Bill, tempted to drop the Acting?

60 comments on “Bill, tempted to drop the Acting? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Mark M 1

   21 November 2008 at 6:51 am

   How about some serious comment or analysis on something.
   Silly commentary like this dosent do this site justice
2. infused 2

   21 November 2008 at 7:24 am

   SP, You’re an idiot.
3. higherstandard 3

   21 November 2008 at 7:38 am

   Just silly SP, come on you’re better than that.
4. chfr 4

   21 November 2008 at 7:39 am

   That is just pathetic.
5. Monty 5

   21 November 2008 at 7:46 am

   Oh you are a nasty little socialist aren’t you. Keep it up please and you will only demonstrate why the left should never be given the reigns of power again.
6. Mr Shankly 6

   21 November 2008 at 7:55 am

   This is a very average post
7. SeaJay 7

   21 November 2008 at 8:13 am

   Mmm, lovely thought, and better sooner than later yeah? As long as the John has his heady Tourism portfolio to parade around just like a real parliamentarian, anyway, that nice smiling man is surely Mr Englishs puppet,
8. RedLogix 8

   21 November 2008 at 8:30 am

   SP,

   Worth it just for that delicious morsel of totally unselfconcious irony from Monty.
9. Kerry 9

   21 November 2008 at 8:35 am

   Lets do a sweepstake….i’d say before the end of next year BIl with be it!!
10. lprent 10

    21 November 2008 at 8:41 am

    Red: I seem to remember a little campaign from the right bloggers to get Goff to roll Helen earlier this year. I’m sure that Monty participated. But it is an interesting question – Bill is clearly ready for running the government. In fact he probably is
11. higherstandard 11

    21 November 2008 at 8:45 am

    I’ll take that bet Kerry.

    What would you like to wager ?
12. Pascal's bookie 12

    21 November 2008 at 8:46 am

    Interesting. A little joke and all the righties start acting all defensive. Way to show confidence in Key’s support guys.
13. Monty 13

    21 November 2008 at 8:48 am

    Redlogix – there is no irony – Just that you socilaists are too blind to see that your own nastiness (including Cullen and Clark) were a major part of the downfall of Labour. You will realise that the country has had an absolute gutsful of you obsession with John John, your totally negative attitude, your arrogance and your lust for power. No one who voted for the National Party, Act or the Maori party will be regretting their decision. By contrast I am sure there are no doubt many people who wondered why they hell they thought a vote for the nasty vile Labour Party would have been worth their while.

    [surely it’s too early to be this angry, Monty. Why don’t you go back to Kiwiblog? To paraphrase Muldoon, that would improve the quality of conversation on both blogs. SP]
14. TomS 14

    21 November 2008 at 8:49 am

    The National Party are kinda like the bitter guy the morning after he finally got laid – so relaxed and smiley, you can’t help but want to pinch their little cheeks.
15. Steve Pierson 15

    21 November 2008 at 8:52 am

    sorry, Mark M, this blog doesn’t do serious commentary or analysis.. oh, wait, I’ve scrolled down the front page and it turns out that it’s mostly serious commentary and analysis.
16. Janet 16

    21 November 2008 at 9:02 am

    I quite like Bill. He’s got a good brain and he thinks. I’ve had some interesting conversations with him over the years. But then he will say something quite different in public. I’m not sure how much the public Bill is just a play acting one, and whether he wouldn’t be happier being an academic.

    By the way anyone know what is happening with the specials? I see Johnathan Young of the religious right has unofficially just held on in New Plymouth – possibly because of a large non vote. But this has long been a marginal seat. Private trucking company lobbyist Friedlander held it for National for years.
17. ak 17

    21 November 2008 at 9:05 am

    Just curious here, but has this Monty cretin ever once made any remotely cogent contribution other than the sort of grotesque, hate-drenched manifestation of his own insecurities we see above? If not, might I humbly suggest to our hosts that we’ve seen enough case-studies of this blogging equivalent of a delinquent imbecile smearing his own excrement on these walls and ask him to either desist or depart permanently?
18. Steve Pierson 18

    21 November 2008 at 9:05 am

    Janet. The Electoral Office’s target is to announce the final count, including specials, at 2pm tomorrow.
19. Peter Johns - bigoted troll in jerkoff mode 19

    21 November 2008 at 9:07 am

    I will start a book, when will Goff be rolled? I reckon September 2010, will give the new leader a year to try and take on Key. Goff is a lightweight and will be quite weak as a leader, although I do admit he did a good job in some of the protfolios he had.

    WRT Key vs English:
    – Key has never known demotion before and BE will not roll Key in a hundred years.
    – Key beat Helen Clark during the campaign in the debates so handling BE is chicken feed compared to that. (It was the first debate that mattered in this instcnce).
    – BE is more suited to deputy than leader as he is quite skilled as an attack dog, similar to Cullen’s role for Labour.
20. Felix 20

    21 November 2008 at 9:11 am

    ak,

    I quite enjoy Monty’s little tanties.

    They remind us what’s behind the smiles.
21. Steve Pierson 21

    21 November 2008 at 9:13 am

    Peter. It’s a joke post, if I really thought English was about to roll Key I would write about it in a serious manner.

    Also, Key was demoted when working for Merrill Lynch – after he stuffed up in the UK he was sent to Aussie.
22. randal 22

    21 November 2008 at 9:17 am

    Felix
    thats what you call a tantamonty
23. Felix 23

    21 November 2008 at 9:24 am

    Heh. Lets not make a Monty out of a mole though.
24. Steve Pierson 24

    21 November 2008 at 9:29 am

    puns = lol
25. Dave 25

    21 November 2008 at 9:30 am

    I think he will roll him, just as soon as all the unpleasant bills have been passed… oops, I made a pun there 🙂
26. randal 26

    21 November 2008 at 9:40 am

    getting serious here folks.. I think there will be a snap election next october
    centrebet that one and put the house on it
27. Vanilla Eis 27

    21 November 2008 at 9:41 am

    Monty:

    No one who voted for the National Party, Act or the Maori party will be regretting their decision.

    Actually, one of my flatmates voted Act, and is dismayed that someone as completely fucktarded as David Garrett got into parliament. He never wanted Act to have more than 3 seats (huge Douglas fan) and thinks that they now have a stupid amount of influence compared to the amount of support they have amongst New Zealands voting population.
28. giggles 28

    21 November 2008 at 9:42 am

    more nonsense from the muppets who are still scratching their heads wondering why they’re in opposition.
    when will the sulking stop?
29. coge 29

    21 November 2008 at 9:44 am

    Let’s have a bipartisan approach here guys.
    Who will get rolled first Goff or Key?

    Here is a hint. The smart money is on Goff.
30. randal 30

    21 November 2008 at 9:49 am

    Who will be PM in 2010?
    smart money is on PHil Goff

    keys will be gone by brunchtime
31. higherstandard 31

    21 November 2008 at 9:58 am

    Coge

    Neither I suspect both, when they go, will go on their own terms after an election loss.
32. coge 32

    21 November 2008 at 10:03 am

    Randal. Leaders who deliver do not get rolled. JK has delivered in spades for National. You opposition supporters have put high expectations on Phil Goff to deliver. At this point you need to consider long term strategy. Maybe the caretaker would prove more useful leading a troop of boy scouts.
33. Tane 33

    21 November 2008 at 10:09 am

    I don’t know if it’s public, but I’m reliably informed that Clark told caucus she wanted them to back whoever they chose as leader for the next three years. If it did’t work out after the 2011 election they’d be free to reconsider. Everyone agreed on that, and then unanimously endorsed Goff to take them through.

    If there’s one thing people in Labour understand it’s the importance of unity. Things would have to go very badly for Goff to lose his position before the election.
34. coge 34

    21 November 2008 at 10:14 am

    Thanks for clearing that up Tane. I suspected the real acid test will be the election. At this stage holding ground would be the big priority for Labour.
    Steady hands on the tiller & all.
35. Seti 35

    21 November 2008 at 10:21 am

    Can’t see either of them being ousted, but if pushed it would be Goff. Cunliffe may have some support but is still a political lightweight. Would be the worst mistake Labour makes in generations to put him in.

    And BE is in no position to challenge Key. The Nat caucus I believe would be particularly impressed with election result, certainly with the way he held his own, if not dominated HC in the debates. And the way he has cobbled together this government with Nats only in cabinet shows considerable nous in negotiation ability.
36. Chris G 36

    21 November 2008 at 10:36 am

    Hahaha! what a laugh to wake me up.

    The first 6 responses Definately made the post worth it.

    Thank You angry righties.

    With regards to the post, I really dont think English would attempt to roll J Friendly… Unless of course he is a fool OR the true right wingers in national decide that the party is getting a little too cushy with ‘All Dem Shocialists’ (As Monty would put it) and that they need to take a step back to the right.
37. Ianmac 37

    21 November 2008 at 10:38 am

    I noticed that on Colin Espiners Blogsite, always the first handful of posters for each blog were acidly anti-Labour. Wonder if the first few above are the same ones?
    Must admit that Bill in recent TV interviews largely answers the questions fluently and succinctly. Whether you agree with his answers or not there is nothing ambivalent about them compared with…..
38. Chris G 38

    21 November 2008 at 10:43 am

    Yeah agreed Ianmac.

    Hes come along well since those 2002 TV ads with him in front of a (Blue/grey background?) with that morbid music playing.

    Those ads were a complete flop.
39. Steve Pierson 39

    21 November 2008 at 10:45 am

    hey! Tane, was that you who changed the title from …Acting to …acting?

    It’s a pun old boy – Acting PM.
40. Tane 40

    21 November 2008 at 10:47 am

    Oh. I thought it was another of your trademark typos. Feel free to change it back.
41. Pascal's bookie 41

    21 November 2008 at 10:47 am

    “Bill… largely answers the questions fluently and succinctly.”

    Even after a few cocktails…
42. Steve Pierson 42

    21 November 2008 at 10:48 am

    Pb – gold. pure gold
43. Phil 43

    21 November 2008 at 11:00 am

    Tane,

    Playing Devil’s advocate for a second, you and I both know that Labour has a handful of ‘factions’ each with their own sub-agenda’s as part of the broader party movement.

    So, is it concievable that the more ‘left’ of those factions acquiesced to Goff as leader, on the assumption that 2011 would lead to defeat as well?

    In that scenario, it would then be easy to roll Goff in ’11 or ’12, and install the person you really want…
44. randal 44

    21 November 2008 at 11:05 am

    chris g.
    you are spot on with your call about angry righties. one would never guess they have won the election.
    they are still frothing at the mouth with bile and venom
    methinks it is their natural state
    anyway
    they say they dont believe in government so they will be gone by next november
    they cant do anything right
45. Tane 45

    21 November 2008 at 11:08 am

    Phil, I can tell you very confidently that there is no plot from any ‘left faction’ to undermine Goff. If such a faction does exist I’ve never seen any evidence of it, and I tend to hear these kinds of things.

    It sounds like a line, but I’d have to say the ideological battles of the 1980s and 90s are no longer an issue. There is a very broad consensus around the policy direction under Helen Clark, and Phil Goff will continue that direction. I don’t see that changing in a hurry.
46. higherstandard 46

    21 November 2008 at 11:09 am

    Randal

    There appears to be only one angry post from Monty – most of the frothing as usual is emanating from your fine self.
47. Tim Ellis 47

    21 November 2008 at 11:18 am

    Bill English knows he will never be Prime Minister, just as Cullen realised he never would be, McKinnon and Birch realised they never would, and Palmer hoped he never would. English had aspirations in the past, but he came to the view about three years ago that there just wasn’t caucus support for him, and never would be, in anything other than a deputy role. The brat pack of the 1990 crowd–Nick Smith and Tony Ryall–are all 100% behind Key. Almost everyone else in caucus owes their place in government now to John Key, and they know it.

    Of course, both Labour and National always have had genuine aspirants. Bolger had Graham and Shipley, but only Shipley was bold enough to make a move. Lange had Moore and Douglas, and Moore eventually got there. Clark had Maharey and Goff, but she enforced discipline so tight, kept Maharey so close and kept Goff so busy overseas, that neither had a chance.

    Leadership changes just don’t happen when a PM is clearly winning elections. As long as Key continues to win decisively, his leadership is safe. If there was going to be a genuine contender in five or six years, if Key’s ability to win a third election looks vulnerable, then of course there would be contenders.

    The only question for now is the what if Key fell under a truck scenario, which is amusing speculation for some but not very likely. I think that person would most likely be Judith Collins. Other contenders have been talked about–Power, since he entered Parliament–but his name hasn’t been mentioned in a long time. Others may emerge depending on how they perform as Ministers–Coleman and Heatley could be sleepers over the next five or six years, as could Joyce.

    Conversely there seems to be a real paucity of potential leaders within Labour. If Goff sticks through to the 2011 election, then he’s obviously toast. Leaders generally don’t survive losing elections. The only apparent aspirant in caucus now is Cunliffe. The obvious sleeper is Andrew Little, of course. But apart from them? Pretty slim pickings over the next three years, I would have thought.
48. Phil 48

    21 November 2008 at 11:30 am

    Tane,

    I’m not suggesting part of the Labour Party would undermine Goff. That wouldn’t look good externally, and harm chances further in the future. I call it the “Hillary Plan”.

    I think the next ‘ideological’ battle for Labour is right on top of us – does it follow a ‘centre’ line to match Nationals new appearance, or go ‘left’ as a point of difference?
    If you ask 100 Labour members which is the better strategy of the next three years, iIm willing to bet you that the result will be as close to 50:50 as makes no difference. Goff has to navigate that – I personally don’t like his chances, just as you don’t like Key’s in similar circumstances.
49. lprent 49

    21 November 2008 at 11:31 am

    Phil: There basically aren’t any major ‘factions’ in Labour, at least not anywhere to the standard of 80’s and 90’s. During the 80’s and 90’s, anyone that was unwilling to work with others offloaded themselves off outside the party. The extremists of the right went to Act, and the extremists of the left went to bits of the Alliance.

    There is a big range of opinion in the party from me to the people that Tane is likely to be talking to. But the one thing that most of the long term activists believe in is that you have to work together to achieve common goals. Faction fighting is inherently useless, and where we see it we’ll actively oppose anyone using the techniques of division. The biggest division these days is generational between the people who grew up politically under FPP, and the more recent generations who actually understand MMP.

    There is far more faction fighting inside of the Nat’s these days. It is quite apparent from the outside to someone who has seen it all before, and the hastily applied wallpaper doesn’t fully conceal the fights inside.
50. Sarah 50

    21 November 2008 at 11:53 am

    Was Key actually demoted when working for Merrill Lynch SP? I’ve never heard the media make one reference to that.
51. gobsmacked 51

    21 November 2008 at 12:20 pm

    National leader heads overseas, loyal deputy Bill English left in charge … what could possibly go wrong?

    http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/425825/60139

    That’s settled then.
52. will 52

    21 November 2008 at 12:36 pm

    bill english of course wants the prime ministers job, he will be quietly collecting the numbers. For example, there’s poor old aggrieved maurice williamson… looking so pissed the other day mumbling his assent to being minister of what was it.. gib board standards – wow what a portfolio for such a genius, thatll keep him busy.

    This coalition is the shakiest yet. With his self-important costcutterfeuhrer role prince rawhide the short will be spending nights sitting in that chair dreaming, he’s already taken to wearing winston’s pinstripe suit; a populist rawhide? ha ha in his dreams and in dreamland epsom…

    Yes bill english of course wants the prime ministers job. After all he’s the only one experienced enough who can keep this dodgey right wing government together. They’ll all be gone by lunchtime 2011…

    ha ha like the nirvana song, it smells like key splitup: “so here we are now, entertain us!!”
53. Tim Ellis 53

    21 November 2008 at 12:39 pm

    Oh yes that’s so right, Will. Bill English is just so set to launch a coup against John Key, along with Williamson, who Bill suspended from caucus for disloyalty to him. Together, the two of them will out-vote the other 57 members of caucus.

    In other news, Will predicts Judith Tizard will launch a coup against Phil Goff this evening, from her position outside of Parliament.
54. Tigger 54

    21 November 2008 at 12:55 pm

    Tim – can you seriously tell me that Collins and Power are leadership material? And Coleman? Power?! That’s National’s ‘depth’? Wow, they really are in trouble. None of these names have the clout to lead a party let alone a government – they’re either too divisive, unlikeable or simply not leaderhip material.

    Love seeing how you righties can’t take a joke. You filled Kiwiblog and Whale Oil with some vile stuff in the past few years and now you can’t take a simple ironic post like this? Wow, it really is going to be a long three years.
55. Tim Ellis 55

    21 November 2008 at 1:14 pm

    Tigger,

    I said that those people are likely stars, who will likely be leadership material in five years’ time. Yes, I do think each of them possesses star quality, and whether they fulfill their potential will be determined by how well they perform as Cabinet ministers. They are each intellectually very smart, have developed a keen political sense, and are highly regarded in their caucus. Brownlee, on the other hand, is one of the smartest political operators in the House and I think will be an outstanding Minister, but will never be Leader.

    As for personal popularity, I’d challenge you to name a single Labour MP who might be leadership potential in the next five years, who has a bigger electorate majority than any of them. Don’t hold back, now.
56. Lew 56

    21 November 2008 at 1:18 pm

    To back up what Lynn says, there’s little infighting within Labour because all those with heterodox agendas have tended to split off to form their own parties, viz. United Future, Alliance, Progressives, etc.

    L
57. Kerry 57

    21 November 2008 at 1:26 pm

    your righties must be here to change the wicked lefty minds so that one day we will wake up and go…öh what were we thinking…lets vote National”. Not going to happen guys!!

    I would rather date Rodney Hideous they EVER go against moral standards and vote Nat!
58. will 58

    21 November 2008 at 1:29 pm

    These act ‘tards tire of their own boring unctuous drivel over on their oily kiwibog and that intelligence-free zone whaleoil.

    Come 2011 this nact government is toast. After the hard times people will get out to vote again because they will have something to actually vote for, or more likely, against. And it will be for their lives, not fuzzy ‘helengrad nanny state’ smear campaigns. So nact slogans that fooled people this time wont work, if anything people will want more nanny state not less.

    It’s of little relevance what happens in labour leadership ranks they have learned gung ho the hard way and they have recent good management experience. But the nacts will shit their nest again just you wait.

    These nacts will panic again. Those 57 will be flakes, all of them. Just like last time.

    so here we are now, ENTERTAIN US! ha ha ha
59. Mr Shankly 59

    21 November 2008 at 4:43 pm

    Kerry we are actually on here to support our and your right to freedom of expression – if this site was just labour supporters all cheering each other on it would be a bit boring.

    Though it is a little frustrating when people from the right or left proclaim with such feeling that they would never vote for this party or that party. Do people actually follow politics or are they more like politicial hooligans cheering on there team no matter what through good or bad. The problem for individuals or groups who behave like this is that they will be taken for granted by one party and ignored by the other – as they are seen as guaranteed votes.
60. RemadeRemodeled 60

    21 November 2008 at 6:40 pm

    The blog entry here raises a good point: who was the last National leader who didn’t have a sickeningly patronising smirk?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS