Teapot tattle

122 comments on “Teapot tattle ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Carol 1

   26 January 2012 at 2:46 pm

   Partial repost of something I just posted in Open Mike:

   Tim Selwyn’s take on the tape has a couple of extra details, and the dodgiest stuff may have been said in a whisper, after Banks says he didn’t know, following the 15% snap election comment:

   http://www.tumeke.blogspot.com/2012/01/teapot-tape-now-online.html

   —
   JB: He’s a strange fellow the other fellow, isn’t he
   JK: Mmm, yeah, oh yeah. Yeah, no, we’ve been down that road. The reason why when they rang me in the UK I never ever thought that […] 15% a snap election.
   JB: No, no, I didn’t know, I didn’t know.
   —

   That odd fellow they refer to is Don Brash. What the hell 15% and snap elections have to do with anything and why Banks is claiming profusely that he didn’t know is odd.

   A lot of the rest is about polling, and what Key is going to say to the media about the te drinking encounter.

   It also include s the hypocritical smearing of Labour as the “nasty party” for negative campaigning (ie in reference to Goff calling Key a liar, and some mail drops in Epsom about Banks.
   • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 1.1

     26 January 2012 at 3:17 pm

     smearing of Labour as the “nasty party”

     But, given his audience was only Banks, it demonstrates that this is something he genuinely believes.
     • Anne 1.1.1

       26 January 2012 at 3:28 pm

       Yes, and it’s called: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

       Hat tip to Draco T Bastard
     • Lanthanide 1.1.2

       26 January 2012 at 4:57 pm

       “But, given his audience was only Banks, it demonstrates that this is something he genuinely believes.”

       Or, something he just said to stay chummy with Banks. ’cause people never lie to each other or try to impress each other in private, right?
   • Carol 1.2

     26 January 2012 at 5:01 pm

     I agree with Tim Selwyn in that what is not said, or cannot be heard on the tape that is the most interesting.

     ie, the resort to whispering when discussing Brash as an odd fellow and the phone call to Key in the UK. And this bit quoted and commented on by Selwyn:

     2:45
     JB: “Someone said that you’d be working with… ah, ah…”

     —
     Now there is no name mentioned but they both know who they mean. There’s a lot of nod, nod, wink, wink with that – are they talking about a journo, a consultant?

     So apart from the mystery over these 2 points, doesn’t this indicate that JB and JK thought there was a possibility that their conversation might be a little too public to discuss these 2 points in audible voices and with names mentioned?
     • Anne 1.2.1

       26 January 2012 at 5:47 pm

       the phone call to Key in the UK. And this bit quoted and commented on by Selwyn:

       2:45
       JB: “Someone said that you’d be working with… ah, ah…”

       Could the someone be a certain Lord A?
       • Carol 1.2.1.1

         26 January 2012 at 6:08 pm

         As they are talking about the way they present themselves to voters at that point, I think it’s likely to be a media trainer or consultant.
   • Carol 1.3

     26 January 2012 at 5:32 pm

     Phone call must have been in April 2011 when JK was in London for ANZAC Day – a brief mention of Brash becoming leader of the ACT party in the last minute of the vid:

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mVzVC048K8

     So is the reference to a snap election to do with that change of leadership of ACT.

     (PS: is JK a small man or is the woman reporter just very tall?…. and so much smoozing and name dropping… too sugary compared with the tea tape John).
     And Brash taking leadership is referred to here in the end of April 2011:

     http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4934835/ACT-leadership-coup-Brash-highly-unlikely-to-get-top-Govt-post

     Key congratulated Brash from the Eurostar train as he returned from London last night.

     He will meet with Brash early next week.

     Brash “unequivocally” assured him the confidence and supply agreement with National would remain stable until the election.

     But Key would not speculate on an agreement post-election.

     He said he would “try and be constructive” and won’t rule Brash out of an executive post. But it was “highly unlikely” he would be offered the top jobs.

     He could see no need to hold the election than the already declared November 26th date.
2. Anne 2

   26 January 2012 at 3:12 pm

   It also include s the hypocritical smearing of Labour as the “nasty party” for negative campaigning (ie in reference to Goff calling Key a liar, and some mail drops in Epsom about Banks.

   What’s more, the mail drop wasn’t associated with the Labour Party anyway.

   And don’t forget the nasty attempt by John Key to slander Phil Goff with a ‘slit throat’ gesture in the debating chamber after the sad spectacle of a distraught individual trying to leap from the balcony.
3. billE 3

   26 January 2012 at 3:36 pm

   It’s strange to hear journalists being hussled away like naughty children. So many things wrong with the tone of the politics they talk, very nasty ironically. And then to tell themselves they don’t “play the man”. Banks especially. They are having a great time by the sounds of it in the disneyland cloud of the top ranks of the govmint.
4. Ed 4

   26 January 2012 at 3:52 pm

   A transcript would be good . . .
   • Ianupnorth 4.1

     26 January 2012 at 4:06 pm

     Agree, or a serious filtering of the background noise
     • lprent 4.1.1

       26 January 2012 at 4:11 pm

       If I see one I’ll put up a link to it.
5. Carol 5

   26 January 2012 at 4:09 pm

   And Key surely is a joker when he says, instead of being “nasty” he prefers to go out there and say what he/National have done (that would be undermine democracy, misdirect, misinform, abuse urgency, carry out activities without transparency?), and promote their policies (like he did, in detail, during the election campaign?)…..
6. Bazar 6

   26 January 2012 at 4:14 pm

   By the sounds of it, there was sweet fuck all on the tape.

   So the lefties made a mountain out of teacup.

   I’m just waiting for the court to decide that it was a private conversation that shouldn’t have ever been released or taped.
   And hoping someone gets charged with this.
   • Carol 6.1

     26 January 2012 at 4:27 pm

     Ah, excuse me? It was Key, The Herald on Sunday and TV3 that made an issue of it. If they’d published in the first place and Key hadn’t started criminal proceedings, people wouldn’t have wondered if there is something to hide?
     • Bazar 6.1.1

       26 January 2012 at 5:13 pm

       So you’re suggesting that the lefties were completely netural on this matter, and were not in any way making demands about, or adding fuel to the fire over the contents of the tape?
       Does that include Winston Peters in your definition of leftie?

       This site was all about how the public deserved to know what was on the tapes, and what evils had been caught on it, and how in the interests of the public, our PM had no rights to privacy.

       We now know that it was a harmless tape.
       The only matter left is for the court to decide that it was a private conversation and to punish the offending individuals.
       • McFlock 6.1.1.1

         26 January 2012 at 5:55 pm

         “Weren’t upset that Key and his advisors royally fucked up the PR on this issue, and were happy to egg them on” != “Constructing a mountain out of a teacup”.
          
         The Chief architect, structural engineers, and machine operators were all in National.
       • mickysavage 6.1.1.2

         26 January 2012 at 10:19 pm

         Don’t you remember Bazar, Goff asked for a break from all of the attention given to the teapot tape a couple of days after it broke.  It was obliterating the campaign.  People forgot about slightly more important things like what to do with child poverty.

         Your last sentence is kind of weird.  You are saying the Court should make a decision but then punish the offending individuals.  What happens if the Court says it was a public area with no expectation of privacy which is extraordinarily likely.  

         What then? 
         • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.2.1

           26 January 2012 at 11:21 pm

           You are saying the Court should make a decision but then punish the offending individuals.

           I’m all for it. Charge JK and NAct a few thousand dollars for wasting police time.
           • aerobubble 6.1.1.2.1.1

             27 January 2012 at 1:57 pm

             The point was it was a distraction. The value to the rightwing was once it became an issue then the National spin central loved the idea of keeping it on prime time. Why? Because Key’s re-election was a non-election, it was about taking the obviously (in heinsight) talking up of brand Key to the bank (polling day). And so anything that played into shutting down the election was good for national.

             yet the problem for National is now they have no public consent because they did not discuss charter schools, because most hate the idea of asset sales, and worse for National the voters that stayed away (Labour) overwhemingly support the welfare saftety net (especially in a few years when China has slowed and Europe has another round of fiscal stupidity).

             So what is National to do? sell assets, hammer those who stayed at home on eleciton night, or theme its second term around ACT charter schools (and other pro-Destiny) policy. HA.

             National, like our boomer leadership, have been coddled and smothered by their own coddling and smothering, and now they can’t see that shitting in the well might actually harm the taste of the water they draw later.

             If Key had not be so desperate t take his high polling to the bank (weakness called fear), he might have actually gone out to have policies that worked for NZ. Ooops,
             like when have National ever had that…
         • Bazar 6.1.1.2.2

           27 January 2012 at 11:51 am

           So because Goff, after days of having the teapot stirred, decided he wanted to move on.
           Thats fine, thats Goff who moved on. Goff’s decision didn’t stop all those other lefties that still haven’t gotten over it.

           I only need to see that Zetetic has posted another story, on this site no less, about the teapot contents to see its still being stirred by the left.

           “What happens if the Court says it was a public area with no expectation of privacy which is extraordinarily likely.”

           Then i’ll be proven wrong.
           If someone wants to ask me if i was wrong about it, i’ll say as much.

           Now i’ll ask something, will those who defended the right of the nation to violate the privacy of JK’s and JB’s chat, apologise for their mistake?

           In the result of such a decision, i’m expecting to read on this site, about how corrupt our high courts are, how we need to egg on the 99% movement for this very reason, and how JK is both somehow the puppet master and master puppet.
           It’d do my cynicism wonders to be proven wrong.
       • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.3

         26 January 2012 at 11:19 pm

         This site was all about how the public deserved to know what was on the tapes, and what evils had been caught on it, and how in the interests of the public, our PM had no rights to privacy.

         Yes, and? When two politicians talk about the government that they’re planning to put together then the public does have a right to know. Politicians aren’t private citizens but public servants.

         We now know that it was a harmless tape.

         So why did JK go to such lengths to hide it?
   • Ngu Wa 6.2

     26 January 2012 at 4:30 pm

     Why?? Nothing to charge them for! Just Key being his usual waffling, nasty self & Banks doing his normal kowtowing to keep in favour!
   • Colonial Viper 6.3

     26 January 2012 at 4:30 pm

     So the lefties made a mountain out of teacup.

     Actually it was John Key who made it into a police matter.
     • Blue 6.3.1

       26 January 2012 at 4:41 pm

       Nonsense, it was the cameraman that made it a criminal matter, by his actions. And it was the hysterical left and the hysterical not so left (Labour) ‘demanding’ to know the contents, and numb-nuts Winston, seeing yet anther conspiracy, escalating it. What a fiasco. The issue was about privacy and a criminal act, nothing more. You must be disappointed it turned out to be fuck all, as the participants said at the time.
       • McFlock 6.3.1.1

         26 January 2012 at 5:50 pm

         Nonsense, it was the cameraman that made it a criminal matter, by his actions.

         Allegedly. As alleged by someone with a vested interest in not having the tape come out before the election. 
          
         Due process is a funny thing.
          
         Although I’m not sure what I would have done in the cameraman’s shoes upon discovering the recording. Kicking it to the editors probably seemed like the easiest resolution to deciding whether it was newsworthy or in the public interest.

         The fact they were chatting in a cafe, albeit with no media, is a bit of a giveaway about “privacy”, as far as I can tell. Maybe I’m a paranoid prick, but I wouldn’t have a private conversation in a cafe. Informal, yes of course, but I wouldn’t have a doctor’s consultation there, nor do confession with a priest. Cafes are for banal inoffensive tripe where the worst “revelation” would be Key saying “I of course have great admiration for our older citizens, and the experience and common sense that they have – but I am greatly reassured by the popularity you have with younger Epsom activists”. Whether it were true or not.”
           
         • Draco T Bastard 6.3.1.1.1

           26 January 2012 at 11:25 pm

           Although I’m not sure what I would have done in the cameraman’s shoes upon discovering the recording.

           I know exactly what I would have done – Transcribed it, put it up on my blog as a torrent, made sure the advertising was in place, then tell everybody it was there. I certainly wouldn’t have gone to the MSM with it.
           • aerobubble 6.3.1.1.1.1

             27 January 2012 at 2:19 pm

             Exactly. Camermen need to get background recordings, and naturally record everything just in case they miss the necessary background noise that they need to make such high quality recordings for TV, that make Key look so good. so exactly, it was accidental recording that Key would have known was the standrad practice, as journals would be putting these back ground microphones on his table all the time. So it was willful negligence on the PM part, and his minders, not to have removed the bag sitting on the table.

             But there is a good reason for not recording the PM, he could be discussing some national security issue – not likely with banks – but… …so the press must be screening National security issues mistakenly picked up, and personal details, etc, etc all the time.

             So now we find out that Key benefited by having the story blanket the main news for days before the election. Once his mistake, his minors mistake, and the camermans normal operating proceedure and the press own ability to censor important conversations if needs be, Key won the election on the back of his campaign strategy of shuting down any real election discussion. Minsters were not be be seen, it was all bland brand Key down to the wire, with a twist of scandel.
       • Georgecom 6.3.1.2

         26 January 2012 at 8:12 pm

         No, it as Key who made it into a criminal matter by making a complaint to the police.

         It was the hysterical reaction of Key and his supporters that turned what was a 5 minute story into one which lost him an outright majority.
         • You_Fool 6.3.1.2.1

           27 January 2012 at 7:49 am

           And put Winston in Parliament along with some tag-a-longs. It is highly doubtful that without the tea-storm that Winston would of made the arbitrary magic number
7. Tigger 7

   26 January 2012 at 4:18 pm

   Worst first date ever. That Banks guy clearly wants to give it all up but the Key guy is obviously just leading him on. Hope they didn’t get into bed together because Key will just screw Banks and run.
8. felix 8

   26 January 2012 at 4:24 pm

   Nastiness @ 4:08 “He polled four last time, he’ll poll three this time, a lot of his constituents will have died”.
   • Enough is Enough 8.1

     26 January 2012 at 4:37 pm

     Nasty???
     • felix 8.1.1

       26 January 2012 at 4:48 pm

       Yeah. Smug, snickering, nasty little prick.
       • Enough is Enough 8.1.1.1

         26 January 2012 at 4:55 pm

         Yeah…I agree with smug.
9. beachbum 9

   26 January 2012 at 4:24 pm

   If this is all people can rely on to discredit Key then they are seriously clutching at straws.
   • Ngu Wa 9.1

     26 January 2012 at 4:34 pm

     Don’t have to have anything to discredit Key…If you really listen to what he says and how often he changes his mind, you would see that he does a good job of discrediting himself.
     • beachbum 9.1.1

       26 January 2012 at 4:46 pm

       Thats funny – thats what the right say about Shearer when he is interviewed.

       Not sure who is the lowest common denominator, then add someone like Winston to the mix and then I start to understand why (was it?) 1 million voters stayed at home on election day…
       • Ngu Wa 9.1.1.1

         26 January 2012 at 5:46 pm

         Sad that Key is not someone I would ever trust, but I don’t know enough about Shearer to pass the same judgement on him…… But I gather from your reply, that you think I am a Labour supporter. Shock, shock! You are very wrong there, too. Doesn’t say much about your powers of discernment. I guess a sickly smile might be all you need to dupe you.
10. slightlyrighty 10

    26 January 2012 at 4:53 pm

    Given the content of the conversation, I tend to believe Key when he say’s it’s not about the tape, it’s about how it was obtained.
    • Lanthanide 10.1

      26 January 2012 at 5:01 pm

      I expect any court hearing to find in favour of the journalist. It really is quite clear what constitutes a private conversation – one where the participants could “reasonably expect” it to be private.

      Having a conversation in the middle of a busy cafe with 30 people from the media (that they invited) less than a metre away through the glass, and crucially directly behind John Key standing in a doorway not obstructed by anything, cannot be said to be a “reasonable expectation” of privacy.
      • beachbum 10.1.1

        26 January 2012 at 5:38 pm

        “Reasonable expectation” of privacy is an interesting term. After asking the media to go outside, maybe they had a reasonable expectation of privacy…

        Glass is reasonably efficient at blocking out a converstaion from the distance in the photo’s. A recorder hidden in a bag of course is a different matter.

        But hey – its just my opinion and I am no lawyer
        • Colonial Viper 10.1.1.1

          26 January 2012 at 6:03 pm

          Ahem. Privacy? The dozen or two dozen other diners in the cafe, some seated only a couple of metres away, might have suggested that it wasn’t going to be a private conversation.
        • Vicky32 10.1.1.2

          26 January 2012 at 6:31 pm

          But hey – its just my opinion and I am no lawyer

          (And no grammarian, either. Plurals don’t take apostrophes, not even when the word ends in a vowel.)
        • Lanthanide 10.1.1.3

          26 January 2012 at 8:11 pm

          You missed this part of my comment:

          “crucially directly behind John Key standing in a doorway not obstructed by anything”
11. billE 11

    26 January 2012 at 5:17 pm

    I think journalists are too cosy with the political folk because of paycheck shrinkage, I am one. But from my non-journalistic private sector background the way they talk about our press is very partonising, let alone straight in front of them. There’s a high “above journalism” insult to their tone ,media as a lion to be tamed, hence almost certainly their publication .

    Subject Nasty and N.Z Politics 101 :

    Politics from the right has been nasty since Muldoon was a young man on the benches. To have two major right wingers wank each other off publicly about how virtuous they are, given their and their parties track and tact record is a bit fucking scary. But that’s how a man justifys 40 million bucks from doing rich folks banking. Hey I’m smoking drugs, watching porn and thinking of my next robbery. Like Kim Dotcom.
    • slightlyrighty 11.1

      26 January 2012 at 5:44 pm

      There has been some nastiness from the right over the years, but the nastiness has gone both ways, and more so from the left in recent times.
      • mickysavage 11.1.1

        26 January 2012 at 10:21 pm

        Is that you Pete George?
        • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.1

          26 January 2012 at 10:25 pm

          Either him or a close lingual relation…
12. randal 12

    26 January 2012 at 5:53 pm

    diddums.
    its not tiddlywinks.
13. Jackal 13

    26 January 2012 at 6:01 pm

    Here’s the first couple of minutes:

    John Banks: JB. John Key: JK. Security Guard: SG. Photographer: PG. Background: BG.

    JB: Um and Um!

    SG: I think we’ve had enough now come along now guys.

    JB: This is great territory for you.

    JK: Yeah! No! It’s a great spot and um! And we’ve done well.

    SG: Come on guys let’s move on shall we catch up… undecipherable.

    JB: Hopefully you’ll get 70 per cent of the party vote here.

    JK: Yeah! Feels like it.

    JB: Feels very good here in Epsom.

    JK: Feels good across the country actually. Most of our election polls are looking really really good… undecipherable

    JK: So I’m brits expecting. Em

    BG: Hey guys are you good?

    JK: Theoretically past the north have been played

    JK: Theoretically the undecipherable could have been a bit more played

    BG: That’s one for Chris. We’re undecipherable at your routine.

    JK: But undecipherable.

    JK: And um! He he um! He, he he bloody worked hard last time.

    JK: He knocked on a lot of doors for a year… so I would be surprised, I mean she’s quit good but um you know.

    PG: John John!

    PG: Thank you very much.

    JK: Thank you.

    JK: Nice photo of undecipherable.

    JB: This is a very good meeting.

    JK: Yeah! Yeah! Wherever I go now there are really big numbers, yeah! Waiting, waiting to trip out.

    JB: I mean ah… there’s thirty here today.

    JK: Yeah!

    JB: and that is very good and important.

    JK: Yeah! The ,ah! Apparently the undecipherable is out this afternoon to, and that’s very good as well, TV3 undecipherable good working for us… it’s all, pretty solid.

    JK: I’d say… my, the herald would be slightly below but, you know, marginal.

    JK: I think in the end, it’s going to ease down more or less. You know.

    JK: We’ll we’ll get to 50, 49 50, anything around there will be good.

    JB: Yeah!

    JK: undecipherable

    JK: Yeah! I thought so.

    JB: Um!

    JK: You know what campaigns are like.

    JB: Oh!

    JK: It’s ah, when you’re were we are, the risk is on the down side. Undecipherable

    JB: The um the left have been very very nasty!

    1:54

    Will transcribe the rest later.
    • tsmithfield 13.1

      26 January 2012 at 6:24 pm

      Shit. If the rest is like that its gonna bring the government down!!
      • Colonial Viper 13.1.1

        26 January 2012 at 6:36 pm

        Nah mate, its only going to knock another brick from the wall.
      • Jackal 13.1.2

        26 January 2012 at 6:39 pm

        Well if anything it confirms that Key and Banks can’t formulate a sentence properly. The bit about TV3 doing some good work for National is a bit interesting… maybe that’s why they refused to broadcast the tape.
        • insider 13.1.2.1

          26 January 2012 at 8:35 pm

          They were talking about polls by the looks.

          I reckon you should replace the ‘ indecipherable’ with ‘bleep!’. That will make it much much more interesting, more like a guy Ritchie movie

          JK: Yeah! The ,ah! Apparently the BLEEP! is out this afternoon to, and that’s very good as well, TV3 BLEEP! good working for us… it’s all, pretty solid.
      • Anne 13.1.3

        26 January 2012 at 6:42 pm

        It shows them up for what they are: a couple of ignorant, semi literate bumpkins.
    • The Voice of Reason 13.2

      26 January 2012 at 6:41 pm

      Good work, Jackal! This line is quite telling:
       
      “Hopefully you’ll get 70 per cent of the party vote here.”
       
      That’s not the line Key was pushing in public! I do wonder if Key’s worry about the tape was that he genuinely didn’t remember what he said and he was afraid that he’d dissed Nat voters along with Winnie’s lot. Either way, he cost ACT 3 seats and gifted Winston an unlikely political comeback.
       
      • The Voice of Reason 13.2.1

        26 January 2012 at 6:55 pm

        Whoops, it was Banks that mentioned the 70%, not the Keyster.
    • Carol 13.3

      26 January 2012 at 6:53 pm

      Thanks,

      Some additions and corrections…
      K: Feels good across the country actually. Most of our election polls are looking really really good…

      JK: So I’m a bit suspect that. Em

      BG: Hey guys are you good?

      JK: Theoretically Palmerston North should have been played

      JK: Theoretically Rumataka could be a bit more played
      BG: That’s one for Chris. We’re undecipherable at your routine.

      JK: But undecipherable Palmerston North, because Mike.

      JK: And Pete (?) um! He he um! He, he he bloody worked hard last time.

      JK: He knocked on a lot of doors for a year… so I would be surprised, I mean she’s quite good but um you know.

      PG: John John!

      PG: Thank you very much.

      […]
      JK: Yeah! The ,ah! Apparently the latest Roy Morgan is out this afternoon to, and that’s very good as well, TV3’s very good working for us… it’s all, pretty solid.
      • Carol 13.3.1

        26 January 2012 at 7:02 pm

        and some more:

        JK: Most photographed cup of tea in the world.

        JB: This is a very good media contingent I gotta tell you.

        JK: Yeah! Yeah! Wherever I go now there are really big numbers, yeah! Waiting, waiting to trip out.

        JB: I mean ah… there’s thirty here today.

        JK: Yeah!

        JB: and that is very very good and important.

        JK: Yeah! The ,ah! Apparently Roy Morgan that is out this afternoon to, and that’s very good as well, TV3 is very good and working for us… it’s all, pretty solid.

        JK: I’d say… my, the herald would be slightly below but, you know, marginal.

        JK: I think in the end, it’s going to ease down, it’d be my guess. You know.

        JK: We’ll we’ll get to 50, 49 50, anything around there will be good enough.

        JB: Yeah!

        JK: but when where we are

        JK: Yeah! I thought so.

        JB: Um!

        JK: You know what campaigns are like.

        JB: Oh!

        JK: It’s ah, when you’re were we are, the risk is on the down side. Undecipherable

        JB: The um the left have been very very nasty!

        1:54
        • Colonial Viper 13.3.1.1

          26 January 2012 at 7:15 pm

          I bet that Iain Lees-Galloway would love to know what these boys were scheming about re: Palmerston North being played.
          • The Voice of Reason 13.3.1.1.1

            26 January 2012 at 7:25 pm

            I think it’s “in play” rather than ‘being played’, CV. The Nats wanted Palmy bad. It was, at the time, Labour’s only provincial seat and Key visited regularly during the campaign. But as the PM pointed out, Iain is a bloody hard worker and the seat’s his for keeps now.
            • Colonial Viper 13.3.1.1.1.1

              26 January 2012 at 7:37 pm

              Yep, kudos to Iain, I’ve only met him once or twice but I know him as a very solid, well respected local MP.
        • Jackal 13.3.1.2

          26 January 2012 at 7:35 pm

          Thanks Carol. I thought it was Rumataka… “Playing” different electorates seems a rather dodgy way to put it.
          • Carol 13.3.1.2.1

            26 January 2012 at 7:41 pm

            Actually, it turns out it’s “in play” not “being played”… see below.
            • Jackal 13.3.1.2.1.1

              26 January 2012 at 7:51 pm

              Damn that man’s pronunciation.
      • The Voice of Reason 13.3.2

        26 January 2012 at 7:05 pm

        “But undecipherable Palmerston North, because Mike.
        JK: And Pete (?) um! He he um! He, he he bloody worked hard last time.
        JK: He knocked on a lot of doors for a year… so I would be surprised, I mean she’s quite good but um you know.”
         
        It’s “But we’re a bit suspect in Palmerston North … (then he can’t remember Iain Lees Galloway’s name, and I think Key says ‘lees’ not ‘pete’.”
         
        He was wrong about his candidate in Palmy. Bloody hopeless, as it turns out.
      • Carol 13.3.3

        26 January 2012 at 7:08 pm

        Palmerston North won by Ian Lees Galway for Labour in 2011. Rimutaka won by Chris Hipkins for Labour in 2011 and 2008.
14. just saying 14

    26 January 2012 at 6:36 pm

    I’m assuming that the newspapers got the tape “clarified” in what ever ways it is possible, to minimise the background noise and optimise the sound quality of the actual converation. I assume the transcription the media have, has more informationa than this raw copy has provided so far.
15. Blue 15

    26 January 2012 at 6:46 pm

    Banks: Yeah, so it’s been great. Um, and um…this is great territory for you.
    Key: Yeah. No. It’s a great spot and um I mean, we’ve done well to follow that up from…
    Banks: I’m sure you’ll get 70% of the party vote here.
    Key: Yeah, it feels like that, yeah.
    Banks: Feels very good.
    Key: Across the country actually we’ve got some…most of our electoral polling is looking really really good so…I’m a bit suspective – I think theoretically Palmerston North could be in play, theoretically Rimutaka could be in play, but I’m suspect in Palmerston North because my [] last time and um, he um, he…he…he bloody worked hard last time, for myself I don’t…he knocked on a lot of doors for a year, so I’d be surprised…I mean, she’s quite good but I’d be a little bit surprised –
    [Tea cups set down. Media snap photos and are shooed away]
    Key: The most photographed cup of tea in the world.
    Banks: This is a very good media contingent.
    Key: Yeah, it’s huge ay?
    Banks: I’ve got to tell you…
    Key: Wherever I go though there’s more big numbers normally, yeah, waiting, waiting to trip me up. [To the wait staff] Thank you!
    Banks: I mean, uh…
    Key: [To wait staff] Cheers. Thanks very much.
    Banks: There’s 30 here today.
    Key: Yeah.
    Banks: That’s very very good.
    Key: Apparently Roy Morgan’s out this afternoon is very good too and TV3’s very good at the weekend for us, but it’s all pretty solid. I’d say the Herald will be slightly low, but you know, margin. I mean, in the end it’s going to ease down, would be my guess, go…we’ll get to 50, 49, anything around there will be good enough.
    Banks: Yeah. It will be good…
    Key: Yeah, I expect so…well, you know what campaigns are like. When you’re where we are, the risk is in the downside…
    Banks: The election has been very, very nasty.
    Key: Yeah, yeah. I don’t…I don’t think that’s a strategy that works very well. I reckon you’re much better just to get out there and promote what you’re doing, promote your policies and…
    Banks: You have got no idea how vicious they’ve been, you know, especially at public meetings, but um, we can handle that and I’m not buying into it.
    Key: No.
    Banks: I’ve been around too long, I’m not…
    Key: I feel the same and…
    Banks: I don’t play the…
    Key: No, no, I don’t reckon it works. When you look at Roughan last week in the paper saying ‘the moment he called him a liar I knew it was all over’ http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10763955 and I mean, it’s so, you know, there are so many things where you go ‘I could spend my life on this stuff’ but you know, I can’t be bothered and I’m not going to do it. And I just don’t think it’s going to take me anywhere. I mean, I was, I’m there to make a difference, I’m just going to keep on working on it each year, and I’m actually proud of the record we’ve got and that’s what we’re going to be.
    Banks: Yeah. Someone’s told me you’re gonna be, you’re going to be working with uh…
    Key: Yeah, yeah. It’s good. Yeah, no that’s right…I reckon you guys are…yeah yeah…unfortunately that’s always the case.
    Banks: I didn’t know.
    Key: No, no, no [chuckles softly]…um…but you…you guys will track at some point. Bit of luck…so what I’m going to do when I go out is I’m gonna say, look we’ve worked with Act for the last three years, provided strong and stable government, blah blah, and then I’m just going to run them through and say look, in 2005 and 2008, the voters of Epsom gave their party vote to National then voted tactically and if they do so in 2011 I wouldn’t be at all unhappy about that, we’re likely positioned to provide strong and stable government again blah blah blah. And they’ll ask about how I’m going to vote for the National candidate, and that’s because I am the leader of the National Party here’s my job, and then if they go on to the ministerial warrants, let’s just say we’ll go through it another day.
    Banks: And, you might, you might be inclined to say ‘I know John quite well.’
    Key: Yeah. That’s right, yep.
    Banks: And we’ve had a good working relationship, and we did a lot of stuff together.
    Key: Yep. Worked well.
    Banks: We’ve achieved a lot.
    Key: Yep. We’re on the same page.
    Banks: Do you think Winston will be back this time?
    Key: [dismissive laugh] No, not at all no chance.
    Banks: [mumble]
    Key: [amused] Yeah, yeah, yeah, that’s , but no, no, not a show. He, look, he’s at 2.5 I think on the TV3 poll, we have him about 2.5, 3. Look, he polled 4 last time, he’ll poll 3 this time, a lot of his constituents have all died. He won’t poll, I don’t think he’ll poll much above 3 this time.
    Key: How are you enjoying it? Is it just bloody hard going?
    Banks: Oh, it’s hard going, I mean it’s really hard, I mean, I’m at it 14 hours a day. Bus stops this morning, on buses, in the trains, on the trains, railway stations, taxi stands, pushing it hard, and ah, but it’s quite small, the response here is amazing. Our polling this week shows the gap between Paul and I is closing anyway, albeit there’s some distance, but a couple of key media have him well out in front…
    Key: Look at the end of the day, there will always be [] both [], but you shouldn’t be worried about the [] help with the Maori Party that will be a very different set of circumstances, and um…
    Banks: Makes your time here very…
    Key: Mmm, mmm, yeah, I’m not worried.
    Banks: I think the Labour Party have um have given up on Epsom.
    Key: Oh, yeah.
    Banks: He’s a horrible fellow, that candidate. Nasty, nasty.
    Key: He is, ooh, nasty. They’re a nasty party in a lot of ways.
    Banks: Yeah, well, you know they’ve been putting stuff in letterboxes about me. Shocking stuff.
    Key: Yes, that’s nasty. That’s what they do, they play the person the whole time. We never do that stuff.
    Banks: And John, I think the important thing is the [] politics, the policies, [] I’ve learned that the long term experience is never any value with them…
    Key: No, it doesn’t help you, does it?
    Banks: People…people…
    Key: I mean, longer term I reckon Act’s gotta…the reason I didn’t text you is because it’s better if I don’t because it puts you under pressure to say he has or he hasn’t you know?
    Banks: No, no I haven’t heard from the Prime Minister.
    Key: No, no, it’s easier to say…
    Banks: I don’t expect you to [] on me…what’s that number of yours? I’ve got two numbers for you.
    Key: Oh, the proper one is [number omitted from transcript]
    Banks: [repeats number]. I haven’t talked to you…they want us to know I haven’t heard from the Prime Minister. I think it’s important during the campaign we stay at arm’s length. He’s got his party, and…
    Key: Definitely.
    Banks: I think that after the election with Catherine…
    Key: Yeah, she’s good.
    Banks: Don Nicolson, and Steve Whittington, the four of us, we can completely restructure and rebuild this party.
    Key: That’s right. And she’s good actually. She’s…I reckon she’ll have quite a bit of female appeal.
    Banks: Yeah.
    Key: Yeah, that’s where you’ll…
    Banks: He’s a strange fellow, the other fellow isn’t he?
    Key: Mmmm! Oh, yeah! Yeah, no, no, we’ve been down that road! That is why when they rang me in the UK I never ever thought of this, you know, 15 percent we’d have a snap election…
    [quiet mumbling]
    Banks: I didn’t know. I didn’t know.
    Key: Well, you learn everyday. So, you want to do the standup? Is that yours? Is that yours? Is that yours?
    Banks: No.
    Key: Hey, that’s a recording device.
    • Carol 15.1

      26 January 2012 at 7:25 pm

      Great. Thanks.
      Key: Yes, that’s nasty. That’s what they do, they play the person the whole time. We never do that stuff.

      ha ha ha ha ha…………
      • tsmithfield 15.1.1

        26 January 2012 at 7:33 pm

        Ummm… you might want to reconsider your mirth in the context of some of Labour’s marketing strategies from this and previous election. Hint: Simpering woman “we don’t trust you Mr Key”.

        I don’t recall any of Nationals marketing from this or the previous election that targeted individuals. They were very much focused on promoting themselves rather than dissing the opposition. Then again, you could find some examples to prove me wrong.
        • Colonial Viper 15.1.1.1

          26 January 2012 at 7:42 pm

          One thing the recording shows is how Angelic the born-to-rule Right Wing view themselves.
          • Redbaron77 15.1.1.1.1

            26 January 2012 at 8:21 pm

            Almost to the point of delusion. In contrast they are perfectly at ease “putting the boot in” towards anyone or any group that stands in their way.
            • Carol 15.1.1.1.1.1

              26 January 2012 at 8:43 pm

              +1

              “Phil in”, Darren Hughes, Chris Carter, the whole “commyunist lesbian dictator” discourse around Helen Clark fanned by Wishart’s writing and DF’s billboards. etc, etc
            • millsy 15.1.1.1.1.2

              26 January 2012 at 10:03 pm

              National has targeted low paid workers, teachers, trade unionists, those on a benefit, single mothers, etc and so on with their nastiness.

              John Banks is on record that he thinks that animals are more important than children in poverty.

              The right are really really really nasty in the past few years, look at the POA dispute, with the abuse towards the wharfies being easily compared with the brownshirts abuse of the Jews in 1930’s Germany..

              First they came for the unemployed, and I didnt speak up because I wasant unemployed
              Then they came for the DPB mothers, and I didnt speak up because I wasant a DPB mother
              Then they came for the public servants, and I didnt speak up because I wasant a public servant
              Then they came for the teachers, and I didnt speak up because I wasant a teacher
              Then they came for the state housing tenants, and I didnt speak up because I didnt live in a state house
              Then they came for the actors, and I didnt speak up because I wasant an actor
              Then they came for the wharfies, and I didnt speak up because I wasant a wharfie
              And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me…….

              – with apologies to the good Pastor.
    • travellerev 15.2

      26 January 2012 at 9:10 pm

      Wow, thanks for that!
    • Jackal 15.3

      26 January 2012 at 10:18 pm

      Thanks Blue… I was a bit pressed for time hence the bad transcription. I’m also not fluent in gobbledygook, which is what Banks and Key were speaking. You should send National an invoice for your work.
    • Dun Brush aka jaymam 15.4

      26 January 2012 at 10:46 pm

      Surely Don Brash was number 1 on the ACT party list? So why is Banks talking about “the four of us” not including Brash? Was Banks intending, before the election, to roll Brash immediately? That would be enough for Key to not want the tapes released before the election.

      “Banks: I think that after the election with Catherine[…] Don Nicolson, and Steve Whittington, the four of us, we can completely restructure and rebuild this party.”
16. tsmithfield 16

    26 January 2012 at 6:52 pm

    Whatever Ambrose got paid for that was too much.
    • Lanthanide 16.1

      26 January 2012 at 8:18 pm

      I don’t think he got paid anything.
      • tsmithfield 16.1.1

        26 January 2012 at 8:34 pm

        That is still too much. 🙂
17. Mark 17

    26 January 2012 at 7:25 pm

    This is hilarious, you Lefties with your conspiracy theories, now you end up in bed (Opposition) with your great mate Winston, you will be able to give each other tips on how to take back handers and milk the state.  Someone could make a comedy about Wussel, The Crooked Pensioner from St Mary’s Bay and whoever it is that leads Labour (is it still H2?) having a little meeting about rorting the taxpayers. We could play it 4 days before the next election.
    • The Voice of Reason 17.1

      26 January 2012 at 7:36 pm

      I think you’ll find it’s currently the right that are obsessed with conspiracies, Mark. But your comment makes no contextual sense anyway, because I don’t see anyone here putting up conspiracy theories. However, I like your comedy idea. Perhaps you could pitch it to NZ On Air and get it made. Don’t forget to include a role for a leading politician who gets an hour’s free advertising just before an election on a radio station whose owners he personally bailed out with a cheap loan. Pip Pip!
      • Mark 17.1.1

        26 January 2012 at 8:15 pm

        “Personally bailed out”
        Oh, are we allowed to discuss the LAX incident now -where a certain Corrupt  Minister in return for large amounts of taxpayer money given by a certain Corrupt PM  to payback certain favours from a four legged industry arranged Diplomatic Immunity for the Wife of said Corrupt PM engaging in in a bit of four legged sport with (what is the word for a male foal?).
        Excuse the grammar, but everyone knows what I refer to. 
        • The Voice of Reason 17.1.1.1

          26 January 2012 at 8:47 pm

          You know none of that made sense, right? Shouldn’t you just shuffle off back to Whale’s home for the bewildered? And try not to drag your knuckles on the way, I heard he faints at the sight of blood.
          • Mark 17.1.1.1.1

            26 January 2012 at 9:13 pm

            Whale? That’s like preaching to the converted, or masturbating into a condom, or supporting MUNZ, or believing the left care about the poor.. where is the sense in that?
            It is far more rewarding (unfortunately not very challenging) poking holes in lefty dogma over here. 

            [lprent: You are starting to look like a rather incoherent troll trapped in 2007 from your comments today. They appear to be meaningless phrases strung together wih little understanding. I’d suggest that you need to read the policy, some comments, and adjust your behavior before I or another moderator gets bored with the nostalgia for a bygone era of blogging. ]
            • Colonial Viper 17.1.1.1.1.1

              26 January 2012 at 9:27 pm

              Its not very challenging because you are a gnat trying to screw the pooch.
            • Mark 17.1.1.1.1.2

              26 January 2012 at 10:05 pm

              Okay, don’t bother, I retire.. back in the good old days the left would at least be able to maintain a rational and intelligent debate, now unfortunately it is just tired and disproved 2nd hand ideology. Good luck all with the quest to improve society. 

              [lprent: rational and intelligent aren’t the words I would associate with your comments. Hidebound, myth ridden and outright ignorant are. But you have made a wise decision. I don’t think that you are up to the standard yet. Test yourself on the baby talk blogs like the sewer and try here again in a few years when you get tired of talking to reflections of yourself. ]
        • adriank 17.1.1.2

          27 January 2012 at 12:39 pm

          Wait… are you saying Steve Joyce arranged for Bronagh to f**k a horse???
18. Jester 18

    26 January 2012 at 7:57 pm

    I just love that on your complete home page there is 29 references to John Key and 0 references to David Shearer.

    Sorry you lot but this is a major fail!

    Always….Always…..always remember, that you can’t sell a secret!

    [lprent: don’t be more of a fuckwit than you usually are. We aren’t brown-nosing Tories with a sycophantic Key fetish. Our authors seldom mention the leaders on the left or even the parties. Never have, and probably never will except when they are having leadership changes.

    Resume trolling and I will resume banning you. How many times have we done it thus far? I guess you may be too stupid to learn? ]
    • The Voice of Reason 18.1

      26 January 2012 at 8:13 pm

      Because this a Labour Party site, right? Moron.
    • Jester 18.2

      27 January 2012 at 4:40 pm

      Didn’t even notice that I had been banned, Suspended, or even castigated for any previous comments. Are you sure you have the correct person?

      But feel free to ban me now if you like.

      Here I’ll assist you with it…….what type of fucking gay name for a bloke is Lyn anyway. You poor cunt. I feel for you.
19. tsmithfield 19

    26 January 2012 at 8:05 pm

    Yep.

    Labour’s strategy in the last two elections has been to attack John Key. Each time it has been an epic fail. On this site at least, the strategy continues.

    As the saying goes “if you keep on doing what you’ve always done, you’ll keep on getting what you’ve always got.” It will be interesting to see if the strategy changes for the next election.
    • Colonial Viper 19.1

      26 January 2012 at 8:26 pm

      Labour’s strategy in the last two elections has been to attack John Key. Each time it has been an epic fail. On this site at least, the strategy continues.

      National’s coalition majority was reduced by 4 seats on Nov 26.
    • McFlock 19.2

      26 January 2012 at 9:02 pm

      Does that count as an assumption that this site is public advertising extension of the Labour party?
    • felix 19.3

      26 January 2012 at 11:24 pm

      “Labour’s strategy in the last two elections has been to attack John Key. Each time it has been an epic fail. On this site at least, the strategy continues.”

      You’re right t, everyone should just leave Key alone.
20. tsmithfield 20

    26 January 2012 at 8:33 pm

    You have a very strange way of measuring success. But it is fairly typical of the way the left has been focusing its attention in the wrong direction. The Labour vote collapsed. There is no way that can be called “success” regardless how many seats the government got.
    • felix 20.1

      26 January 2012 at 9:01 pm

      “But it is fairly typical of the way the left has been focusing its attention in the wrong direction. The Labour vote collapsed. There is no way that can be called “success” regardless how many seats the government got.”

      Would you like to rephrase that?

      You start out talking about “the left” but then you jump to talking about “Labour” as if the two were synonymous.

      See if you don’t rephrase it, people might think you were deliberately trying to ignore the fact that the Green Party won a record no of seats.

      Just, you know, cos you were talking about “the left” and all…
      • tsmithfield 20.1.1

        26 January 2012 at 10:19 pm

        “Would you like to rephrase that?”

        Not at all.

        I said the left focussed their attention in the wrong direction. I said Labour were unsuccessful.

        Some members of the Green party also engaged in some fairly grubby sort of behaviour e.g. vandalism of National hoardings. To that extent, the Greens, the other main component of the left had its attention focussed in the wrong direction as well, because their source of success was disaffected Labour voters. In the case of the Greens they were successful despite the distraction because of the disaffected Labour voters had to go somewhere.
        • felix 20.1.1.1

          26 January 2012 at 10:57 pm

          And yet they got more votes than ever before.

          Was it more than any third party ever has under MMP? Not sure, but a record Green Party turnout nonetheless.

          A historically significant election for the Green Party.

          I note that you decline to rephrase your error. This can only mean that either you haven’t actually managed to decouple “Labour” and “the left” in your brain, or you know it was an error but you’re spinning shit.

          Gee I wonder which.
          • The Voice of Reason 20.1.1.1.1

            26 January 2012 at 11:29 pm

            Yep, best ever result for a 3rd party, shading Winston in 2002 (10%, 13 seats).
      • Colonial Viper 20.1.2

        26 January 2012 at 10:23 pm

        Some members of the Green party also engaged in some fairly grubby sort of behaviour e.g. vandalism of National hoardings.

        Oh look you sensitive soul, rubbing is racing OK? Don’t get on to the track if you can’t keep up.
        • tsmithfield 20.1.2.1

          26 January 2012 at 10:51 pm

          Doesn’t bother me at all. Just that if the Greens had focussed their efforts more fully on their source of votes i.e. disaffected labour supporters they might have got even more of the vote and NZ First would have probably got less.
          • Colonial Viper 20.1.2.1.1

            26 January 2012 at 11:04 pm

            I’m not a big fan of the Greens, but they did very well. Both them and NZ1 were the only true winners on the night IMO. The Conservatives had a credible showing too – shows the influence money in a campaign can have.
          • felix 20.1.2.1.2

            26 January 2012 at 11:08 pm

            To put your bullshit into context, in 2008 the Greens won 157,000 odd votes.

            In 2011 it was 247,000. That’s a phenomenal increase.

            Makes Labour’s slight decrease & National’s slight increase look like margin of error stuff.
    • Colonial Viper 20.2

      26 January 2012 at 9:28 pm

      The Labour vote collapsed.

      It was a fraction of one percent below the 1996 result. Big deal.

      Still way more than English’s pathetic not-quite-21% effort though.
21. Mr. X 21

    26 January 2012 at 11:31 pm

    Welll…Obviously the whole thing was a set up from the beginning. Controlled by the pm. You will notice that Jk never really says anything of a controversial nature. Nothing that would even slightly damage him. And when Jb heads off in the direction of slander and gossip Jk quickly diverts the conversation to matters of a more banal nature. Jb tries several times to go down the road of personalities but is trackstopped each time. Jk was obviously totally aware of the tape recorder from the get go, whilst the patsy Jb was a pawn in the whole charade and oblivious. Jk only “notices” the black bag when he finishes the meet and wants to stand up. The Jb thought the bag belonged to the Jk, i mean he is thinking “it’s not mine must be his.”
22. tsmithfield 22

    26 January 2012 at 11:43 pm

    I didn’t say the Greens weren’t successful. But maybe they could have had 50000 more votes if they had put effort wasted on National towards the easy pickings from Labour. The misguided efforts of some members against National may have actually had the effect of turning off some Labour supporters who might have been thinking about voting Greens.

    That’s why I made the clear distinction between the misguided focus on the left and the unsuccessful outcome for Labour.
    • felix 22.1

      27 January 2012 at 12:08 am

      And yet your advice to the Greens is that they should’ve crashed Labour’s vote more. You fucking moron.
      • tsmithfield 22.1.1

        27 January 2012 at 6:00 am

        They seemed quite happy to crash it to a very considerable extent. Why not more?
23. Dun Brush aka jaymam 23

    26 January 2012 at 11:57 pm

    Both Kiwiblog and Whaleoil have picked on something minor, as if there was nothing else important in the tape.

    DPF: “Yes the awful secret was that John Key said he doesn’t like nasty politics, and thinks it doesn’t work for Labour.”

    Slater: “This is the secret that John Banks wanted no one to know. He thought Don Brash was a “strange fella”.”

    I note that they carefully avoid mentioning Banks intention to roll Brash, here:
    “Banks: I think that after the election with Catherine[…] Don Nicolson, and Steve Whittington, the four of us, we can completely restructure and rebuild this party.”

    and avoid mentioning Key’s wrong contention that “a lot of [Winston’s] constituents have all died”

    and Banks lying here:
    “Banks: No, no I haven’t heard from the Prime Minister.” while swapping phone numbers with the Prime Minister
24. felix 24

    27 January 2012 at 12:13 am

    “I note that they carefully avoid mentioning Banks intention to roll Brash”

    And of course their line will be “but everyone already knew about that, it was no secret”.

    Which is true insofar as we all knew, and they denied it! That’s Banks caught in a massive and repeated lie to the public right there and the whole political establishment including the media are going to brush it off as business as usual.

    It’s not good enough. Banks need to be raked over the coals for this.
    • Campbell Larsen 24.1

      27 January 2012 at 12:27 am

      It is enough of a loss that our politics is defined by these banal moments, mourn instead for that lack of honesty or integrity, mourn for the replacenment of actuality with expedience.

      Banks and Key are pawns in this game. We have no choice but to play – but we must be more careful, because people are not expendable.
25. bobo 25

    27 January 2012 at 3:58 am

    Banks: Oh, it’s hard going, I mean it’s really hard, I mean, I’m at it 14 hours a day. Bus stops this morning, on buses, in the trains, on the trains, railway stations, taxi stands, pushing it hard, and ah, but it’s quite small, the response here is amazing.

    Banks sounds like hes been soliciting for sex..
    • Colonial Viper 25.1

      27 January 2012 at 1:46 pm

      eeeeeew
26. james 111 26

    27 January 2012 at 7:52 am

    Ha Ha Ha
    What a joke nothing in it just show how the left and winnie the fake blew everything out of proportion prior to the Election. Really quite a deflated ballon for the Labour Party
    • Tangled up in blue 26.1

      27 January 2012 at 8:22 am

      Have you considered that maybe Nationals poor handling of the situation contributed to the media circus which (arguably) ultimately resulted in NZF having 8 seats in parliament?
27. happynz 27

    27 January 2012 at 10:01 am

    JK: TV3 is very good and working for us…

    No shit.
28. Fortran 28

    27 January 2012 at 1:36 pm

    To get back into Government Labour must adopt a “positive” stance, and close up towards the Greens, because without the Greens there will not be a majority being necessary to form the Government. Stop the negativity. Think and formulate the positives for the future of our country.
    What are we going to do to get the country out of the rut ? – not just increase taxes etc – that’s negative.
    • Colonial Viper 28.1

      27 January 2012 at 1:42 pm

      Increasing taxes is not a negative.

      Funding spending and tax cuts for the rich via foreign debt is negative.

      By the way optimism is going to fuck us. In the energy depleting world, realism is what is required.

      Of course, the well off middle classes will keep voting for any political party which lies to it and says that the current comfortable status quo can be continued and improved upon via economic growth.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS