Interesting. My comment at The Daily Blog responding to a section of one of Martyn ‘Bomber’ Bradbury’s post got moderated out. No matter. Apart from anything else it does rather reinforce the basis of my comment, so I will repeat and enhance it here.
A bit of history. Back at the end of May, Bomber and others were rabbiting on how Labour shouldn’t stand a candidate against Hone Harawira for the benefit of the Internet Mana Party. This was despite nearly a century of Labour trying to stand candidates in every electorate regardless of its winnability. Doing so fosters the development of the local organisations over decades, and in these days of MMP helps to promote the party vote across the country.
Bomber appears to have never spent enough time inside any political organisation to understand the workings. It was clear he didn’t understand the reasons for this organisational need. Because he usually doesn’t listen to the ideas of others, and usually moderates out opinions that are critical of his ideas, he never learns.
Obviously this act of arrogant and rather silly political foolishness by political neophytes didn’t exactly go down well with Labour’s candidate Kelvin Davis or some of Labour’s more experienced MPs. They expressed this through tweeting in a rather idiotic fashion. Labour probably needs to run some courses on how not to be stupid on the net.
For those of us who are more concerned with getting an overall victory in the forthcoming election for the left. It was irritating. So on the 3rd of June, I put up two reposts with opposing viewpoints for discussion. One having a go at Labours twittering MPs and supporting a deal in the electorate. The other having a go at some of Bomber’s stranger ideas ideas about politics in his recent posts.
I would have written my own opinions, but these were better than anything I’d have written and provided the required room for the continuing disagreement and debate.
However it appears that Bomber took offense at the post aimed at him and some of my comments that merely hinted at my irritation with him and the twittering MPs. So today he appears to have expressed that in a sideswipe at my opinions and this site and anyone who dares to disagree with him. When I wrote a responding comment on the topic, it was moderated out.
In my view it is clear that he needs some education in how to deal with disagreement in politics. This was my comment.
When I first called the ABCs out for their attack on social media over Queens Birthday Weekend, the editor of The Standard had a mini meltdown online about me and made all sorts of silly accusations and tantrums in the comment section of a blog written by a failed David Shearer strategist.
You really a a bit of a sensitive prima donna aren’t you.
I’m not particularly well known for being kind when I think someone is being a fool. Which is exactly what you are doing with this recent ABC bullshit.
Or the strange way that you think a relatively conservative electorate will warm to the IMP this election (I think that they will be lucky to get 3%. I will be amazed if they got 4%).
Or the idea that Labour would not stand a candidate up North when Labour always stands candidates in all electorates and has done so for nearly a hundred years. If I were the IMP, I’d be running a strong campaign in both north and the equally winnable rotorua area where Annette Sykes has a damn good chance.
Or any other number of things where your lack of actual real world political experience glares through.
The short answer to your ABC fantasies is that as far as I can tell (and I have vastly more access to the inside of Labour when I care to exercise it than you do) there is no interest in moving against Cunliffe before the election. I rather suspect that there will be little enthusiasm even if we don’t form a Labour led government. This is just the usual election tussling that will carry on for the next 3 months.
But in the meantime I think that *your* hysterics and conspiracy theories about Labour and even the Greens don’t help anything apart from your inflating your own ego. Perhaps you should rein your hysteria in a little bit and concentrate on trying to get a government of the left formed rather than trying for silly vendettas.
I had been just as sarcastic about the twittering of Kelvin Davis and Chris Hipkins, plus the Phil Goff’s unuseful analysis as I was about Bomber. But later the week after I made my comments, I was at the Auckland regional list conference amidst the some of the same people I’d been criticising.
As it happens, I sat next to Kelvin David for several hours with just some minor small talk. We were both concentrating on the list selection and other work. I also asked for and received the favour of some information from Phil Goff without hesitation or questions when I said it was for the common good of the left. Both were clearly aware of my comments. But neither raised them nor were apparently upset about them. These are both people who have spent time in politics.
Contrast that with Bomber’s reaction. It was that of a politically inexperienced neophyte. More concerned about his ego than the common good, it appears that his feelings were hurt by my comments.
The political scene is a very bad place to have such a sensitive ego. Most people involved around the political scene will have different opinions even inside the left (actually especially inside the left) and they usually aren’t particularly hesitant in expressing them. Living with criticism is part of having any kind of a political life everywhere from being a volunteer to being a senior politician. This shouldn’t and usually doesn’t stop them working together for the things that they do agree on.
It appears that young Bomber lacks the backbone to withstand that level of diversity without having a fit of pique. Perhaps he will grow it eventually. The sooner the better.