shop floor will incentivise their colleagues to perform better and will improve productivity. And it will reduce heating bills during the winter.
• Abolish minimum wage. In some African countries you can live on $1 a day. For a while, before you die of malnutrition or an entirely preventable disease. Why are our workers so greedy? 
• Bloodsports. If people choose to work in a place where employees are randomly hauled out of the production line and forced to fight each other to the death in front of a live audience, then we should respect that choice. Nobody forced them to do anything. It's not like people were hauled from the street at the point of a gun, thrown into trucks and driven to secret locations where they were made to engage in the most degrading acts, all while being filmed. At least that's what my defence team will be arguing tomorrow when they finally get their turn.
• Relax health and safety rules. If workplaces were deathtraps that would only be a good thing. Being at risk of horrible injury or a terrible and agonising death should ensure workers stay alert and focused. We want to get the best out of our people, and what better way to do this than to put them directly in harm's way?

This is just a wishlist, but any move the government makes to free up the labour market during a time of unemployment and stagnation will be welcomed. If we want to compete with the rest of the world then we need to focus on being a low wage economy. Let's be the China or Vietnam of the South Pacific. But with the added bonus of not having quite so many Chinese or Vietnamese people living here.

How can any of this possibly be bad?

Right Thinking: It’s All Just A Coincidence

Controversial conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen writes in defence of the ACT leader

People have been attributing all sorts of mischievous motives to the decision by a group of ACT and National-linked people to organise opposition to MMP.

The fact that some of the people behind the campaign have close ties to ACT leader Dr Don Brash is entirely coincidental. That’s why Brash has denied knowing who is behind the campaign.

In case you are wondering whether Brash should be taken at his word, bear in mind that one of the people identified as being involved, Simon Lusk, was also instrumental in 2005 in introducing the Exclusive Brethren to National. Dr Brash also denied any knowledge of the Exclusive Brethren’s campaign for National in 2005.

This just proves that Brash is a serial truth-teller, who doesn’t know what his supporters are up to. Why would such a man lie to us? What would he have to gain? The fact that many of the rich-listers who bankrolled Brash’s National in 2005 (e.g. Shirtcliffe and Deane) remain implacably opposed to MMP means nothing. I’m sure they gave all that money to National out of a desire to help the community, and not because they wanted a political environment that allowed people with big money to do as they please, free from the need to consult with and listen to others, and free from regulation and taxes.

And even if a shadowy group devoted to getting rid of MMP does exist, why would that be a bad thing? Consensus politics have been a disaster for this country, preventing us from enjoying the fruits of the revolution that began in 1984. With so many political parties in the mix and capable of influencing the course of government, the task of lobbying parties has become increasingly burdensome and expensive. Under First Past the Post a large cheque to the National Party would have once ensured a favourable outcome for the philanthropists who seek to influence the course of events for the good of humanity, but now they must donate to multiple parties to cover all potential combinations. Consider the plight of the weary lobbyist.

So let’s get rid of MMP and replace it with a system that rewards success and freedom. Electoral reform is long overdue, and the sooner we get back to the notion of one dollar one vote the better.

Right Thinking: Just Say No To Your GP

Conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen injects some common sense into the immunisation debate.

Sir Peter Gluckman, the government's Chief Science Adviser, has bemoaned the low rates of vaccination in this country.

Well he would, wouldn't he? But I've always objected strongly to immunisation for the simple reason that I don't trust doctors.

I'll tell you why. Whenever you go to see your GP your visit's being subsidised by the government. That means you're effectively perpetuating big government each and every time you have a consultation over your hernia, your rasping cough, or your tendency to want to stab anyone who comes to your door.

And these doctors have got it so sweet that the more illness there is the more money they make.

I'm the last person to begrudge doctors the opportunity to make a living, but it's pretty obvious to anyone who cares to look at the evidence that doctors are the cause of most diseases. It can't be coincidental that wherever there is a breakout of some illness or malady, you'll find doctors. I'm sure if the self-serving medical profession would do a study on this topic, rather than wasting time making martyrs of people like the heroic Andrew Wakefield, we would find there is a correlation between the presence of physicians and the incidence of disease. Cause and effect.

So when doctors offer to stab our children in the arm with a needle, it's obvious to me that what they're really doing is planting little time-bombs in our kids. Bombs that will go off at a time of the doctors' choosing, leaving the entire populace at their mercy. I'm sure we'll later learn as our children flounder on their sick beds that only the doctors have the antidote, and that it is prohibitively expensive.

But the ultimate price for this immunisation drive may well be a surrender of our freedoms and liberties to a world government run by doctors, social workers and lesbians. Is that what we want for future generations?

That's why I'm saying no to immunisation. You should too.

Right Thinking: No More Free Cash For Criminal Scumbags

Conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen gets his teeth into the legal aid debate

It's about time they reformed the legal aid system. Lawyers have been sucking the public teat for just too long. And criminals have been using the system to drag out their cases and cause bother to prosecutors.

The state has armies of police officers, prosecutors, forensic scientists and other experts to call upon, while most individuals charged with offences are on their own, unless they can manage to afford a lawyer or can get legal aid. If we take away the legal aid safety net it's likely that the rate of convictions will rise.

So what's the problem? Don't we want more scumbags to be convicted?

And don't give me a bleeding heart story about some poor innocent person being done over by the police. Don't even try and tell me that the people the cops pick up are all lilywhite. For starters they're mostly brown.

I'll admit that the police occasionally get it wrong. But in my own case it was more the crown prosecutor's fault than the cops. I protested my innocence until I was black and blue, explaining that I was only trying to defend myself. But the crown lawyers decided they wanted to nail me anyway. I bet they fancied the idea of telling their kids they sent a bigtime political commentator and radio star down. But justice was done in the end, and I have a huge amount of faith in our system. The manslaughter charge was dropped after two of the star witnesses had unfortunate accidents. One was found dead in his office after stabbing himself repeatedly in the face. The other was found floating in a river after having tied himself up and thrown himself over a bridge while weighed down with stones. So in the end the prosecution had nothing and had to let me go.

So if I can get off a serious knife charge (and, as I've explained before, I was acting in self defence when the vicar came at me with that prayer book), I am fully confident that anyone wrongly accused by the police will have their day in court and walk free.

Of course, some people will just work the system. Like the guy who just got a payout of $350,000 because of a technicality. Apparently DNA evidence proved he didn't commit the crime. And yet these criminal scumbags want us to feel sorry for them because they can't afford legal aid. Well I imagine $350,000 will go an awfully long way next time this guy wants to get off a charge.

I do like this idea of having a public defender service, though. I'd usually be the strongest advocate against an increasing bureaucracy, but the plan's a cunning one. We'll axe legal aid and take it in-house. Then we'll outsource the entire service to the Chinese. They can defend these ratbags for a tenth of the price, and best of all just about everyone who goes through the Chinese legal system is guilty.  Justice is swift and often leads to a bullet in the temple, and we can even make some cash harvesting their organs.

We don't need a legal aid system, because in the end the choices people have are simple ones. If you don't want to have to beg for legal aid then don't get charged with an offence you didn't commit.  

Right Thinking: Bully Attack!

Conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen exposes the weakness of every bully

There's been a lot of talk in the media lately about bullying and the best way to tackle the problem.

I've always found that if there's one thing bullies don't like it's someone who fights back. That's why I make it a policy to commit acts of violence against anyone who has the potential to one day threaten me.

And I've always said the best form of defence is a pre-emptive strike, which is why whenever I see an old lady walking down the street I'll snatch her walking cane from her hands and beat her over the head with it. Just in case.

Now you may take the view that attacking a group of Girl Guides with a bat is a little over the top, but there's nothing I hate more than the sight of those round succulent biscuits. They fill my body with urges that a man of my age and maturity really shouldn't have to put up with. And those girls just know I get upset at the sight of a naked biscuit. The temptresses seem to appear whenever I'm in a shopping mall. It can't be a coincidence.

But they never expect it when I get the cricket bat out and smash down their desk and scatter their money tins and biscuit boxes.

I am also intimidated by some of the more obnoxious forms of radio and TV advertising. For a long time I would cringe and close my ears at the sound of a Harvey Norman TV advert. If an annoying man screaming at you at a million miles an hour isn't bullying then I'm a leftie.

But I decided to fight back. I haven't been able to shut the ads down, but I did manage to bite one of their salesmen in the face last week. And I reckon I'd have had his ear if it hadn't been for his interfering wife coming out to see what all the noise was outside their front porch. It was a near thing, I can tell you, and I only just got away, because it took an eternity to find my trousers.

Another type of bully I can't abide is the one who berates me and tells me I'm a bad person. I've no time for emotional bullies. You probably know the sort. They are usually male or female, have hair, breathe, and lose the plot when you try to pin them down and tie them up.

Then there's the distant, untouchable bully who uses his or her position of authority to attack others. Like the High Court judge on Monday. Yelling at me and telling me I'm the most evil and cowardly monster who's ever set foot in his courtroom. Isn't that just textbook bullying? It's not even true and he knows it. What about the fact I was performing a public service? What was I meant to do? Leave that Greenpeace guy on the street corner to sign up even more members to his evil organisation? And I certainly don't need anyone's widow scowling at me in the courtroom.

It's a good thing they decided to put me in this place in the end, because it's quite pleasant. But the nurse is really starting to piss me off. Apparently it's "house rules" to wear underwear. And pants. And to not lick other patients. Socialist scum!

Right Thinking: Meet My Syndrome

Hard hitting conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen has a plan to make our streets safer.

Good lord, has the world gone mad?

Has our judiciary finally been taken over by screaming liberals?

I had thought they were taking a firm line in Christchurch with evildoers. Like the monster who was looking to steal light fittings before they caught him. Is there any worse crime than taking light fittings in the midst of a natural disaster? It's no better than stealing from the dead. In fact, it's much, much worse. Rightly, the judge threw him in jail, but not before a quick-thinking member of our constabulary gave the fellow a physical souvenir of his disapproval.

Now it turns out this guy's got a convenient disease which leaves him with a compulsion to collect light fittings. And yet he's now been given bail! Jesus wept! How are we supposed to protect our light fittings from these people when our judges turn out be be so wet? I don't remember being cut any slack when my own compulsion to knife nuns saw me before the courts.

Well if the judiciary won't protect us from these Asperger's "sufferers" then I will. Let me tell you about my current project. I'm presently rounding up some of my friends. We'll drink some liquor, then we'll plan our defence. I've always believed a good defence is built around offence, and I'm sure my friends will agree with me once we've downed a few bottles of Jack Daniels and listened to a few hours of talkback radio.

We might even give our little group a name. Better still, let's call ourselves a "syndrome". That way when it turns out that we have a compulsion to club, beat and kick certain persons the judge will have to let us off.

When you're dealing with these people the only thing they respect is brutality. It is cruel to be kind, and, besides, it's more fun. More importantly, if you don't take a hard line they'll just keep doing it. I for one have had enough of these people. I'm not going to just sit at home any more, cowering in fear clutching my shotgun while reading my bible, and with only the woman chained to the foot of my bed to keep me company. It's time we took back the streets from these light-fitting louts, these bulb bandits, these illegal illumination extractors.

Are you with me? And can you shoot a gun?

Right Thinking: Time To Nuke Global Warming

Hard-hitting conservative columnist Dr. Frank Shizenhausen takes aim at the climate change industry

I for one don’t believe a word of this global warming hoax. You have to get up pretty early in the morning to pull the wool over the eyes of this old campaigner. The proposition that the Earth is gradually warming is ludicrous and can be easily disproven. The only people who have provided evidence that any of this warming is going on are the scientists. Now why is that? Could it be because they’re all thick as thieves in their plan to steal our society away from those who have traditionally led it? If scientists are now the new prophets, what place will there be for religious leaders and talkback hosts? I don’t know about you, but when my man Leighton Smith makes a pronouncement on a topic I generally regard it as infallible as a papal decree. He’s that good.

I’m sick of being told what to do by those sandal-wearing environmentalists and tree-huggers. They tell us we need to cut our carbon emissions in order to prevent the Earth from heating up. Then they say we can’t burn all these fossil fuels. Next they’ll be telling me I can’t dump my household waste in the bushes of the local council reserve, and that I need a permit if I want to set fire to my neighbour’s house or the local daycare centre.

It’s no wonder that whenever you find a greenie scurrying around you find socialists too. They’re allies in an unholy battle against freedom and liberty. If they get their way we’ll all be wearing hemp clothes, singing folk songs, living off welfare, and forgetting about soap.

But the global warming industry doesn’t appear about to disappear any time soon. It seems as if it is here to stay. We can get all worked up about this, or we can use this reality to our advantage.

I prefer the latter course. I’m essentially an optimist, even if I do come across sometimes as despising anyone who isn’t white, male and heterosexual. My wife berates me sometimes for being so down on people, and she may have a point. Tomorrow when I let her out of her cage I may even tell her she’s right. But in my optimism I see an opportunity to get one back. Because we are now being told by the same scientists who sold us global warming, that the solution to global warming is a nuclear winter.

The boffins at NASA have worked out that a nuclear war involving 100 Hiroshima-level nuclear bombs would kick up about five million metric tonnes of carbon into the upper atmosphere. The effect would be a cooling of the Earth by one to two degrees in most places for several years.

It sounds like a pretty good idea to me, even if global warming is a hoax. If they can convince us that we need to avoid activities that increase the Earth’s temperature, it shouldn’t be so hard to convince world governments to drop a few nuclear bombs. And, God knows, there are a few places that desperately deserve a bomb or two being dropped on them. Like Hamilton.

I suppose the decent thing to do would be to alert the people of these places before we nuke them, so that they can make appropriate preparations. I think I read somewhere that if you survive the initial blast the effects of nuclear radiation can be quite unpleasant. I expect that hiding under a table or doorway and applying a good SF30+ sunscreen before the bomb lands ought to provide sufficient of protection.

A nuclear war would sort the Middle East out once and for all, and God knows it’s so hot over there they would probably welcome a nuclear winter. And once this global warming nonsense has gone by the wayside the Arabs will be able to sell even more of that carbon-emitting oil.

There are no downsides to this nuclear plan. None that I can see, at least. But I’ll wager my entire fortune built over many years on tobacco stocks and blood diamonds that they won’t try it. If there was no global warming, only cooling, what would the environmentalists have to bleat about then? If there was no threat to humanity then the scientists would have to go without the millions of dollars of public money currently being chucked at them. Without such cash how would they research all their other nefarious research projects, like evolutionary science and round-earthism?

Nuking much of the world is a good, sensible idea, which is why they will never let it happen.

Right Thinking: Finally Some Good Out Of The Quake

Hard-hitting conservative columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen cuts through the crap and gets to the truth.

The 2011 census has been cancelled.

The earthquake that destroyed so many lives and wrecked so many buildings finally gave me something to smile about.

That hotbed of unreconstructed socialism, the Department of Statistics, can’t run the census because its building is damaged and there’s chaos in Christchurch.

It's an indisputable fact that census data is routinely misused by bureaucrats and big government advocates. Instead of population data being used to determine who may live and who must die, it is used in ways that Comrade Stalin would be proud of. Water fluoridation, welfare benefit expansion, and the Marxist indoctrination of our pre-schoolers, are but some of the things these officials have planned for us. The data gives them the tools they need to continue their reign of terror.

That's why whenever there's a census I go bush. As far as Big Brother is concerned I don't exist.

Being outside the system in every way has its advantages. I don't pay tax (or, as I call it, the stupidity levy), and when I do have the occasional brush with officialdom they have trouble pinning me down. If the shock troops ever do finally catch up with me in my bush hideaway I will have some surprises for them that will make Ruby Ridge seem like a children's picnic.

Since we're stopping the census, why don't we also consider a population freeze? I’m not suggesting we stop people from breeding (the PC mob would never allow their numbers to diminish). Let’s just stop counting them. Pretty soon the state would just become irrelevant. When we're a nation of twenty million (probably some time next year, with all these foreigners coming in and with all the breeding beneficiaries), having a government that thinks there are only four million people to look after will mean the other sixteen million of us pay no tax.

The end of the census may be something worth celebrating, but there's nothing else joyous about events in Christchurch. So many have lost their lives or their homes. I watch the news on the TV and see communities coming together, pooling resources, helping neighbours out and sharing everything they have. People helping strangers. Do you know what it makes me realise? The Communists have won.

The market just isn't working properly in Christchurch. In a time of shortage and want people should be hoarding, and then holding out for extortionate prices. Water is a precious commodity, but instead of making a killing on selling it to the desperate and needy, they're giving the stuff away. It just doesn't make any economic sense.

Let me tell you that if there's ever a disaster up my neck of the woods you'd better have a wallet full of cash if you expect help from me. My bush fortress has a well, and a bunker with enough tinned food to last for five years. I may be willing to share my little stash with you, but for a price. So cough up, or stay away. And don't push me, because if you think the world would mourn another dead socialist you are surely mistaken.

Right Thinking: Sorry

Dr. Frank Shizenhausen's latest post shows that even hard-hitting and searing columnists can cross the line

Yesterday I wrote a post suggesting that beneficiaries should turn to prostitution and crime to supplement their incomes, rather than rely on food bank handouts.

I was wrong and I unreservedly apologise.

I know a lot of drug dealers, pimps, petty criminals and streetwalkers. They are all good people, doing their bit to improve their lot, give their clients a buzz, and put food on the table. That I would even suggest their noble trades be opened up to those wastrels on benefits fills me with regret and shame.

Rest assured that I'll be careful not to make inappropriate comparisons next time I post something about vermin.