Nigel Latta: The so-called anti-political-correctness guru is just another liberal fake

Before getting into the nuts and bolts of this post, let me make this clear: 99.9% of all political correctness comes from liberals. And when I say liberals I mean leftists, and when I say leftists I mean people who vote for any of the left-wing parties including National. If you voted for National under Don Brash, you can be forgiven; if you voted for National under John Key in his first election, you can be forgiven for being a tad naïve; however, if you voted for National in the last election, you are a liberal through and through.

The National Party under Don Brash was in fact a centre-right party but now it is definitely centre left. Getting off the point for a moment, Don Brash’s biggest mistake was taking over the ACT Party; he would have been better off sitting down and nutting out a deal with Colin Craig of the Conservative Party. Having said that, I doubt Brash would have accepted anything other than a leadership role.

Now back to Nigel Latta; a few years ago Latta started his politically-incorrect programs: ‘The politically-incorrect guide to teenagers’ and ‘The politically-incorrect parenting show.’ Around the same time, the anti-smacking controversy was all over the media as 87% had opposed Sue Bradford’s anti-smacking law in a referendum, yet John Key would not repeal the law and Nigel Latta came out in support of Key.

Having read about Latta’s stand on this, I thought to myself: ‘I smell a rat here; I smell a phony; I smell a leftist hijacking the right-wing, anti-political-correctness mantle.’ Yes, only right wingers—or conservatives to be exact—can truly say they are anti-political correctness; all others including libertarians who proffer to be anti-politically correct are mere imposters. Libertarians simply can’t say they are opposed to political correctness as they wear two hats; they have a good hat in respect to their stand on small government and fiscal conservatism, but their liberal hat in respect to social issues makes them leftists. And as I mentioned above, 99.9% of political correctness comes from liberals/leftists.

Anyone who clearly understands political correctness is aware that it doesn’t just magically appear in isolation; it appears before, during, and after any liberal policy is introduced; it is an inherent part of the liberal game-plan. Take the gay agenda, for example; we have had years of so-called gay-discrimination cases being propagated by the left, now we have left-wing, gay-marriage policy on the table, and if gay marriage passes, we will have politically-correct gay indoctrination in schools, etc.

The following is a list of what usually comes under the liberal, political-correctness umbrella:

• pro-multiculturalism and issues pertaining to it
• pro-feminism and issues pertaining to it
• pro-social engineering: so-called gay rights and other social-engineering issues
• pro-affirmative action
• pro-restriction on free speech
• pro-nanny state: health and safety issues, etc.
• pro-zero tolerance of any discrimination and related issues

Obviously I may have inadvertently missed some, but for the most part the political-correctness issues on the list are commonplace and are always creating controversy of some sort. With political correctness there always seems to be some overlapping; for example, a discrimination issue could be related to affirmative action but it could also pertain to multiculturalism as well.

Without question, all the categories on the list are liberal; they are all liberal concepts, and if you endorse any of them, you are liberal and you cannot claim to be anti-politically correct as Nigel Latta purports himself to be.

Take a look at the Bob McCoskrie – Nigel Latta debate on gay marriage on the ‘Breakfast’ show, which clearly shows how politically correct Latta really is:

These are some of the ludicrous points that Latta made in the debate that deserve attention:

Firstly he said this:

“If you are going to take away—if you’re going to say that some people in society don’t have the same rights as everyone else, it’s not up to them to prove why they should, it is up to the people who want to take it away as to why they shouldn’t.”

What absolute nonsense; how can a right that never existed in the first place be taken away?

Then he said this:

“It’s a silly argument to say that if we redefine who gets to marry then all bets are off; that everyone will be marrying everyone because that just doesn’t happen with other things.”

Well hello, Nigel, it happens with everything; feminists started out seeking work equality but that soon led to the redefining of words in the English language, and now gender-neutral advertising, etc. Well, hello, Nigel the gay marriage issue started out with the legalisation of homosexuality. Yes, Nigel all bets are off if you open the door.

Then Latta said this in reply to Bob’s question “Why is your discrimination against 3 people getting married okay?”

“So why is it okay for cats not to vote.”

This is a typical ploy of the left when they simply don’t have an answer; they make a joke. They make a joke and all their brainless, liberal followers go ‘Oh that was funny; he must be clever; I’ll vote for him.’

Then he said this:

“.......research says that with same-sex families when comparing apples to apples they are just as good as any other families”

Well sorry again, Nigel, that is utter crap. The Mark Regnerus study is the most robust to date and it completely floors that falsehood.

Then he said this:

“Look at the polls and you will see most people are on our side (the pro-gay marriage side)”

Once again this is utter nonsense; have a look at the most recent polls:

TVNZ Poll:

Research NZ Poll:

Footnote: You may have noticed in the Research NZ Poll that they have 3 main answering options; a ‘Yes’ and a ‘No’ to the question ‘Should gay marriage be legal in New Zealand?’ and one question that asks if we should stick with civil unions. If the latter question wasn’t there those respondents would have answered ‘No’ to gay marriage making the opposition results far greater—closer to 60% would be more exact.

You may have also noticed that all the way through the debate Latta was making these stupid funny faces as if to portray himself as some sort of intellectual; a person above the fray of a meaningless debate according to his own pretentious, liberal arrogance—what a pathetic prat.