Key to spit dummy if voters reject him

162 comments on “Key to spit dummy if voters reject him ”

• Comments are now closed

1. mickysavage 1

   3 January 2011 at 9:25 am

   Crosby Textor never sleeps.

   In today’s Herald is an interview with John Key where he says that he is not suited to opposition politics because he is not a negative person. You could have fooled me. I thought the last 12 months of the Labour Government’s term showed some of the most negative politics I have ever witnessed in New Zealand and Key was in there boots and all.

   This is however a very good line to run. It suggests that Key is a reluctant politician and also wants to have a life. This is a continuation of the “ordinary bloke” theme. This a theme that will go down very well in ordinary New Zealand land. It is however a cheap soundbite that totally ignores Key’s inability to deal with the detail, a skill required of a good PM.

   He also makes a comment about a possible replacement for the Governor General and had made one suggestion to which a Cabinet Colleague said “Don’t even think about it”.

   “Untrustworthy and obnoxious” was his ministerial colleague’s description of the suggested candidate.

   I wonder if it was Don Brash? The nats have done this before when Muldoon appointed Keith Holyoake as GG back in the 1970s.

   The article is at http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10697623
   • Deadly_NZ 1.1

     3 January 2011 at 9:30 am

     Hey Smiley,

     Your wish is our command, now for you to lose the election . But you will have to take Blinglish with you.
     • Tigger 1.1.1

       3 January 2011 at 9:56 am

       And Tony Ryall please. He gives me the creeps.
       • Kevin Welsh 1.1.1.1

         3 January 2011 at 1:18 pm

         Oh yes, but for me it’s his circus clown dress sense. I’m sure he is colour blind.
   • Olwyn 1.2

     3 January 2011 at 10:43 am

     I do not think Key was ever likely to hang around in politics if he lost an election – for him, being PM of NZ seems to be one episode in his wonderful life. But I would not trust his “frank” admission that the election would be in November/December. He has not kept his word on other things, and it is easy enough to come up with a scenario that “necessitates” an early election. As to the “untrustworthy and obnoxious” GG gossip – it is like bread to sea gulls, the right can seize on Helen Clark or Michael Cullen or similar, the left on Brash etc.
     • Anne 1.2.1

       3 January 2011 at 11:18 am

       “But I would not trust his “frank” admission that the election would be in November/December”

       Yes, and he covers his tracks later with the words “you can never say never…”. If it’s in his interest to go early he will go early and to hell with public preferences.

       Note also Audrey Young’s use of the word “candour” to describe his comments. That conjures up a nice image of open-mindedness, impartiality, freedom from malice etc. If it was Helen Clark who had uttered those words early in 2008, then the descriptive word used would have been something along the lines of “controlling” or ” manipulative” or something with a negative connotation.
   • Draco T Bastard 1.3

     3 January 2011 at 11:05 am

     This is however a very good line to run. It suggests that Key is a reluctant politician and also wants to have a life. This is a continuation of the “ordinary bloke” theme. This a theme that will go down very well in ordinary New Zealand land.

     I think you’re wrong there. I think a lot of NZers will see it as an admission from him that he’s not there for them.

     PS, someone move this discussion into the new posts thread.
     • Salsy 1.3.1

       3 January 2011 at 11:15 am

       Looking at the comments on Yahoo, Id have to agree John key threatens to quit
     • mickysavage 1.3.2

       3 January 2011 at 11:44 am

       I wish you were right Draco but I get the strong impression that Key does not say anything unless it has been focus grouped within an inch of its life. And he does not need to persuade a lot of New Zealanders, just those that swing their votes around.

       These people tend to have an innate distruct of politicans. This is why for some of them a bunch of flowers on the Ministerial Card is much more important than incompetent handling of the economy allowing unemployment lines to lengthen.
       • Akldnut 1.3.2.1

         3 January 2011 at 3:04 pm

         hahahaha I got three of those this Christmas from 1.Phil 2.Lynn 3.Carmel
   • Eddie 1.4

     3 January 2011 at 3:00 pm

     nah micky, this wasn’t intentional, this was key stuffing up.

     look at farrar’s weakarse response trying to cover for him. bet captain panicpants was on the phone to him quick-smart trying to work out a line
   • millsy 1.5

     3 January 2011 at 10:29 pm

     Don Brash, Nah, when I read or hear the word “obnoxious”, I think of Bob Jones…..
     • fermionic_interference 1.5.1

       3 January 2011 at 10:59 pm

       brownlee
     • Colonial Viper 1.5.2

       3 January 2011 at 11:04 pm

       Rodney Hide.
   • kinto 1.6

     5 January 2011 at 1:50 am

     Suprised McCully isn’t demanding it?
2. Deadly_NZ 2

   3 January 2011 at 11:02 am

   Shows how much he cares. But was he holidaying in Hawaii because The Pres of the US was there and he is still trying to get a photo op. Looks like he did’nt get it.

   And with this peice it looks like he is going to the undecided older mom n pop type who would hate to lose that nice Mr Key(Shudder, ( (And there will be some of them in their rose coloured blinkers.))

   But to most in here it will be Hurry up and lose.

   And then please make like Sex and Travel and Fuck Off..
3. lprent 3

   3 January 2011 at 11:06 am

   Beat me to it. I was about to write a post “Key admits to lack of fortitude”
   • Marty G 3.1

     3 January 2011 at 11:14 am

     I’ve just been reading the full interview: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10697628

     check out the final question:

     Do you regret setting the 2025 target to match Australia?

     No, and the reason for that iseveryone knows it’s very difficult to achieve because you are not benchmarking yourself against a lame duck [but] against a soaring eagle. They have got an amazing economy and they have got a lot of natural resources and they fundamentally have the same advantages we have. They are in Asia and all that sort of stuff. But they are our biggest economic base and they are 40 per cent of our economy so I think you do have to take those issues seriously and you’ve got to have long-term ambitions. You’re setting a medium-term target which people are always going to measure against the short term. It’s a bit like the cycleway. In the end, long after I have left politics, people are going to look back and there’ll be 18 cycleways around New Zealand. They will be very successful for those communities and they will be an asset that will live on a lot longer than I will but will I have to take a bit of flak about the number of jobs that gets created from day one? Yeah. Who cares? I don’t.

     “who cares if I’ve broken my promises? I don’t”
     • Mickysavage 3.1.1

       3 January 2011 at 11:22 am

       So cycleways remain the means by which he will lead us to our economic salvation? WTF?
       • Lanthanide 3.1.1.1

         3 January 2011 at 12:46 pm

         Working For Families, Kiwibank, Kiwisaver, Cullen Fund, Interest Free Student loans.

         18 cycle ways around New Zealand.

         Key certainly is “ambitious for New Zealand” isn’t he?
         • kinto 3.1.1.1.1

           5 January 2011 at 1:55 am

           Labour really needs to sink to Nationals level of shit politiking next election, I think a series of TV ads showing Key in a damning light, with his own words, all those things the media have quietly let him forget, eg cycle ways, is in order.
     • Eddie 3.1.2

       3 January 2011 at 2:17 pm

       Marty, I know we’ve talked about how it’s counter-productive to critise the media too much but jeez, it’s tempting when you read Key saying this shit:

       “I read John Armstrong’s [Herald correspondent] columns in the weekend and they look good.”

       That must be pretty professionally embarrassing for Armstrong, to be singled out as ‘helpful’ by Key.
       • QoT 3.1.2.1

         3 January 2011 at 5:05 pm

         Maybe if our political media had any basic integrity. This lot are probably just jealous.
4. Colonial Viper 4

   3 January 2011 at 11:12 am

   He just wants to have ‘PM of NZ’ on his CV.

   Oh, how could you EDDIE? 😯
5. Tigger 5

   3 January 2011 at 11:12 am

   I’ve always said Key had deep unresolved daddy-abandonment issues and this is a symptom of that. He is so afraid of rejection that already put in place his explanation for why he will run off crying if and when he loses the next election. He needs to sort this stuff out because it colours every decision he makes. He constantly makes decisions based on pleasing male power figures. It’s hardly a way to run a country. Or live a life for that matter.
   • Colonial Viper 5.1

     3 January 2011 at 11:20 am

     He constantly makes decisions based on pleasing male power figures.

     Hilary Clinton??? 😮
     • Akldnut 5.1.1

       3 January 2011 at 3:10 pm

       Aw shucks Hilliary – you da man!!! 😯
   • David 5.2

     3 January 2011 at 5:50 pm

     Of all the nasty bitchiness that comes from the “tolerant” side of the political fence that is arguably the nastiest I have ever read. Makes me question my political roots to be perfectly honest.
     • Marty G 5.2.1

       3 January 2011 at 5:52 pm

       your political views should be based on your own reason and ideals, not on whether you agree with everything someone on your ‘side’ says
     • the sprout 5.2.2

       3 January 2011 at 5:54 pm

       you must live an inordinately sheltered life if that’s the worst you’ve ever read
       • Tigger 5.2.2.1

         3 January 2011 at 6:18 pm

         Happy to argue the unbitchiness of what I’ve said, David as I feel it’s a just analysis of Key’s personality. But CV has a point, Key has a need to be liked by everyone, not just male power figures. And I believe that stems from not having a father (and feeling that he should have, some people I know didn’t have a father or mother and aren’t this way). How is that bitchy?

         And if it is indeed bitchy, how is it more nasty than, let’s say, the misogynistic bile directed at Helen Clark her entire time on the 9th floor…? At least mine has a basis in reality, not the desperate and illogical hatred of women in power…
     • QoT 5.2.3

       3 January 2011 at 6:44 pm

       Your political roots can’t be that deep then.
6. Treetop 6

   3 January 2011 at 11:24 am

   Within the last month I stated on the Standard that Key was hungry for power like Muldoon was. When a person is power hungry they have a tendency to be sneaky about not disclosing the truth as this may jeopardise their position of power.

   Key’s ultimatum to the right wing voters is “vote for me if you do not want me to go.” Also Key’s ego is that he dares not think that he will be rolled as the National Party leader.
   • felix 6.1

     3 January 2011 at 4:16 pm

     No way will he be rolled.

     He’s the only person in the National caucus with public appeal.
     He’s the only one who can bring in the votes needed.

     He is, in short, National’s electability. Without him they are nothing.
7. Colonial Viper 7

   3 January 2011 at 11:29 am

   OMG the Granny Herald has just pulled the Key Will Quit story from its headlines and replaced it with “Stung Diners Want Rules Clarified”

   !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 😯
   • Marty G 7.1

     3 January 2011 at 11:34 am

     be serious, CV. What’s the bigger story – ‘PM threatens to quit if he loses’ or ‘jounro’s mates pissed off about holiday surcharge’?
     • Marty G 7.1.1

       3 January 2011 at 12:10 pm

       it’s not even on the front page now, you have to scroll right down.
       • BLiP 7.1.1.1

         3 January 2011 at 12:22 pm

         Yeah – I noticed that too. It was front page at 10am. When did this post appear?
         • Redbaron77 7.1.1.1.1

           3 January 2011 at 1:12 pm

           I came across it at 7.30ish this morning. It wasn’t the headline story however was easily visible sitting in the top quarter of NZZ online. It was subsequently repositioned to the headline spot at 1000 this morning but now sits in the Politics section.
         • Anne 7.1.1.1.2

           3 January 2011 at 1:47 pm

           Mickeysavage made comment on Open Mike (moved to this post) at 9:25am. It’s been all on from there. Interesting isn’t it.
           • Tigger 7.1.1.1.2.1

             3 January 2011 at 6:19 pm

             It was retitled also…
8. Sean 8

   3 January 2011 at 12:00 pm

   If John Key wants to go, he can go as. Being a Member of Parliament isn’t a gaol sentence.

   If he needed it, I’d shout him the taxi fare to Wellington airport.

   And smile and wave at him.
   • Robert Atack 8.1

     3 January 2011 at 2:59 pm

     na give him a bike
9. BLiP 9

   3 January 2011 at 12:21 pm

   Reminds me of one of my nephews when we were playing one of those interminable monopoly games over Christmas – unless he had Park Lane AND Mayfair he wouldn’t play. He’s six.
10. ghostwhowalksnz 10

    3 January 2011 at 12:23 pm

    The Air Force has moved a new plane up its priority list so that Key can carry a larger entourage around the country.
    Of course they arent saying that, its for …… whatever.
    Will they be stuck with an expensive plane they dont really want so Key who allways wanted his “own plane” just as another item on his bucket list
11. Draco T Bastard 11

    3 January 2011 at 12:24 pm

    Mr Key said the 2011 election would be challenging because ”essentially there is no money”.

    ”There won’t be money for us and there won’t be money for Labour.”

    That’s because you gave it all to yourselves and your rich mates.
    • QoT 11.1

      3 January 2011 at 12:29 pm

      Isn’t it a bit laughable for a man worth $50m to claim there’s no money? Why not part with some of your own, JK? Except of course for the fact he doesn’t really give a fuck because it’s never actually been about governing NZ or anything.
      • Bazar 11.1.1

        3 January 2011 at 3:54 pm

        Indeed, we should make it so that to be PM on NZ, you have to forfit all your previous assets, and accept a 40k a year job.

        And if things go badly for our country, like recession or the all blacks loosing, we’ll just take our PM and execute him for treason.

        Its only fair.

        There are of course people who think that a persons private properity is his own to do with as they please, but they are lunatics and should also be shot.
        • QoT 11.1.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 4:04 pm

          Yep, that’s exactly what I said. Gosh, you’re so clever.
        • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.2

          3 January 2011 at 4:08 pm

          There are of course people who think that a persons private properity is his own to do with as they please

          Yeah, and it pleases John Key to keep it for himself.
        • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1.3

          3 January 2011 at 4:22 pm

          There are of course people who think that a persons private properity is his own to do with as they please,

          and then there’s those of us who understand economics who think that people need to pay for the services that they’ve received from society. This is normally in the form of taxes which Jonkey and NACT cut for themselves and put up on everyone else.
          • Janice 11.1.1.3.1

            3 January 2011 at 4:31 pm

            If John Boy goes what will happen to all those deserving charities which have been receiving his (unwanted) salary? I am sure they have been looking forward to his tax cut, pay rise and back pay. BTW does anyone know who those charities are?
            • Marty G 11.1.1.3.1.1

              3 January 2011 at 4:38 pm

              I think the charity’s called the Aldgate Trust
              • Anne …

                3 January 2011 at 7:45 pm

                Thank-you Janice and Marty G. You’ve made my evening 😀
12. JJ 12

    3 January 2011 at 12:47 pm

    You know, I wouldn’t read much into this. I think its fair enough, I don’t blame Helen Clark for quiting immediately and I wouldn’t blame Key for doing the same thing, all he is doing is providing advance warning.

    I think its the best thing to do too, once the electorate has decided they do not want you why hang around? Just makes you a liability for you party. Stepping down from the leadership position would be neccessary too – I mean can you imagine a party with an ex-prime minister as leader and all the baggage that goes with that??? And once you’ve stepped down, you’ve got to resign from being an MP altogether – or else how is the new generation of leadership meant to thrive with the old looking over their shoulder?

    Low, desperate attempt to make politics out of nothing EDDIE.
    • RedLogix 12.1

      3 January 2011 at 1:27 pm

      I don’t blame Helen Clark for quiting immediately and I wouldn’t blame Key for doing the same thing, all he is doing is providing advance warning.

      Clark resigned as leader but remained in Parliament until she took up an arguably more senior role in the UN. And this was after a remarkable career over almost 30 years, as a Ministers in one govt and several tough terms in Opposition. A person renowned for her intelligence, hard work, and encyclopediac command of policy detail.

      Key by contrast has never had to really work at politics, his wealth and the sheer lack of other talent in the National Party more or ensured the job of PM was his for the taking. He’s never done any real party work, the safest of Nat seats was given to him without hesitation, he’s never served as a Minister doing the hard yards and long hours running a Ministry… and now he’s telling us that he can’t even be arsed doing the job of Leader of the Opposition.

      The word lazy comes to mind.
    • bbfloyd 12.2

      3 January 2011 at 1:42 pm

      JJ… you seem to be missing a fundamental tenet of democratic government. e.g, the reason for having representative government is to represent the best interests of society as a whole.

      considering the amount of political capital plundered by supporters of this government regarding mp’s entering into politics simply for their own benefit, then one would assume a blatant admission from the leader of said government that he is not interested in representing his own people unless it is on his terms, would have them frothing in anger.

      that this isn’t happening suggests, to me anyway, that those “principals” are not adhered to as deeply as they would have us believe.

      does this mean that national, and it’s supporters are more focused on attaining, and holding on to power for it’s own sake, and that the exercise of that power is to be directed towards ensuring an ongoing advantage, economically and politically, for it.s own supporters. ?

      if this is the case, then john keys obvious lack of any social conscience is a distinct advantage, as he can say, and do, what is expedient, rather than have to weigh the consequences of his actions. this allows him to look the country in the eye, and lie without blinking.

      maybe we shouldn’t be surprised to see a wave of support for johns “candour” coming from the nat’s after all..
    • Eddie 12.3

      3 January 2011 at 1:52 pm

      notice the paragraph where I point out every single leader since Rowling (and probably the ones before) DIDN’T resign Parliament upon losing an election.

      That paragraph was specifically for morons.

      Unfortunately, it appears morons don’t bother to read beyond the opening paragraph.
      • Eddie 12.3.1

        3 January 2011 at 2:10 pm

        just for the hell of it:

        Kirk died on office
        Marshall stayed on for another term after losing in 1972
        Holyoake resigned in office as PM and stayed as an MP until 1977. He also stayed on as leader during the term of the 2nd Labour government after losing the PMship the first time in 1957.
        Nordmeyer lost in 1963 and lost the leadership afterwards but stayed in Parliament until 1969
        Nash lost in 1960 and stayed as an MP until 1968
        Holland resigned as PM due to ill health
        Fraser lost in 1949 and remained as an MP until he died in 1950
        Hamilton was rolled as National leader in 1940 but stayed as an MP until 1946
        Savage died in office

        And that’s all the National and Labour leaders since the modern two major party system formed.

        None of them had a hissy fit and quit Parliament after losing the PMship. Because they hadn’t come to Parliament just to be smile and wave PMs.
    • Robert Atack 12.4

      3 January 2011 at 3:05 pm

      If you put your hand up at election time (for a 3 year term) and the cards don’t fall your way, but you still get elected, then it is immoral to resign … letting down all those people who bothered to vote, otherwise what was the point of voting?
      And that goes for Clark and all of the ones that shot through in the last 2 years
      Lying scum comes to mind.
      • Policy Parrot 12.4.1

        3 January 2011 at 4:52 pm

        So are you saying to Key, that if he doesn’t want to stick around if he loses, don’t be an electorate candidate for Helensville?
        • Robert Atack 12.4.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 4:59 pm

          If the voters in Helensville elect him as their representative for the next 3 years, then he is morally obliged to stay for that term, they are electing a politician to represent them in Wellington they are not voting for a PM.
        • the sprout 12.4.1.2

          3 January 2011 at 5:01 pm

          good point – it would, by Robert’s towering intellect, be morally bankrupt for Key to stand as an electorate MP in Helensville given this latest admission
          • Robert Atack 12.4.1.2.1

            3 January 2011 at 5:08 pm

            Can’t you make a statement without attacking people?
13. KJT 13

    3 January 2011 at 1:05 pm

    Key was bought in as a charismatic figurehead for the Neo-lib agenda when Brash proved to be unelectable. No one was going to vote for Brash because they knew what he stood for.
    If Key loses the election then he has not served his purpose and will be dumped anyway. Best to jump before you are pushed.
14. Policy Parrot 14

    3 January 2011 at 1:08 pm

    Good. The sooner we all smile and wave, the better.
15. Richard 15

    3 January 2011 at 1:20 pm

    John “30 Seconds” Key………he smile and walk away.

    BTW…who could this be…..

    John Key has had his first nomination for the next Governor General rejected as being “untrustworthy and obnoxious”.

    Any guesses?
    • RedLogix 15.1

      3 January 2011 at 1:37 pm

      John “30 Seconds” Key………he smile and walk away.

      Very, very good…
    • marsman 15.2

      3 January 2011 at 5:55 pm

      “30 Seconds……”Laugh I did!

      Re reject GG. John Banks?
      • Marty G 15.2.1

        3 January 2011 at 5:57 pm

        surely even key wouldn’t have thought he was a possible.
    • Treetop 15.3

      3 January 2011 at 6:09 pm

      “Any guesses?” Was it Paul Henry?
      • Anne 15.3.1

        3 January 2011 at 7:55 pm

        My guess is: it was a National ancient – a former Nat cabinet minister from yesteryear. Someone like Don McKinnon or his half brother Jim McClay? Gosh, there’s oodles of them who havn’t kicked the bucket yet.
        • kinto 15.3.1.1

          5 January 2011 at 2:19 am

          Richard Long?
16. Treetop 16

    3 January 2011 at 1:22 pm

    I think that the country is near bankrupt. Life is going to be tough for even the average income family for the next two years. Being charasmatic is not going to save NZ and a continuation of English’s economic mismanagement will only make matters worse due to excessive borrowing e.g. for tax cuts for those who did not need them, and as for the better off NZder spending their tax cut here, it has probably been spent overseas.
    • Draco T Bastard 16.1

      3 January 2011 at 1:51 pm

      Well, considering that the better probably don’t have their wealth here why would they spend it here?
      • Treetop 16.1.1

        3 January 2011 at 2:14 pm

        I would need to ask English why he gave the impression that NZ would benefit by the more wealthy spending there tax cut here?

        Thanks for the info link.
17. alfa 17

    3 January 2011 at 2:11 pm

    Is there anything left for a person to go to after they’ve held the highest office in NZ? Clark left NZ politics as soon as she lost an election. She was graceful about it. So did Bolger. Muldoon and Lange both stuck around far too long afterwards, and it was pretty sad to see them justifying why they were there afterwards.

    It’s no bloody surprise that Key doesn’t want to stay around if he’s rejected by the voters. Maybe more MPs in Labour could learn from it.
    • Marty G 17.1

      3 January 2011 at 3:15 pm

      “Clark left NZ politics as soon as she lost an election”

      No she didn’t. She left months later after being offered the chance to head the UNDP.

      For God’s sake, that’s in the bloody post.

      As Eddie has pointed out no leader, National or Labour, has left Parliament because they lost an election. It’s not the right way to behave – you’re elected to be an MP, not to have a cry if you’re not PM.
18. the sprout 18

    3 January 2011 at 2:38 pm

    Here’s Clark’s concession speech from Election night 2008. Instead of throwing her toys out of the cot like Key is threatening, she pledges her support to the new leadership.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/helen-clark-prime-minister/news/video.cfm?c_id=1502272&gal_objectid=10541898&gallery_id=103343
    • Robert Atack 18.1

      3 January 2011 at 3:08 pm

      And then she jumped ship
      • the sprout 18.1.1

        3 January 2011 at 3:12 pm

        moving on to lead the UNDP = ‘jumped ship’. yeah right 😆

        note also that at no time prior to her defeat, did Clark ever threaten to throw the toys out of the cot if she wasn’t re-elected. Key’s little toddler fit is unique.
        • Robert Atack 18.1.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 4:06 pm

          It doesn’t matter if she went to Calcutta and tried to fell Mother Theressa’s sandals.
          The people that wasted their votes thought they were voting for an MP for the next 3 years (Helen), ‘we’ all knew the UN job was on the cards.
          They all should grow a backbone and commit, just like everyone who went out and voted for her, by giving her their once in three year democratic ‘privilege’ … people have died for that privilege, those who don’t respect the voters are simply carpet bagging scum.
          Unless they sign a contract to guarantee there commitment, then why would you bother leaving home on election day?, taking their word doesn’t work as we have seen.
          Again they are all carpet baggers and self opportunists, out for number one only. As it has always been for politicians.
          We all need to listen to George http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk
          Fuck hope don’t vote … garbage in garbage out.
          • Colonial Viper 18.1.1.1.1

            3 January 2011 at 4:21 pm

            They all should grow a backbone and commit, just like everyone who went out and voted for her, by giving her their once in three year democratic ‘privilege’ … people have died for that privilege

            And Helen Clark spent the majority of her professional working life representing both her electorate and her country.

            What exactly the frak more do you want from your public servants, apart from a decade or two of dedicated service and then having to put up with lip from the likes of yourself?
            • the sprout 18.1.1.1.1.1

              3 January 2011 at 4:39 pm

              What exactly the frak more do you want

              perhaps a loaded Johnny Come Lately who buys his way in to power, parachutes into the top job after serving what, one term in Opposition, then threatens to leave if it meant not keeping the prize position – all for the sake of satisfying his egoic needs?
          • Marty G 18.1.1.1.2

            3 January 2011 at 4:37 pm

            MPs aren’t bonded for three years. Occasionally they retire mid-term for health reasons or to pursue another job. nothing wrong with that
            • Robert Atack 18.1.1.1.2.1

              3 January 2011 at 5:03 pm

              If they stand in an election for a 3 year term, they are morally obliged to stay for that term, apart from death or serious ill health, another job offer just doesn’t cut it, leaving for another position is an act of selfishness.
              Dying on the job , now there is an honest departure
              • pollywog …

                3 January 2011 at 6:30 pm

                somebody shoulda told Winnie Laban 😛
              • Carol …

                3 January 2011 at 6:48 pm

                Moral imperative to stay for 3 years as responsibility to people who voted for them? But the voters get to vote again in a by-election. It’s not like the voters are left with no local representation.
                • pollywog …

                  3 January 2011 at 7:50 pm

                  yeah, nah…more on the ‘can’t be arsed putting the hard yards in opposition’ steez with our Winnie…

                  …some would say thats typical Pasifikan tradition right there 🙂
      • DJames 18.1.2

        3 January 2011 at 6:23 pm

        You realise she left the country but didn’t jump ship? She still talks with her old colleagues and gives them advice.
19. Jordan Wyatt 19

    3 January 2011 at 2:45 pm

    Pardon me, but did Helen Clark not also pull the same stunt last election?

    I remember despising her for a very long time, being angry that she would leave parliament rather than be anything less than leader… but seeing her after Key won, it was very sad.

    Key is said to “spit the dummy” for SAYING he wouldnt run again, meanwhile, Clark walked the walk, and actually DIDNT continue.

    Regardless of who we like, of who we vote for, is this not the exact same act?
    • Marty G 19.1

      3 January 2011 at 3:17 pm

      “Pardon me, but did Helen Clark not also pull the same stunt last election”

      No, she didn’t. She resigned the Labour leadership then stayed in Parliament and would have stayed the term if the chance to be head of the UNDP hadn’t come along.

      You people don’t actually bother to read the whole post, do you? It’s been pointed out that NO National or Labour leader has ever quit Parliament because they failed to win the PMship.
      • Draco T Bastard 19.1.1

        3 January 2011 at 3:53 pm

        The RWNJs don’t bother reading the post. They just come in here and defend their heroes(s) no matter what the facts are.
        • Jordan Wyatt 19.1.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 4:07 pm

          Oh come on now, “Right Wing Nut Jobs”?

          I’m a guy asking that we treat our current PM the same as the previous PM.

          For what its worth, I wouldnt vote for National, as we speak, I’m uploading an Animal Rights video to YouTube, I’m the founder of the Invercargill Vegan Society.

          NOW, for what its worth, others have mentioned “does that sound like he’s gonna look out for NZers?”…. what about Clark, is she even in NZ still? Or did she move somewhere else for her UN post?

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Clark#United_Nations

          “Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme ” BAHAHAHA! Sorry, werent National welcomed in to power because of our own nations perceived “backwardness”? “We gotta keep up with Australia” and all that crap? And the last Labour government was seen as “these shower heads put out too much water”?

          I loved the Facelift programs take on politicians, I have one of the seasons on DVD, their version of when that scumbag Holmes visited “their homes” was hilarious!

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtNsM9RUyig

          Left wing nut jobs, Right wing nut jobs, who cares? Lets treat PM’s the same.
          • Marty G 19.1.1.1.1

            3 January 2011 at 4:11 pm

            “I’m a guy asking that we treat our current PM the same as the previous PM.”

            No, you’re not.

            Key will quit politics if he loses.

            Clark did not quit politics either time that she lost a race for PM. Neither has any other National or Labour leader.
          • Colonial Viper 19.1.1.1.2

            3 January 2011 at 4:27 pm

            I’m a guy asking that we treat our current PM the same as the previous PM.

            Why?

            Why would you treat a 3 term Prime Minister who was dedicated to serving the country, and would have for a fourth term if she had been asked to, with John Key, a 0.7 term Prime Minister who has said that he will walk from Parliament the moment his party loses power?
          • RedLogix 19.1.1.1.3

            3 January 2011 at 4:35 pm

            I’m a guy asking that we treat our current PM the same as the previous PM.

            Well yes… and as Eddie and others have clearly made the comparison. Of all NZ’s previous Prime Ministers , not just Helen Clark, Key is the only one to have said that if he can’t be PM then he’ll quit politics altogether. And this while still in his first term!!!

            This is quite different from the usual practise of resigning as leader of a party after loosing an election. If you cannot make that basic distinction you really have no business being in this conversation.
    • RedLogix 19.2

      3 January 2011 at 3:29 pm

      Jordan… total fail.

      PMs who lose elections usually resign leadership. It’s an honourable and respectable tradition in Westminster politics at the least. But almost invariably they also stay on in Parliament, or some political role for a period to either serve the nation in some capacity or dedicate themselves to help their Party win a future election.

      Key has done something that’s quite different. What’s he’s saying is that if he can’t be PM then he really can’t be arsed with all the work that politics entails.
      • Jordan Wyatt 19.2.1

        3 January 2011 at 3:49 pm

        I most certainly understand its common, its also fair to acknowledge “the other side” when they depart, just as our own, favoured party did last time.

        captcha was “similar”, just like one leader “spitting the dummy” by leaving parliament, rather than starting as the leader of the opposition again and another “moving on to other things”, by leaving parliament, rather than starting as the leader of the opposition again.
        • Marty G 19.2.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 3:57 pm

          Jordan. You said Clark did what Key says he will do when he loses.

          It wasn’t true.

          Clark resigned the Labour Leadership (on her second election loss, btw, remember 1996?) and stayed in Parliament until offered a very powerful political role at the UN.

          Key says if he can’t be PM he’ll quit politics altogether and sulk off to his Hawaii mansion. Does that sound like a man who is committed to serving New Zealanders? Hell no.

          Just admit you’re wrong.
        • Draco T Bastard 19.2.1.2

          3 January 2011 at 3:57 pm

          Helen Clark wasn’t leader after the election as she resigned that position. It was after she stood for, and won, an election that she was offered another job that required her to leave office. If she hadn’t she’d still be there.

          Jonkey as said he will leave politics if he doesn’t win PM well before the election. Hell of a difference.
          • Robert Atack 19.2.1.2.1

            3 January 2011 at 4:12 pm

            >If she hadn’t she’d still be there.<
            Exactly looking after number one, fuck all those thousands of people in Mt Albert* who voted for her.
            *or whatever the electorate is called
            • Colonial Viper 19.2.1.2.1.1

              3 January 2011 at 4:18 pm

              I think Helen Clark gave extremely long service to the country as Prime Minister and even longer service to the people of her electorate.

              So your comment is truly unjustified.
              • Robert Atack …

                3 January 2011 at 4:29 pm

                Then why stand again?
                If she had had enough then don’t waste our money and piss off BEFORE the election
                Just stop lying and go.
                She was paid enough, she chose to stand at every election she stood in.
                I’m only saying why vote if the person telling you they want to be your representative for the next term gets your vote, then says stick it where the sun doesn’t shine, I’ve got a better offer. … JUST DON”T STAND, don’t lie to people
                Wini Laban was the same if they can’t commit, then why should we?
                Remember I hate them all equally
            • the sprout 19.2.1.2.1.2

              3 January 2011 at 4:56 pm

              looking after number one

              do you not understand the role of the UNDP?
              that’s a very impressive display of ignorance there Robbo 😆
              • Robert Atack …

                3 January 2011 at 5:02 pm

                Grow a real name if you want to attack me creep, don’t hide behind ya mums appron
                • the sprout …

                  3 January 2011 at 5:07 pm

                  after that crack and your previous tasteless comment about Rod Donald since deleted, you can now join the spam queue. you should have read the comments policy.
                  bye bye
                  • Robert Atack …

                    3 January 2011 at 5:12 pm

                    How does that saying go about power corrupts? Are you enjoying the buzz.

                    [Over the last six months or so you have had every opportunity to express your opinions and ideas. But nonetheless this is a moderated forum; repeated bad behaviour invariably attracts attention…RL]
        • felix 19.2.1.3

          3 January 2011 at 4:28 pm

          Jordan.

          Now that you’ve repeated it 3 times, and had your error explained to you 3 times, perhaps you should just repeat it again as if none of that had happened.

          That way it will appear to the casual observer that there is a real disagreement over the facts of the matter and thus – to the casual observer – subtly weaken the structural integrity of the post.

          You can probably only do this a couple more times and then sign back in with another handle and start all over again.
20. Irascible 20

    3 January 2011 at 2:58 pm

    A more charitable way of reading the story would be:
    “I must be re-elected as PM as now that we’ve spent all the money the means for NACT to begin the policies I really stand for – the sale of all state assets. If I lost the election then my NZ (?) mates won’t be able to benefit from our policies. Now all that remains is to persuade the public that privatisation will benefit the “mum & dad investors” who believed in Hotchin, Bluechip, and Southern Finance…. or who can’t remember the asset stripping indulged in by Faye, Richwhite, AT&T…..”
    Whichever way it reads this statement by Key is every reason why Labour needs to really go all out in Botany and deliver the wave good bye message to good old scuttle & run, smile & wave and his rorting mates.
    • Treetop 20.1

      3 January 2011 at 3:38 pm

      That is what worries me, the sale of state assets, how else are Nact not going to completely bankrupt NZ.
21. M 21

    3 January 2011 at 3:07 pm

    Johnny to resign if he loses?

    In the immortal words of Helen the Great “Diddums!”

    Anti-spam: worry – sounds like Key is starting to.
22. alfa 22

    3 January 2011 at 4:30 pm

    So labour PM quitting after losing an election and going to another job good, national PM quitting after losing an election and going to another job bad.
    • Marty G 22.1

      3 January 2011 at 4:34 pm

      which Labour or National PM has quit politics because they lost an election?
    • Colonial Viper 22.2

      3 January 2011 at 4:36 pm

      national PM saying that he’s already made plans to go to another job should he lose is bad.

      Fixed that for ya. And yes, it is bad.
    • Treetop 22.3

      3 January 2011 at 4:57 pm

      alfa, Clark was elected to parliament on 28 November 1981, Key was elected to parliament on 27 July 2002. The difference is, that Clark was serious about making a political contribution to NZ and after 27 years she also went on to make a political contribution, this time internationally.

      I have a suggestion for Key, call an early election to avoid dithering about.
23. Colonial Viper 23

    3 January 2011 at 4:34 pm

    I am going to have a party talking to National supporters about Key’s statement. Lets force him to produce clarification after clarification after clarification throughout 2011.

    Let’s make sure people know that he is only in it for the top job and nothing else. Not his electorate, not his country.

    Key already has an exit plan in place to go, he has already thought it through in detail, he is ready to bolt for the door on to bigger and brighter things then being Prime Minister of NZ.

    Oh yeah, this is gonna be frakin good.
    • alfa 23.1

      3 January 2011 at 4:40 pm

      National supporters have better things to do than go to your parties. Maybe you should hold a party for labour party supporters and decide on a leader who can win an election in the next ten years.
      • RedLogix 23.1.1

        3 January 2011 at 4:44 pm

        Which is precisely the kind of bollocks that was said about Helen Clark in the 90’s. She did the hard yards slogging her way through two very discouraging terms as Leader of the Opposition…something your blue-eyed wonder boy clearly couldn’t be bothered doing.
        • alfa 23.1.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 8:30 pm

          Yes John Key is evil because he couldn’t be bothered losing an election as leader of the opposition before winning one.
          • Marty G 23.1.1.1.1

            3 January 2011 at 8:38 pm

            jeez, you’re clutching now, alfa.

            Give it up and admit that it’s pathetic, unprecedented, and immature of a PM to threaten to quit politics if they lose an election
      • Colonial Viper 23.1.2

        3 January 2011 at 4:45 pm

        Hey alfa weren’t you saying on Red Alert a couple of days ago that you were one of “us” Labour supporters?
24. Tanz 24

    3 January 2011 at 5:33 pm

    Key is there for the glory, the glamour and the entertainment value, in my view. He is a trophy PM, but sometimes I wonder if the boyhood dream is not quite what he imagined in reality. Maybe he’s bored already, and he was sure a sprinter into the leadership. Strange, no twenty-five years apprenticeship as an MP for Key, first. Seems too easy. Anyway, he will win another term, if the polls are right.

    Bill English for next National leader? I wonder and I wish, but I doubt it.
    • Colonial Viper 24.1

      3 January 2011 at 5:37 pm

      There is the old rule in corporate life that if you are not moving upwards to a new position every three to four years max, chances are that you are stagnating and falling behind.

      Also life in the public eye is not always pleasant for someone more used to the freedom of being your own boss, and the realtive anonymity that private sector wealth brings.
    • RedLogix 24.2

      3 January 2011 at 5:41 pm

      Maybe he’s bored already, and he was sure a sprinter into the leadership.

      Actually this has characterised Key’s career all his life. A few years here or there looking promising, then suddenly he’s off somewhere else. Typical corporate ‘executive surfer’.

      More than that it always struck me as odd that after 20yr climbing the greasy pole in merchant banking, and clawing his was to almost the very top at the Foreign Exchange Committee of the Fed …after two years he suddenly throws in the towel and becomes a lowly opposition back-bench MP back home.

      In fact sticking at being a Parliamentarian since 2002 is about as long as he’s held down any job.
      • Treetop 24.2.1

        3 January 2011 at 5:52 pm

        My first impression on Key was that he was a money mover. May be the job as PM is not proving to be as satisfying as anticipated, because there is no money to move.
        • Colonial Viper 24.2.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 8:38 pm

          $9.1B in tax cuts moved to the richest 10% of NZ income earners, e.g. over $1000 per week to each of NZ’s 650x millionaire earners, thats not bad.
          • Treetop 24.2.1.1.1

            4 January 2011 at 11:38 am

            All to be spent overseas as DTB stated in the 16.1 link.
25. Carol 25

    3 January 2011 at 6:51 pm

    There’s a vote on TV3 website on whether Key should stay as an MP if National lose the election. But the question doesn’t really get to the heart of the issue really.

    http://www.3news.co.nz/

    But there’s also comments on it under the TV3 article:

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Key-to-quit-if-National-loses-election/tabid/419/articleID/193012/Default.aspx
26. kriswgtn 26

    3 January 2011 at 7:49 pm

    Key is a joke

    it was on Primes news re this
    oh please dont be evil to me or I’ll leave
    What a complete fucktard
27. john 27

    3 January 2011 at 7:49 pm

    well yeah lets treat key as others treated clark….they went on and on that clark was a lesbian etc

    did you know that john keys wife is just for looks ? he really likes men and i mean really likes them.
    ohh and one time his wife got in trouble…somethink about she touched someone in a bad way on a plane…
    key keeps his beehive door locked as he models being a pm on how Bill Clinton acted as President of the United States …johns got his own bill for that…whats gos on behind locked doors and all that!!!
    he really hates women so much that if he loses out on pm its going to be their fault and Bronagh’s going to pay
28. Jenny 28

    3 January 2011 at 7:57 pm

    [Bumped this into a post…RL]
29. Chris73 29

    3 January 2011 at 8:53 pm

    Amazing innit, a politician speaking the truth…no wonder you people don’t/can’t understand it

    If (and lets face it thats a pretty big IF) he loses the election then the people are telling him that we don’t want his policies so why would he stick around? Better for the party for him to leave so they can rejuvanate (something Labour failed to do) then hang around

    But unlike a number of Labour MPs he doesn’t need to stick around for the money because he has other prospects…not that a bunch of former teachers and trade unionists wouldn’t be snapped up quickly 😉
    • QoT 29.1

      3 January 2011 at 9:34 pm

      Ha, only took ’em nine and a half hours to work that line out. I am so smug right now I cannot say.
      • Colonial Viper 29.1.1

        3 January 2011 at 10:47 pm

        Looks like teh fear is out that all their careful focus grouping might have gone awry lolz
    • millsy 29.2

      3 January 2011 at 9:36 pm

      Yes, lets all lay into those evil teachers and trade unionists. Lets all lock them up while were at it, shall we?
      • Chris73 29.2.1

        3 January 2011 at 9:43 pm

        I don’t know i’d lock ’em ALL up but the ones who refuse to teach the new standards should quit and find new employment
        • Draco T Bastard 29.2.1.1

          3 January 2011 at 10:57 pm

          No, the ones who refuse to teach Nationals’ Standards should be given a medal for preventing massive abuse of children and saving us money.
        • McFlock 29.2.1.2

          3 January 2011 at 10:59 pm

          Why should they be sacked? They’re only speaking the truth that national standards are bad for kids, bad for schools and bad for the country.

          Or are they obliged to do something when they know it is both stupid and wrong?
          • Chris73 29.2.1.2.1

            4 January 2011 at 8:48 am

            Yes as a matter of fact they are

            Whether they like it or not they are there to do what the ministry of education tells them to do (like tomorrows schools and NCEA) they dont turn around and say we’re not going to teach because we don’t like National (wheich lets face it is exactly whats happening)

            If my boss told me to do something and I refused I’d get the sack pretty damn quickly and as for speaking the truth who says standards are bad?

            for every expert for theres one against so get on with your jobs (for which you’re very well paid) or quit

            simple really

            [And you do not meet our standards here… take a weeks ban. Simple really..RL]
            • Chris73 29.2.1.2.1.1

              4 January 2011 at 9:27 am

              Umm replying to McFlock is bad?

              [No … but you have been banned for a week. It doesn’t matter if you think it’s stupid or wrong, you are obliged to leave. Simple really…RL]
              • McFlock …

                4 January 2011 at 6:53 pm

                damn, and he’d just come up with the Nuremberg Defense. Or if that’s too much of a Godwin, any other explicit legal principle that states that if someone knows (or believes) an act to be wrong at the time, then it’s no defense to say that one was only following orders.

                And most “experts” are people who have studied and practised in the field for years, and the dispute over national standards is in no way 50:50. It’s probably more 95:(5+Tolley).
30. NX 30

    4 January 2011 at 3:10 am

    Clark resigned the leadership but stayed on as an MP until offered another political role, which is arguably even more powerful than being PM of NZ.

    ^ actually, Clark herself has pointed out that the UNDP’s annual budget is about equivalent to Tony Ryall’s health budget.
    While her UN job is certainly respectable, to rank it above the NZ PM – leader of a multi-billion dollar economy, & fourth largest EEZ in the world – is frankly insulting to all New Zealanders.
    • Marty G 30.1

      4 January 2011 at 11:25 am

      the UNDP affects the lives of far more people than the NZG, and in dramatically. Sure, the budget might be only a fifth of the NZG’s but that money saves huge numbers of lives and drives economic development in the third world on a massive scale.

      Clark, who should know, has compared the complexity of the job to governing a small country – that’s the source of my comment.
31. RedBaron 31

    4 January 2011 at 10:43 am

    I think that Key is also making these statements to position himself to go onto the list and therefore not contest an electorate next election, spinning this as not “causing an unnecessary byelection if they lose.” Even if NATS win I can still see him leaving politics after a few months. It hasn’t been as easy as he thought it would be and I think he has made up his mind to leave full stop. Of course not contesting an electorate avoids any prospect of having to face Winston too!
32. interesting 32

    4 January 2011 at 11:19 am

    So, was Helen Clark “Spitting the Dummy” when New Zealand didnt vote for her and she quit? or is it different with her? Her comments were along the line of not wanting to be an opposition leader after being Prime Minster. So why is it not okay for John Key to say and do the same?
    • Marty G 32.1

      4 January 2011 at 11:22 am

      Clark didn’t threaten to quit politics if not re-elected as PM. Indeed she hasn’t quit politics. She left Parliament when offered a job that is arguably more powerful than PM of NZ.

      Clark stood down as leader of Labour after the loss saying that it was appropriate for someone else to do the rebuilding for the future. Clark has continued to work in politics to advance the ideals she was elected for – first in Parliament, now as head of the UNDP>

      Key says he will quit politics altogether. That’s spitting the dummy.
    • Colonial Viper 32.2

      4 January 2011 at 11:26 am

      So why is it not okay for John Key to say and do the same?

      The same? Nope. John Key has declared that he has already thought through his exit plan from being NZ PM.

      He has bigger, brighter and more profitable things to move on to.
33. Nick C 33

    4 January 2011 at 11:38 am

    It must really suck to live your life seething with blind hatred, as the standard authors and commentators seem to have for John Key
    • Colonial Viper 33.1

      4 January 2011 at 11:43 am

      It must really suck to live your life seething with blind hatred

      Oh no, its really quite reasoned and not blind at all.

      Tell you what, once Key starts championing the cause of the 50% of NZ’ers who earn less than $27K p.a., instead of the 2% of NZ’ers who earn more than $100K p.a. most commentators on The Standard will like him a lot more.

      Yeah, I know, when you can buy Mint Magnums in hell.
    • Treetop 33.2

      4 January 2011 at 11:58 am

      I took my rose coloured tinted glasses off the moment it became apparent to me that Key’s policies are only working for 10 % in the country, because that group is the group which has benefited.
34. RedLogix 34

    4 January 2011 at 11:53 am

    There are 144 comments on this thread. I’ve just done a quick scan and failed to spot much in the way of ‘seething hatred’ for John Key.

    We don’t like his politics, we see plenty of evidence that his actions tend to benefit the few rather than the many and that in the long run the govt he is leading will cause much detriment to this country as a whole.

    On the other hand many of us have from time to time expressed respect for Key’s strong political instincts, he is an opponent we do not underestimate. He is very good at tapping into that strong undercurrent of kiwi ‘she’ll be right anti-intellectualism’, declaring himself to be ‘relaxed’ and then walking off with a smile. (Which never reaches the “Smiling Assasins” eyes by the way. A nick that Key earned long before he entered poltics.)

    But hatred…no.
    • Nick C 34.1

      4 January 2011 at 3:16 pm

      Oh come on, the hatred here goes far beyond policies. You would have to be blind not to see that. If you’re looking for examples try comments 2,5,6,10,11.1,18.11111, 20, 21, 24, 26.

      I’ve been reading this blog with varying degrees of interest since it was formed. It started off as nothing more than a hate blog of John Key, getting further into the gutter as he looked more and more likely to win the 2008 election. Admittedly its been a little better and focused on policy since he got elected, but occasionally the raw hatred comes through as it has done here.

      Also your defense of Clark is really pathetic. She quit parliament because she knew she had better job prospects than opposition backbencher. Key could probably also get a top job somewhere if he left parliament. At least hes prepared to be honest about it.
      • Colonial Viper 34.1.1

        4 January 2011 at 3:33 pm

        At least hes prepared to be honest about it.

        Yes we have a 0.7 term Prime Minister who is honest with the fact that he has already thought through his exit plan and would be ready to move on to something bigger and better at the drop of a hat.

        But good on you for defending his “honesty”.
      • RedLogix 34.1.2

        4 January 2011 at 3:37 pm

        She quit parliament

        She resigned as party leader. It was some six months later that she accepted another senior political role with the UNDP. This after a 27 yr career in Parliament , three terms as PM, two terms as Leader of the Opposition and a Minister of Health before that.

        I think Helen Clark gave extremely long service to the country as Prime Minister and even longer service to the people of her electorate. And has now moved on to serve the interests of the poorest and most vulnerable in the world.

        Contrast with your hero who before even his first term as PM is complete talks about quitting politics altogether if he can’t have the job he wants.

        By contrast whose interest’s do you think Key is serving?
        • Speaking Truth to Unions 34.1.2.1

          4 January 2011 at 3:54 pm

          “She resigned as party leader. It was some six months later that she accepted another senior political role with the UNDP.”

          I think even in Nadsat that’s equivalent to “She quit politics”. She would have stayed on as PM had she been re-elected and left after she lost. It’s fairly simple and no one expected her to stay on, indeed she got some brownie points for going quickly.

          Add Phil to that list in about 11 months.

          It seems a rather minor point to get upset about.
      • RedLogix 34.1.3

        4 January 2011 at 4:09 pm

        You would have to be blind not to see that. If you’re looking for examples try comments 2,5,6,10,11.1,18.11111, 20, 21, 24, 26.

        Perhaps you are seeing what you want to see. This is a left-wing blog, and moderated at that. We certainly do not allow the raw kind of raw emotive slander and filth that is routinely permitted on other blogs… especially of that hysterical and personal nature that was aimed at Helen Clark before 2008.

        I’ve checked all the comments you list. None except perhaps 26 was out of the ordinary for a political blog or forum anywhere. They do of course express opinions that I realise you don’t like reading… but it’s quite another step to project your own negative reaction onto the other person as hatred.
      • Treetop 34.1.4

        5 January 2011 at 1:55 pm

        Nick, I posted 6 on this thread. I do not have an issue with you having an opinion, nor whether or not you disagree with a posting of mine. I do have an issue with your statement that I “live my life seething with blind hatred.”

        Are you currently online, because if you are switch on 2zb and listen to the public’s opinion of Key quiting politics if he does not win the next election. Similar has already been said about my posting and other callers have said similar to what is on this thread. May I suggest that you make a complaint about the callers opinion’s you do not agree with.

        I came across this today:

        “The true goal of leadership is not to cross the finishing line first, but to take as many others with you as you can.”

        Bob Gass
35. randal 35

    5 January 2011 at 1:37 pm

    sounds like he has had enough already.

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 2 January 2011 at 9:50 pm
2. Gabriella Turek: posted on 2 January 2011 at 11:24 pm
3. John Key threatens to throw toys, doesn’t understand how Parliament works « Ideologically Impure: posted on 3 January 2011 at 12:07 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS