Banks – in his own words

Written By: - Date published: 8:32 am, November 12th, 2011 - 137 comments
Categories: brand key, john banks, john key - Tags:

137 comments on “Banks – in his own words ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. John Dalley 1
    12 November 2011 at 8:53 am

    Wow, John Banks being John Banks. What an idiot.

  2. Scott Chris 2
    12 November 2011 at 9:08 am

    Well, if you don’t want this pernicious Con servative to return to office, then you lefties have the POWER to stop him.

    Cast your Epsom electoral vote for Goldsmith. Simple.

    Same goes for the Greens in Ohariu. Chauvel is only trailing Dunne by a couple of points. So you Ohariu Greenies should cast your Ohariu electoral vote for Chauvel.

    Get rid of the populist Con servatives.

    • Lanthanide 2.1
      12 November 2011 at 9:41 am

      The Greens should have done the pragmatic thing and not stood in Ohariu, like Act did with Waimakariri. This would be entirely justified on their part, because Dunne was the reason the Greens weren’t in the coalition after 2005.

      • Galeandra 2.1.1
        12 November 2011 at 10:28 am

        Of course, Parker didn’t need to stand in Epsom, either.
        Perhaps he should invite Goldsmith to have a beer with him?

      • Ari 2.1.2
        13 November 2011 at 1:26 am

        Yep, we could have got rid of Dunne last election if Gareth’s votes had gone to Chauvel.

    • Tom Gould 2.2
      12 November 2011 at 10:17 am

      Unlikely with the National Herald printing straight out lies for Epsom to read. Subheading “John Key can’t vote for John Banks …” Bullshit. He is an enrolled voter in Epsom. Of course he can. The Hearld should say John Key WON’T vote for john Banks. That would be accurate. But that would send the wrong message to Epsom voters on behalf of the Tories who run the paper, and we can’t have that from the National Herald, can we.

      • ianmac 2.2.1
        12 November 2011 at 10:51 am

        Secret vote. Guess what the vote will really be.

      • anne 2.2.2
        12 November 2011 at 1:13 pm

        On the nation this morning,JK’s press secretary is an ex herald manager and they have been told to only print favourable headlines,i thought the media have been bought off and this is proving to be correct,winston also knows the media bias towards him as well,in the light of this,nz’ers are
        living in a dictatorship not a democracy at all and for the sake of nz and its people and the economy we as a whole have just got to get these national rouges out of government.
        Are we already in what libya and other places have gone through with the media reporting?

        • madagascar 2.2.2.1
          12 November 2011 at 1:16 pm

          Sorry Anne, but saying that we live in a dictatorship when we have an election at the end of the month does little for the credibility of your statement.

          • KJT 2.2.2.1.1
            12 November 2011 at 1:20 pm

            Whats the fact we are graciously allowed to rearrange the deck chairs every three years have to do with anything.

            As a famous American said. “If voting changed anything they would abolish it”.

          • anne 2.2.2.1.2
            12 November 2011 at 1:47 pm

            I strongly refute your denial of the dictatorship not being present in nz,when the media wont accept postings that show key or his cabinet in a bad light,wont print the corrupt practices of this current govt,of which there has been many,the media only print and speak about a smile and wave PM, while there are 200.000 kids living in poverty in nz and many families living below the breadline and all key could say was “National standards in all schools and victims rights” where was the press release on that one,it was only in one paper,also a huge concern for the people
            of nz is Key’s statement in the shadow of the rwc “There will be much,much deeper and bigger
            cuts which will involve everyone” has this been re-reported in mainstream media,NO.
            Key’s ‘cuppa’ in epsom is another example of rigging the election.
            Dictatorship means taking choices away from people whether it be by words or by actions,while
            playing mind games to pull them into line.

            • madagascar 2.2.2.1.2.1
              12 November 2011 at 5:50 pm

              Sorry Anne but I think perhaps you need to reflect on some actual dictatorships past and present and contrast them with the country in which we live in.

              • mike …
                12 November 2011 at 10:44 pm

                Yes I think dictatorship is not the right word. A dictator has absolute power, Key is a long way from that thank God. But Anne has a point our media is doing a crap job as a watchdog. And an electorate might actually vote this piece of shit into parliament? What does that say about NZ politics?

                But there is more than one kind of toxic government. I do think that Key is pushing us towards a corporate oligarchy like the US. Same old sociopathic manipulation techniques.

                “The iron law of oligarchy is a political theory, first developed by the German syndicalist sociologist Robert Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties. It states that all forms of organization, regardless of how democratic or autocratic they may be at the start, will eventually and inevitably develop into oligarchies. The reasons behind the oligarchization process are: the indispensability of leadership; the tendency of all groups, including the organization leadership, to defend their interests; and the passivity of the led individuals more often than not taking the form of actual gratitude towards the leaders.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

                “Many scholars are of the opinion that due to the effects of the unfettered laissez-faire capitalism present in its economy, the increasingly powerful influence of corporations on its political system is turning (or has already turned) the modern United States into a corporate oligarchy.

                Athenian techniques to prevent the rise of oligarchy: Especially during the Fourth Century BC, after the restoration of democracy from oligarchical coups, the Athenians used the drawing of lots for selecting government officers in order to counteract what the Athenians acutely saw as a tendency toward oligarchy in government if a professional governing class were allowed to use their skills for their own benefit. They drew lots from large groups of adult volunteers as a selection technique for civil servants performing judicial, executive, and administrative functions (archai, boulē, and hēliastai). They even used lots for very important posts, such as judges and jurors in the political courts (nomothetai), which had the power to overrule the Assembly.”
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy#Examples_of_oligarchies

                Maybe should we just pick MPs at random. Look what we got by voting.

                • Ari …
                  13 November 2011 at 1:29 am

                  I think the word you’re looking for is “plutocracy”.

                  • mike …
                    13 November 2011 at 4:17 am

                    “Corporate oligarchy (Greek Ὀλιγαρχία, Oligarkhía) is a form of government where political power effectively rests with a small, elite segment of society (distinguished by wealthy Corporations, with the utmost contempt for their people, ex. United States(William H.Boywer). The phrase corporate oligarchy is from the word for “business entity” (Corporation) and the Greek words for “few” (ὀλίγον óligon) and “rule” (ἄρχω arkho).”

                    My understanding is that a plutocracy (rule by the wealthy) is a kind of oligarchy (rule by royalty, wealth, family ties, corporate, or military control). If I was nit-picking, I think I would go for rule by corporations over rule by wealth. What about plutarchy? Which is apparently the combination of oligarchy and plutocracy, whatever that means. Semantics. I’d be happy to call it a steamingpileofshitocracy.

                    How about pathocracy? Rule by psychopaths. That has more explanatory value to me.

              • ropata …
                12 November 2011 at 10:49 pm

                i agree madagascar, national’s aspiration to dictatorship does bear comparison with history
                * personality cult around the leader,
                * smooth propaganda machine,
                * sociopathic government,
                * policies to benefit the ruling elite,
                * rentier class living off the workers,
                * divide and confuse the electorate,
                * tax breaks and perks for their mates,
                * big on “law and order” but not so much on human rights
                * undermine democracy (urgency/FPP campaign)
                * bread and circuses, to divert attention from govt failure

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  12 November 2011 at 10:58 pm

                  big on “law and order” but not so much on human rights

                  And it’s law and order for the lower classes and not themselves or their clique.

  3. John Dalley 3
    12 November 2011 at 9:20 am

    The man is a moron.

  4. Sookie 4
    12 November 2011 at 9:21 am

    Same old bigoted prick he always was. Man, I thought I hated Rodney Hide but this guy is way worse. God/Allah/Buddha/Krishna, please, please save us from this douchebag getting into parliament. Lefties in Epsom, um all 10 of you, hold your nose and vote Goldsmith.

  5. John 5
    12 November 2011 at 9:32 am

    That’s disgusting. That should be front page outrage shit, damn racist.

    • Kty 5.1
      12 November 2011 at 10:23 am

      Too right, any comments liike that should be front page news, if any other political figure came out with that line of comment they would be hung drawn and quartered by the MSM. and their mates, especially prior to an election. The question is why come out with wat would appear to be sutch a politicaly suicidal statement like that, or is somebody trying to go down the Owera speach line once more.

  6. Tombstone 6
    12 November 2011 at 10:28 am

    Just a bunch of smug bastards all leaning on each other for cushy jobs in the boys club. It’s bloody disgusting. Banks is a fink and has no place in politics in this country. He’s a biggot and an arrogant red neck! As for Key all he does is avoid fronting up to the hard questions and uses disinformation to convince the masses that his way is the only way – fascism?

  7. randal 7
    12 November 2011 at 10:47 am

    Binky and Kweewee.
    what a team.

  8. Janice 8
    12 November 2011 at 10:47 am

    John Banks is angling for a ministeral job if he gets in. I hope he doesn’t take over Rodney’s job of Local Bodies. Imagine what he would do to Auckland. Another reason for Epsom voters not to vote for him.

    • Rodel 8.1
      12 November 2011 at 12:06 pm

      Now that would be interesting.Melissa Banks with governance of Auckland city while the guy who wasted him in the mayoral elections trying to run the place.
      A Key-Banks-Brash junta. Mind boggles! Is anyone in Epsom aware of how they’re being treated?

  9. John 9
    12 November 2011 at 10:52 am

    The brown population of Auckland are a major community in the town, growing ,vibrant and dynamic. To demonise race like this in 2011 is just fucking disgusting.It’s just got to stop, he should be stood down from the campaign, sent off for that fucking racist shit.

  10. dave 10
    12 November 2011 at 10:57 am

    Green voter in epsom here.

    Will be putting a vote on my man goldsmith. Who the hell is he? No idea but i’d do anything to not have Banks and Brash anywhere near parliament.

    By the way. Parker has been doing a brilliant job around here. There isn’t a possibility he could win is there?

    • toad 10.1
      12 November 2011 at 11:51 am

      My workmate is a Green voter in Epsom, but she will also be voting for Goldsmith just to keep the bigot Banks out.

      I’d suggest the Epsom Returning Officer should provide an ample supply of sick bags for Green and Labour supporters who will be voting for Goldsmith.

    • KJT 10.2
      12 November 2011 at 11:59 am

      Almost no chance of a Labour win in Epsom. They could put up a right wing donkey and it would win. (oop’s that is what they are doing). Hope Parker has a list place if he has been doing good things.
      At least a vote for Goldsmith gets us nutty National instead of totally crazy ACT.

      • Luva 10.2.1
        12 November 2011 at 1:56 pm

        This is turning into a farce. Greens voting blue. Nats voting act. Labour not knowing what the fuck to do.

        MMP in all it’s glory.

        • felix 10.2.1.1
          12 November 2011 at 2:22 pm

          You think National wouldn’t be helping ACT into a seat under FPP? Maybe, maybe not – they do seem to like having a nominally separate party to keep their A-grade bigots, racists, criminals, and all round fuckwits in.

          But really this is the win-a-seat, bring-your-mates rule in all it’s glory. It’s one of the things that needs to be changed about MMP along with the absurdity of the arbitrary threshold.

        • lprent 10.2.1.2
          12 November 2011 at 2:47 pm

          A system that doesn’t reward dumb loyalty – how novel.

          Yes I can see how it would confuse you. But you realize that your stupidity* is probably environmental and can be overcome with sufficient study. Try reading about the purposes of giving people the vote in the interests of democracy. Part of that involves giving them the choice. That includes rewarding stupid politicians appropriately.

          * self-evident considering that you appear to think that any of the other electoral systems on offer apart from MMP are worth more than a quick spit. But after reading and moderating your comments for years, I’d have to say that you impress me with your level of innate arrogant ability to be a dumbarse on any topic.

          • Luva 10.2.1.2.1
            12 November 2011 at 3:27 pm

            Chief, if you have the time to study a pattern of dumbarse comments over many years when I comment roughly once a month, I suggest you really need to get out a bit more often and make some friends, you know have good time

            • Draco T Bastard 10.2.1.2.1.1
              12 November 2011 at 3:57 pm

              All we had to do was read your comments. A few months of that and there was a high confidence level that you were clueless. After a few years, well, the jury’s in and the verdict is that you’re clueless fuckwit.

              • Luva …
                12 November 2011 at 4:27 pm

                Come on now Draco there is no need to call me nasty names. It upsets and me and makes me want to cry. I don’t want to have my feelings hurt. I may end up being as negative about our fantastic country and society as you are. I prefer being happy and enjoying life.

                Now back to politics. Amuse us all about those evil capatalists and how wonderful socialism is. Don’t forget to give one, just one example of a real life socialist paradise that has ever existed

                • millsy …
                  12 November 2011 at 4:30 pm

                  Too bad capitalism results in things such as sweatshops, pollution and homelessness.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  12 November 2011 at 4:56 pm

                  Why don’t you give, just one, example of a capitalist paradise that has ever existed?

                  • Luva …
                    12 November 2011 at 5:10 pm

                    Good work Draco, answer my question with a question. Says it all really.

                    I don’t think there is a capitalist paradise. It is a system that has many warts.

                    Now give us an example of true equal socialist society where everyone was happy. Just one. You believe in it so you must be able to point to somewhere where it has worked. And because it is so fantastic I assume it is still working there.?

                • Galeandra …
                  12 November 2011 at 8:55 pm

                  Socialist Paradise =NZ post 1935 till postwar Natsies got their neo-Fascism going.

            • felix 10.2.1.2.1.2
              12 November 2011 at 4:37 pm

              “…I comment roughly once a month…” Yeah under that particular handle.

  11. One Anonymous Bloke 11
    12 November 2011 at 10:59 am

    He can get up and spew his racist hate on Tv, and that won’t end his career by lunchtime, but a suggestion he’s dating outside his class? Dynamite!

    • rosy 11.1
      12 November 2011 at 11:32 am

      I don’t think it’s quite that simple – racism is expected, par for the course, if you like, with Banks. He should be pulled up on it, just like Melissa Lee was.

      The other is a different beast altogether, and can’t really be compared with racism because it’s not class. If true it’s sheer hypocrisy. Voters all over the world have voted out perceived hypocrites without a 2nd thought, no matter how minor or major the error.

    • Craig Glen Eden 11.2
      12 November 2011 at 1:30 pm

      Dating is that what they call it.Is it still dating if money changes hands? Just asking.

  12. John 12
    12 November 2011 at 11:11 am

    He mentioned the south and west because they are demonised parts of Auckland , demonised by the central and eastern suburbs as “areas of trouble.”; and worse the racism is just appalling , and Aucklanders should confront this. John Banks needs to be fired from the race, we need to confront racism in that city.

  13. Mark Wilson 13
    12 November 2011 at 11:19 am

    I have no need to carry a flag for Banks but can someone tell me why the Standard site attracts so many people who “rage against the passing of the light” and indulge in ugly personal attacks and show such venom? Is it because the left tends to contain mainly the powerless?
    It is a indisputable fact that Maori and Polynesians are, on average, far more likely to commit crime.
    Now it can be fairly argued that that is a function of poverty not race but that doesn’t make Bank’s statement unture.
    And it is also a fact that Pacific people have the same rates of child abuse that Asians and Pakeha do despite their poverty yet Maori have much higher rates than those other groups so there is clearly something going on with Maori that cannot be explained by poverty.
    Nowhere in the above vitrolic response is there any acknowledgement of this.
    It is also a fact that over the last 60 years a higher and higher proportion of the population is having to be supported by the wealth creaters in our society yet our social problems continue to get worse.
    There is also no doubt that the civilised section of the world is entering a period where the money will not be there to uphold the cradle to the grave welfare system irrespective of who is in power. Check out what is going to happen to Greece if you disagree.
    Clearly what has been done to solve our social problems doesn’t work.
    It is intersting that Matt MCCarten that well known Ayn Rand supporter said on Radio live last week that giving people money without requiring work is a failure.
    And is it possible to debate the contents of this post rather than the usual lefty ad hominem arguemtns?

    • ropata 13.1
      12 November 2011 at 11:49 am

      Banks is a wanker and race-based politics is despicable.
      Unemployment isn’t a race problem its an ECONOMIC problem.

      Decades of right wing government has created a massive underclass, and what does the right wing do?
      Blame the victims.

      Fuck that

    • Sookie 13.2
      12 November 2011 at 11:51 am

      Unlike you, concerned troll, I don’t think it’s a sign of a healthy society to let people die in a ditch because they’re not very bright and/or lazy and/or can’t find work matching their skill set because there isn’t any. All the useless layabout porn watching dole ‘bludgers’ I’ve known and observed in my life have been mostly white. Banks the Twat can moan about bludgers sure, that’s what RWNJ’s do, but he shouldn’t say all of those bludgers are brown, because that’s absolute racist crap.

      • rosy 13.2.1
        12 November 2011 at 12:05 pm

        and +1 too. I’ve seen plenty of white layabouts. And in other unequal developed nations they’re not calling the underclass Maori or Pacific. e.g. In the UK they call them Scots and in Northern Ireland they used to call them Catholic. Jeez this is basic stuff! Alienation + unemployment + under-investment in people = underclass.

    • ianmac 13.3
      12 November 2011 at 12:05 pm

      What you mean Mark is that brown-skinned people are more likely to be picked up/prosecuted than pale people.
      More white kids get killed than brown kids.
      Hone made some off the cuff remarks about his preference for who should date his kids and the media and politicians went mad. John Banks makes scurrilous comments racially aimed to condemn and the media smile indulgently.
      Banks could have decried the criminal types from anywhere who prey on good people. (This would include the white-collar crims who trap poor folks with excessive interest rates or shonkey investments.)
      Mark Wilson defends racism and bigotry.

    • KJT 13.4
      12 November 2011 at 12:09 pm

      Greece is a prime example of what happens if the wealthy are undertaxed.

      And the continuation of the Neo-Liberal system,where wages are cut to give more money to the financial system so they can lend it back to us. And charge interest for returning what we have earned.

      Their main problem is that tax dodging by the wealthy is a national sport. Same as here (and the USA, UK) except here the wealthy pay for Governments to make tax dodging legal.

      Greeks, like us, work longer hours for less money than the Germans or the French. Who have money to save, simply because more of their wealth remains in ordinary peoples hands.

      Why are we stupid enough to vote for right wing Governments who are taking us further down the path that is failing everywhere.

      Maori have worst statistics than other races in NZ for the simple and obvious reason that they have been poorer for longer.

      Upholding a welfare system has nothing to do with money in the end. It is a function of resources available within the country. New Zealand has ample resources. If we do not sell them to the banksters.

      • KJT 13.4.1
        12 November 2011 at 12:39 pm

        AND. The worst criminals wear suits and ties.

        Including the ones who are happy to starve kids and old people so they can pay 2% less tax.

        • uke 13.4.1.1
          12 November 2011 at 12:47 pm

          Speaking of white-collar crims, is it not a bit weird that Banks (and Brash) didn’t get charged as directors of the fraudulent Huljich Wealth Management scheme?

          • Mac1 13.4.1.1.1
            12 November 2011 at 12:51 pm

            Being both recent ex-nats, they know where the bodies are buried, and which closet to look into.

            • KJT 13.4.1.1.1.1
              12 November 2011 at 1:18 pm

              Steal $100 you go to jail. Steal billions you get a knighthood.

              • Colonial Viper …
                13 November 2011 at 10:03 pm

                Or in the case of the London riots. Steal a 5 quid bottle of booze from a store, and get a criminal conviction. Steal £500M from pension funds and get that knighthood plus a bankers bonus plus an invitation to tea at Number 10.

    • millsy 13.5
      12 November 2011 at 3:48 pm

      Show me a country without a welfare system, and I will show you a country with teeming homelessness and acres of slums.

    • Puddleglum 13.6
      12 November 2011 at 8:53 pm

      “And it is also a fact that Pacific people have the same rates of child abuse that Asians and Pakeha do despite their poverty yet Maori have much higher rates than those other groups so there is clearly something going on with Maori that cannot be explained by poverty.”

      Assuming that is indeed a fact (some stats would be useful), my guess would be that Pasifika people have maintained some social cohesion after migrating (e.g., centrality of the church in some Pasifika communities; maintenance of some traditional ways of living – e.g., extended family, etc.). In-tact social systems have a degree of self-regulation that controls individual members and prevents the formation of isolated sub-groups who operate without sanction from the broader cultural group.

      Maori communities, by contrast, have been effectively dismantled as a result of a pretty well-documented history. Urbanisation added to that toxic mix.

      That would be my guess if, as I said, your fact is correct.

      What would be your guess, Mark Wilson?

    • gnomic 13.7
      13 November 2011 at 2:14 am

      ‘And is it possible to debate the contents of this post rather than the usual lefty ad hominem arguemtns?’

      Hmmm. Last I looked the rightists seem pretty free in their abuse of the lefties who are all apparently hopelessly stupid or maliciously duplicitous. And the right are very prone to astroturfing on leftish websites in a fashion obviously intended to disrupt any possibility of fertile discussion.

      It’s difficult to ‘debate’ a mishmash of non sequiturs and tendentious assertions.

      ‘It is also a fact that over the last 60 years a higher and higher proportion of the population is having to be supported by the wealth creaters [sic] in our society yet our social problems continue to get worse.’

      Ah yes, the famous wealth creators. Banksie would be one of these would he? A restaurateur and publican, besides having his nose in the parliamentary trough. He’s made some wealth for himself, but has he significantly enriched New Zealand society? I rather doubt it.

      And what exactly are our ‘social problems’? Some might say that the creation of a poverty-stricken underclass by the application of neolib economic policies is a social problem. Got any remedies you’d care to suggest?

      ‘There is also no doubt that the civilised section of the world is entering a period where the money will not be there to uphold the cradle to the grave welfare system irrespective of who is in power. Check out what is going to happen to Greece if you disagree.’

      What on earth does ‘the civilised section of the world’ mean? Perhaps a reference to the countries once collectively known as the ‘First World’, enriched by their looting of the rest of the world, and formerly engaging in social contracts which largely prevented extremes of poverty thereby fending off insurrection and blood in the streets. Not to mention providing a docile admass so the capitalists could flog off their goods in a consumerist society.

      ‘ what is going to happen to Greece’
      It has already happened in large part. Of course our media don’t provide the details. Don’t want to make the sheeple restive or apprehensive. A caddie’s brainfart is much more important.

      ‘VAT rates are to rise: the 19% rate will increase to 23%, 11% becomes 13%, and 5.5% will increase to 6.5%.

      Nominal public sector wages will be cut by 20%.
      Wages of employees of state-owned enterprises will be cut by 30% and there will be a cap on wages and bonuses.
      The number of civil servants to be suspended on partial pay will rise to 30,000 by the end of this year, from 20,000 planned initially. They will receive 60% of pay for one year, having been promised a job for life.
      All temporary contracts for public sector workers will be terminated.

      The government aims to raise 50bn euros from privatisations by 2015, including:
      Selling stakes this year in the betting monopoly OPAP, the lender Hellenic Postbank, port operators Piraeus Port and Thessaloniki Port as well as Thessaloniki Water.
      It has agreed to sell 10% of Hellenic Telecom to Deutsche Telekom for about 400m euros.
      Next year, the government plans to sell stakes in Athens Water, refiner Hellenic Petroleum, electricity utility PPC, lender ATEbank as well as ports, airports, motorway concessions, state land and mining rights.
      It plans further sales to raise 7bn euros in 2013, 13bn euros in 2014 and 15bn euros in 2015.’

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13940431

      You are almost certainly correct in thinking that social welfare as we knew is going to vanish. However it is dubious that social conditions will be improved thereby, rather the reverse.

      ‘Clearly what has been done to solve our social problems doesn’t work.’

      Gosh, a statement that is almost indisputable. However I doubt that we agree on the nature of NZ’s ‘social problems’ or what should be done about them.

      ‘It is intersting that Matt MCCarten that well known Ayn Rand supporter said on Radio live last week that giving people money without requiring work is a failure.’

      Ayn Rand was a monstrous bore and intellectual nonentity. Anybody who takes her seriously is a half-wit.

      Does Matt McCarten really support workfare? That seems surprising given his advocacy for unionism.

      I’m afraid it’s a ‘must try harder’ so far. Perhaps that would be futile given the seeming paucity of the mental resources available.

  14. newsense 14
    12 November 2011 at 11:28 am

    yes-

    you infuriating Tories as Michael Cullen said we are the LABOUR movement- we are about getting people into WORK not about paying them to do nothing.

    if there is a downturn a safety net is a social good, and everything should be done to get people into work. If the jobs aren’t there then they aren’t there!

    A welfare system is cheap as chips with low unemployment= more workers and more taxpayers.

    It is cynical when Tories of the past (and probably the present) have deliberately mantained unemployment to keep wages low as there is competition for jobs and then attacked those who can’t get work.

    ugly.

  15. Blue 15
    12 November 2011 at 11:33 am

    The worst side-effect of Key’s cuppa with Banks is that it’s made all the Act supporters come out publicly with their views. They think it’s acceptable now.

  16. Mark Wilson 16
    12 November 2011 at 11:37 am

    So no actual coherent reply about the fact that Maori harm their children far more than any other section of society including those who are as “disadvantaged” as they are or that 60 years of social welfare have done nothing but harmed the recipients?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 16.1
      12 November 2011 at 11:47 am

      I have a coherent remark, although it isn’t really a reply. Citation please: I’d like you, Mark Wilson, to produce some facts and figures to support your assertions, and be prepared to defend your sources.

      Otherwise people might think you’ve just found a convenient justification for prejudice.

    • Tiger Mountain 16.2
      12 November 2011 at 11:56 am

      @ mark wilson: Ignoramus! it is about power relationships and a post colonial environment that is still being sorted out. For the willfully stupid lets just say this…until major statistics for all New Zealanders (99%ers at least) are on par, and until racist moaners start paying attention we will never be ‘one people’.

    • ianmac 16.3
      12 November 2011 at 12:08 pm

      More white kids get murdered by their families than brown kids but the media highlights the brown ones, just for you Mark.

    • felix 16.4
      12 November 2011 at 9:34 pm

      There are quite a few coherent replies actually Mark, but they don’t fit your predetermined narrative so you ignored them. Just saying.

  17. John 17
    12 November 2011 at 11:39 am

    “Now it can be fairly argued that that is a function of poverty not race but that doesn’t make Bank’s statement unture.”

    Look I don’t think you know the city he is referring to well; but he is playing a race card there.It plays well in the central city,but lets call it what it is. It’s a racist idea that young men of a certain colour in the city are living the high life and ruining your life and your middleclass dream, when in reality whatever the auckland innercity suburbs are feeling now , times it by ten for the poor in the west and south.

  18. Mark Wilson 18
    12 November 2011 at 11:43 am

    Sorry but I live in South Auckland – Manukau. Every day I see the indolent and the violence and how welfare without work is a failure.As does Matt McCarten.
    Nowhere does Banks or anyone else say that “young men of a certain colour in the city are living the high life and ruining your life and your middleclass dream”.
    And how can the truth be raciest?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1
      12 November 2011 at 11:51 am

      Is that all you’ve got? The things you “see”? Do a Google scholar search for “eyewitness reliability” sometime, go on, I dare you.

    • ropata 18.2
      12 November 2011 at 12:04 pm

      I grew up in Papakura, worked in Mangere, played rugby and socialised all round Counties & Manukau, never felt worried.

      Lived in Christchurch in the last few years, I have faced white boys with knives and have been challenged several times for no apparent reason, when walking around at night by myself.

      And despite my moniker “ropata” I am ethnically European (but proudly with some Maori heritage).

    • AndrewK 18.3
      12 November 2011 at 12:07 pm

      “Nowhere does Banks or anyone else say that “young men of a certain colour in the city are living the high life and ruining your life and your middleclass dream”.

      Yes he does, and he does so exlpicitly. “… if we continue the bankrupt response of just paying young Polynesian/young Maori men in South Auckland the dole. to sit in front of TV, smoke marijuana and watch pornography and plan more drug offending and more burglaries. Then we’re going to have them coming through our window, regardless if we live in Epsom or anywhere else in the greater Auckland. We have to deal with the root cause of law and order…”

      There is no context that can make such an explicit expression of racism acceptable, this is ‘dog whistling’ at its worst.

    • mike 18.4
      12 November 2011 at 3:10 pm

      It’s really not complicated.

      “We should stop paying dole-bludgers,” – not racist.

      “We should stop paying brown-skinned dole-bludgers,” – racist.

      People who can’t see that – also racist.

      John Banks is a narcissistic bigot with a bullying demeanour who will probably win his seat because John Key had a cup of tea with him. The media somehow turned up for this cup of tea, and dutifully reported what they were told to report, that National voters in Epsom should vote for Banks.

      Key is saying, “I don’t care Epsom, if you don’t actually want this nasty man as your MP, you will vote how I tell you to vote for the good of your party.” That Key doesn’t draw the line at dealing with this race-card pulling career politician shows you that he has no integrity. He will say and do anything to win because that’s all he cares about.

      • marxbrother 18.4.1
        12 November 2011 at 4:47 pm

        Agreed Mike. Says a lot about the sort of power hungry chancer Key actually is. Also says a lot about the average Epsom voter if they obey orders and elect this turd of a man.

    • Terry 18.5
      12 November 2011 at 4:23 pm

      I doubt that Wilson deserves the dignity of a reply. He does show some signs of thinking (unusual for New Zwalanders), but there is “straight” and “crooked” thinking. Sadly Mark must be numbered with the latter.

    • Zaphod Beeblebrox 18.6
      12 November 2011 at 5:01 pm

      What violence do you see everyday? or do you believe in a stereotype just ;like Banks.

    • Carol 18.7
      12 November 2011 at 5:46 pm

      MW: And how can the truth be raciest?

      Well, assuming you meant racist (some truths are racier than others)

      Focusing on selective parts of the truth can be very racist, and misleading. Others have pointed out other truths that you haven’t selected.

    • ron 18.8
      13 November 2011 at 8:53 am

      OK – while we’re analysing social trends through our own anecdotal observations. Sorry – but .I have lived in new Zealand for 53 years and I’ve seen how allowing young men to work for finance companies or as money traders is a failure- criminality, sucking off the suffering of ordinary people, forcing thousands into unemployment, greed, psychopathic behaviour. It’s time it stopped.

  19. AndrewK 19
    12 November 2011 at 11:47 am

    As ugly as it sounds, the prospect that Banks will ‘defend’ the good white wealthy folk of Epsom from sex crazed unemployed polynesian drug addicts probably resonates with a significant portion of voters in that electorate. There does seem to be a a nasty racist streak running through a large chunk of the New Zealand population, one that Brash flirted with in his Hollowman ‘Iwi/Kiwi’ Orewa speech , the same one that Banks and Peters exploited with their antiAsian rants during the 90s (somewhere ’round that time anyway.)

    Publicising this racist crap on the front page of the national news papers would probably increase Act’s party vote.

    I agree with a number of comments here, that anyone in Epsom who isn’t voting Act (regardless of whether you are Labour, Green or Mana [and I am a financial member of the Mana party and utterly despise National]) must vote for the National Party candidate. Snuffing out the Act party should be the priority for the Epsom left. In Epsom only your party vote counts, the only time your candidate vote counts is if you are voting for the National or Act candidate.

  20. John 20
    12 November 2011 at 11:53 am

    “Nowhere does Banks or anyone else say that “young men of a certain colour in the city are living the high life and ruining your life and your middleclass dream.”

    That’s exactly what he’s saying. Look at the clip again. You are just in love with a notion that the poor are the problem when they are just a long time problem that no one wants to help.

    We pay young polynesian men to smoke dope, watch porn and commit crimes for drugs. That’s what he said. Like welfare is a gift and not a basic plank of an efficient, thoughtful city. We need jobs , good jobs, jobs that can last 10 to 20 years, real jobs , not this wankfest neandertal business culture we have in Auckland.

    Anyway stop crosby-texting (diverting) me, John Banks needs to go for racism, that’s just a no-no in modern politics and quite rightly.

    • KJT 20.1
      12 November 2011 at 12:13 pm

      If they are so worried about it why dio they keep voting for right wing Governments who always remove jobs and increase the number on benefits.

  21. The Voice of Reason 21
    12 November 2011 at 12:02 pm

    Just a thought on Banks’s choice of words. Why ‘porn’? I would have thought ‘playing Playstation’ would have been a more suitable cliche, but for some reason he’s gone with masturbation.

    Is this some sort of Freudian slip? John Wanks?

    • Tiger Mountain 21.1
      12 November 2011 at 12:18 pm

      It did seem a very odd choice from the very odd Banksie. Wonder if he has got his stolen Harley back yet? Anyway he should not be let off the hook on this one, he is a nasty piece of work.

  22. John 22
    12 November 2011 at 12:12 pm

    Also vast amounts of drugs get consumed by innercity citizens, they have the cash , it’s just how the market works. I bet they watch a lot of porn.

    Melissa Lee got told to go away after her outbursts, the media did their job. Banks must resign, it’s how politics works, no open bigotry, it shits in the public discourse.

  23. ianmac 23
    12 November 2011 at 12:14 pm

    How recent was Bank’s outburst?

  25. John 25
    12 November 2011 at 12:24 pm

    Maori and Polynesian people will be coming through your window if John Banks doesn’t get in.

    That’s what he is saying politically , that’s horrificly bad, in the us, u.k and australia he’d be gone by lunchtime.

    • anne 25.1
      12 November 2011 at 1:31 pm

      John Banks is a bigoted creep, his rhetoric mirrors national’s,his self obsessed belief in himself
      mirrors key’s,he should be questioned why he nearly bankrupted ACC when he was mayor,that might shut him up,i tried to make that point on the herald and it didn’t get printed.

  26. Jenny 26
    12 November 2011 at 1:02 pm

    Hate to invoke Godwin’s law so early in the piece, but just transpose the word Jews for Maori and Islanders and you’re there.

    In their quest for power there is something about the extreme right that sees them repeating the same patterns of behaviour over and over again.

  27. marty mars 27
    12 November 2011 at 1:27 pm

    A sign of desperation from banks to play the racist card but he must be emboldened by his cup of tea with key.

    I sense more than a bit of the same desperation from the right – it’s somehow not going according to plan although it seems to be okay – the undercurrent will get them.

    So many variables and personalities – and very interesting indeed.

  28. Uturn 28
    12 November 2011 at 1:48 pm

    I was outraged for about two minutes before I realised that John Banks represents and reflects his supporters. The tip of their icebergs of stupidity only start with racism and would exist even if J.Banks didn’t articulate it on TV.

    Right now, one of them is saying to another…”Those Lefties… the tip of their icebergs of stupidity only start with envy…”.

    While MMP exists we get to keep a close eye on the psychotic elements of our society. If it were FPP, this stuff would rarely be seen like it is and would be twice as dangerous. Despite the damage it can do unchecked, seeing it like this is healthy. Like a cancer it should be exposed and treated carefully, not hated ignored and dismissed with disdain. People have always directed hate back against it, but that has never stopped it.

    As one commenter has highlighted, we all sow the seeds of exclusion (of all types) by our belief in statistics – that nice word for stereotype. Next we “target funds” to stereotypes. It makes sense we tell ourselves. Good economic sense. Life is all about… econom … oh wait a minute…

    and we wonder why our ideological enemies are justified in doing the same. Morally right has nothing at all to do with economically prudent. There is no natural law that says that one will take on the characteristics of the other; that the actuality will match the intention. We invent links so we can sell our pure ideals to those who want pure, but only want to pay for comfortable. So we tell them, hey, pure is comfortable…and cheap! Knowing full well we’re lying.

    If you want to start to dismantle racism in politics, you’ll either have to redefine statistics value and use or give it up entirely.

  29. jaymam 29
    12 November 2011 at 1:58 pm

    An urgent and relevant question: what exactly are the rules for promoter statements?
    Does a picture only of a candidate (with no text or ticks) need a promoter statement?
    Is it OK to make an exact copy of a billboard that contains a promoter statement and put that up wihout the promoter’s permission?

    • Colonial Viper 29.1
      13 November 2011 at 10:24 pm

      If something can be construed as electioneering materials then yes it needs a promoters statement. Usually best to err on the side of caution.

      As for making up an exact copy of a billboard – tricky. The answer I would say is yes its fine to go ahead because the original authoriser is usually never aware of each instance a print run or copy of an electioneering item is run or putt up anyways. Best to get the OK from the local candidate probably so they are aware of what you plan to do.

      However its worth remembering that its the taking down of billboards which has to be adhered to as well. Midnight on the Friday, I believe.

      • jaymam 29.1.1
        14 November 2011 at 9:29 am

        I’m sure that the local candidate’s party doesn’t want people to see his billboard, since his early billboards have been removed. I was thinking that someone should make 50 copies of it.
        By “exact copy” I assume that a smaller or larger copy of it is acceptable. Much much larger 🙂

  30. millsy 30
    12 November 2011 at 3:45 pm

    The return of John Archibald Banks to the New Zealand Parliament would be a very bad thing for the country. Hi toxic blend of social conservatism and support for free market economics, and his general authoritarian demeanour remind me of the Tea Party supporting redneck governors in the USA.

  31. ianmac 31
    12 November 2011 at 5:49 pm

    I see that TV1 has mentioned The Standard on its online Election Update and put in a link to the video clip from Banks as above.

    • ChrisH 31.1
      12 November 2011 at 6:22 pm

      Yet TV3 didn’t run it on the news at 6, only a puff piece on Epsom instead. The $47 million, again, I suppose. But seriously, this kind of thing is probably how Slobodan Milosevic probably started out, saying outrageous things about Bosnians and Croatians and thus pandering to his slivovitz-sodden mates’ worst tendencies.

    • Tazirev 31.2
      12 November 2011 at 10:00 pm

      Link please, Can’t seem to find it on Herald site

  32. John 32
    12 November 2011 at 6:35 pm

    Melissa Lee was news, why does Banks get a pass from the media? C’mon journos,do your job, help stamp out racism. Don’t report racist dogma neutrally, racism is just fucked, that’s the truth in civilisation 2011, if he said “Jews” instead of Maori and Polynesian ,it would be front page everywhere with disgusted headlines.

  33. Dylan Reeve 33
    12 November 2011 at 10:09 pm

    The comments were made in an interview in early June, which is why they weren’t really picked up at the time – it was well before anyone was paying much attention to Banks. If he’d said them last week they’d be headline news.

    That video has been online since then too, but only recently has it picked up pace. Hopefully it makes it into the mainstream media sometime soon.

  34. *_* 34
    12 November 2011 at 10:18 pm

    I wonder what Hone would make of all this?

  35. *_* 35
    12 November 2011 at 11:19 pm

    Actually this post reminds me of a certain quote from Shakespeare – “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”.

    So who Labour’s potential coalition partners – NZ First and Mana.

    Hard to take all this talk of racism seriously to be honest with fellow travellers like those.

    • Zaphod Beeblebrox 35.1
      12 November 2011 at 11:28 pm

      So the Poodle Party is let off the hook from its disgraceful statements because you think somebody else is just as bad. Nice bit of rationalisation there.

  36. hoom 36
    12 November 2011 at 11:36 pm

    Madeline Sami just magnificently verbally bitchslapped him on the AFTA awards on TV3 for this 😆

    And to think you know months ago I was just hanging out with my other brown friends smoking weed and plotting criminal activities, and now look what happens when you channel all that creativity into something like the arts.
    John eh? Banksie! He’s a crack up, he should win an award for being funny.

  37. *_* 37
    12 November 2011 at 11:37 pm

    It’s not a justification by any means, simply an observation.

    I don’t easily fall into the trap of believing that those who jump up and down about an issue happen to equally care about.

    A lust for power makes strange bedfellows and given Labour’s coalition options I suppose they’ll take whatever they can get although I suspect there won’t be much inconvenient introspection on this site.

    • McFlock 37.1
      12 November 2011 at 11:52 pm

      “lust for power” FFS.

      So a video of banksie regurgitating some pretty extreme stereotypes is an indictment of Labour? And I think Hone’s comments (and what nactoids alleged he said – not always the same thing btw) were done to death here at the time, so you don’t have a leg to stand on there.

      Get over yourself.

  38. Penny Bright 38
    13 November 2011 at 12:22 am

    How about ACT’s ‘zero tolerance for crime’ equally applying to ‘white collar’ crime?

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Usually-anti-Nats-back-Goldsmith-over-Banks/tabid/370/articleID/232547/Default.aspx

    Goodness me – how rude!

    When I approached John Banks at the Parnell Farmer’s Market Epsom candidates ‘soapbox’ meeting today, “beat it!” – he said.

    Gosh – I haven’t held a grudge over all the times that John Banks, as ex-Mayor of Auckland City Council, has had me (unlawfully) arrested or dragged out of the Town Hall, after (denying me ‘speaking rights’.

    Should be interesting on Monday 14th November 2011, when I make a formal request to the Serious Fraud Office to charge John Banks and Don Brash for the same offences, as former Directors of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Ltd, as was fellow former Director Peter Huljich.

    Shouldn’t be too complicated.

    It seems that the former Securities Commission has already done all the required homework, as explained in the following email from the CEO of the Finance Markets Authority (FMA), Sean Hughes, dated 28 September 2011:

    “Dear Ms Bright,

    I refer to your inquiry yesterday regarding the position of Mr John Banks and Mr Donald Brash as former directors of Huljich Wealth Management.

    I understand that when this matter was initially brought to the Securities Commission’s attention, the Commission sought legal advice on whether an offence had been committed, by whom, and what charges if any should be laid.

    On 10 November 2010, the following charges were laid against Huljich Wealth Management and its director Mr Peter Huljich:

    ·2 charges under s 58, Securities Act 1978, for the distribution of a misleading prospectuses dated 22 August 2008 and 18 September 2009;

    ·6 charges under s 59, Securities Act 1978, for the distribution of misleading investment statements.

    The charges relate principally to unit price performance graphs contained in the Huljich KiwiSaver Scheme prospectuses and investment statements that portrayed the Scheme as having significantly outperformed other KiwiSaver Schemes.

    However, the Commission alleged that prospectuses and investment statements failed to disclose that the performance of the Scheme had been materially inflated by a series of related party payments, made at the direction of Mr Peter Huljich.

    I further understand there was insufficient evidence available to the Commission to prove to the requisite criminal standard that either Mr Banks or Dr Brash was involved in these related party payments.

    I am satisfied that the position of both Mr Banks and Dr Brash was carefully considered by the Securities Commission and that competent advice was received in relation to the entities against whom charges ought to be brought.

    Thank you for your interest in this matter.

    Yours faithfully

    Sean Hughes”

    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    They just didn’t apply their ‘homework’ to ALL the former Directors of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Ltd – just Peter Huljich.

    All I want to see is the application of ‘ONE LAW FOR ALL’ equally applied to fellow former Directors of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Ltd – John Banks and Don Brash.

    s. 58 (3) of the Securities Act 1978, is, in my considered opinion, very clear regarding the criminal liability for ‘misstatement’ in ‘advertisement or registered prospectus’, in that EVERY person who signed the prospectus, commits an offence:

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1978/0103/latest/DLM29406.html?search=ts_act_Securities+Act+1978_resel&p=1#DLM29406

    58 Criminal liability for misstatement in advertisement or registered prospectus

    (3) Subject to subsection (4) of this section, where a registered prospectus that includes an untrue statement is distributed, every person who signed the prospectus, or on whose behalf the registered prospectus was signed for the purposes of section 41(1)(b) of this Act, commits an offence.

    (4) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (3) of this section if the person proves either that the statement was immaterial or that he or she had reasonable grounds to believe, and did, up to the time of the distribution of the prospectus, believe that the statement was true.

    (5) Every person who commits an offence against this section is liable—

    (a) on conviction on indictment to—

    (i) imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years; or

    (ii) a fine not exceeding $300,000 and, if the offence is a continuing one, to a further fine not exceeding $10,000 for every day or part of a day during which the offence is continued; or

    (b) on summary conviction to—

    (i) imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months; or

    (ii) a fine not exceeding $300,000 and, if the offence is a continuing one, to a further fine not exceeding $10,000 for every day or part of a day during which the offence is continued.

    ____________________________________________________________________________

    Why were Donald Thomas Brash and John Archibald Banks, as fellow Directors of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Limited, who signed the same Huljich Kiwisaver Scheme ‘Registered Prospectus’, dated 18 September 2009 as Peter Karl Christopher Huljich, not equally charged, particularly given that it was in their supposedly astute business acumen, that the investing public were led to believe that they could have confidence?

    Were Donald Thomas Brash, former Leader of the National Party and John Archibald Banks, former National Government Minister (of Police and Local Government), effectively protected from prosecution because of their political connections at the highest levels?

    Because, quite frankly, in my considered opinion, that’s how it appears.

    If the CEO of the Finance Markets Authority, Sean Hughes, is not going to do his job and equally apply the same law to ALL former Directors of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Ltd – then, in my considered opinion – he should be sacked because he is not ‘fit for duty’.

    Is it a form of corrupt practice that the CEO of the Finance Markets Authority, Sean Hughes, is not going to do his job and equally apply the same law to ALL former Directors of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Ltd?

    Or are the former Leader of the National Party, Don Brash and former National Government Minister of Police and Local Government effectively ‘above the law’ – because of their political connections at the highest levels?

    High time for a NZ ‘Independent Commission Against Corruption’?

    Penny Bright
    Independent Candidate for Epsom.
    Campaigning against ‘white collar’ crime, corruption (and its root cause – privatisation), and ‘corporate welfare’.

    • fender 38.1
      13 November 2011 at 1:09 am

      It would be ludacrus to suggest only one of those three planned and commited these offences IMO.
      Keep up your great work Penny, shame the authorities dont share your desire to see the homework scrutinised.

      Banks is one person I wish would “beat it” somewhere else. Creeps like him are holding our country back with their racist bigotry.
      I’m sure after his Tea Party conference yesterday he spent time “beating it” whilst looking at Keys’ photograph.

  39. *_* 39
    13 November 2011 at 12:25 am

    As much as I dislike Hone I believe he is an man of integrity and principle – he says what he believes in and is not afraid to do so.

    From the comments here it that the left’s response to racism is silence if it is made by one of their political allies. Hence I find it amusing in the extreme to hear the anti-racist vitriol here.

    Actually when I think about it ‘lust for power’ is the correct term for the moral blindness of the left when it comes to cutting deals with parties like NZ First. How else can it be explained? I’d really like someone here to rationalise that.

    • felix 39.1
      13 November 2011 at 1:06 am

      “From the comments here it that the left’s response to racism is silence if it is made by one of their political allies. Hence I find it amusing in the extreme to hear the anti-racist vitriol here.”

      As has already been pointed out to you above, Hone’s controversial remarks were thrashed out passionately from several sides by authors and commenters alike on this site.

      The argument you’re trying to advance, spurious as is was to begin with, simply doesn’t apply.

  40. *_* 40
    13 November 2011 at 1:25 am

    “The argument you’re trying to advance, spurious as is was to begin with, simply doesn’t apply.”

    Actually, I was more interested in Labour’s relationship to NZ First. As supporters of the Labour Party do you find it akward trying to explain to recent immigrants and potential supporters of Labour how you could give a well know racebaiter and xenophobe a ministerial post and a position of power during Labour’s last term and that you would do it again if necessary to gain power?

    • Paul B 40.1
      13 November 2011 at 1:42 am

      No more awkward than Nats might have to have to feel explaining why they’ve gone with Winston in the past. To some extent you do have to play the hand you’re dealt on election night, but at least in this case Goff, unlike Key, is not having friendly cups of tea with any racists.

    • felix 40.2
      13 November 2011 at 3:39 am

      “Actually, I was more interested in Labour’s relationship to NZ First”

      Oh bullshit, do you think I don’t have a scroll button? You’ve been wanking on about Hone all day. And your argument (that the left is silent on racism from the left) is absolute bullshit as evidenced by the many many threads on this site debating Hone and his statements.

      “As supporters of the Labour Party do you find it akward trying to explain to recent immigrants and potential supporters of Labour how you could give a well know racebaiter and xenophobe a ministerial post and a position of power during Labour’s last term and that you would do it again if necessary to gain power?”

      Don’t know mate, I’m not a supporter of the Labour party. Perhaps I should ask you the same question: How do you feel about your preferred party cuddling up to such a notorious racist bigot?

      Are you familiar with his “barbed wire” comments? The guy has been saying the most horrible racist, homophobic and hateful things for decades. You must be so proud.

      ps learn to use the reply button or it looks like you’re trying to wallpaper the thread.

      • *_* 40.2.1
        13 November 2011 at 3:13 pm

        It’s not about what the voters want – I’m completely relaxed about that – but its about supporters of the left launching vitrolic attacks ostensibly premised on anti-racist yet they are quite happy for their political parties to do backroom deals with racists like Peters and Harawira.

        The lack of moral consistency makes you all hopelessly compromised.

        • McFlock 40.2.1.1
          13 November 2011 at 9:16 pm

          Well at least you learned how to use the reply button.
            
          And, as I said, at the time of the beat-up around Hone’s statements toryboys like you ran rabid here, basically saying the same crap you are now.
            
          The fact is that the Hone thing was done to death then, and you bringing it up when Banks said something an order of magnitude worse (not least of which because it illustrated what his actions might be as an MP, rather than his feelings as a father) is simply a distraction from a wannabe MP attributing crime to skin colour.

    • lprent 40.3
      13 November 2011 at 9:49 am

      NZFirst are a party sometimes elected into parliament by the voters of NZ, and who have been in coalitions with National, Labour, and United Future. I have no more difficulty explaining Winston Peters views than I do explaining the racial bigotry of Don Brash when he was the leader of National or his minon in Act John Banks expressing his views. All are trying for the votes in a democracy.

      Voters put politicians in place, and they do it with the clear knowledge of what the positions of politicians are – especially these three racially divisive bigots. It is up to the parties in parliament to work with whoever the voters throw at them with their disclosed views on a range of topics where they can reach agreement on common ground.

      Of course some of the voters are morons about the morons that they elect. Like you, they do not think deeply about issues and make what I consider are ridiculous stupid mistakes because they do not think through the consequences of what they support or think. But the essence of a representative democracy is to represent voters and the choices they make.

      I am quite sure that you will vote a dickhead into parliament to represent you as your contribution to the commonweal of society. Other parties and politicians will have to deal with the result of your stupidity as well by finding the common areas to work on, while resisting those areas that they disagree with.

    • millsy 40.4
      13 November 2011 at 3:21 pm

      Yeah, god forbid if people should question a policy of importing workers from overseas instead of training our own young people, or question policies of flogging our country off to overseas buyers, or dragging living standards to third world level.

  41. Colonial Viper 41
    13 November 2011 at 8:15 am

    Greens and Labour activists – load this video file up on to your laptop. Door knock all your confirmed supporters. Tell them that they must vote electorate vote Goldsmith to keep Banks out. To show them why thats so important, play them this video.

    • mike 41.1
      13 November 2011 at 3:05 pm

      Please share it on facebook and encourage others to share onwards. CV is right this is important, it’s important to prevent racist bigots like this from gaining power. Take a look at 20th century history to see how that goes.

      And that John Key is happy to have a ‘cup of tea’ with people like this tells you everything you need to know about John Key.

  42. Sam D 42
    13 November 2011 at 9:37 am

    Hey guys, least he’s caring about people now.

    See..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1eQIUoi5Ug

    • ianmac 42.1
      13 November 2011 at 4:55 pm

      Well Sam. He will be a good cosy for Paula since neither really care about the social problems of NZers.

  43. marlene 43
    14 November 2011 at 8:12 pm

    muddy banks, slippery banks, john banks. what a racial basher. people like him can talk how they talk because their nose has been adjusted upwards. vote anyone else except banks