Rules of politics

20 comments on “Rules of politics ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Bored 1

   28 June 2010 at 10:29 am

   The man needs some guidance and a minder to keep him on the straight and narrow. Dont give tat job to Chris Carter however.
   • Bright Red 1.1

     28 June 2010 at 10:42 am

     ha! speaking of which, remember when Coleman was Melissa Lee’s campaign manager? Classic
2. Julie 2

   28 June 2010 at 10:30 am

   To be fair to Len, he didn’t actually compare himself to Jesus, in fact he said that he wasn’t like Jesus. However I agree it was a mistake to even go there at all.
3. ianmac 3

   28 June 2010 at 11:07 am

   What is intriguing is that Mr Banks was able to explain discrepancies and that was that. Len was hammered for the same things like a ham or lunches.
4. tsmithfield 4

   28 June 2010 at 12:32 pm

   I must admit this whole thing has come across as fairly tawdry. Its not the kind of politics I like to see from anyone.

   On the other hand, though, I am sure that Browns opponents will be delighted with the way Brown appears to be losing it faster than the Italian football team at the moment.
   • BLiP 4.1

     28 June 2010 at 8:10 pm

     Italy has already lost, thus, your analogy is a FAIL attempt to paint the “dead duck” label on Len. In fact, the odds are that he will win. Yours is a dodgy comment in that you first claim to find the current Banksy strategy “tawdry” and then have a go at it yourself.

     Or were you trying to be amusing?
     • felix 4.1.1

       28 June 2010 at 9:18 pm

       No, he just doesn’t feel the need to mean what he says, he’s explained this to us before.

       Supposedly it’s because he just likes to pick a position and argue it whether he believes it or not, but in practice it means he can change his position on any issue – apparently even in mid comment – and it doesn’t matter because he never meant it anyway.

       The strange part is that he still expects others to engage him seriously in spite of this admission.

       Oh, and he also mentioned that the reason he switches between different handles is that “tsmithfield” is the one he uses for writing things he thinks he could be sued for.
5. randal 5

   28 June 2010 at 12:45 pm

   anyone who liostened to rnz9-noon this morning will have heard hooton hiding behind a cloud of words to emit a steady stream of slime and drivel and badmouthing cloked in civilised objectivity to belittle one of the candidates.
   the fact is john banks is not campaigning on the issues facing superork but looking for dirt to parade in the popular press and getting assistance from his troupe of trained toadies.
   • ianmac 5.1

     28 June 2010 at 3:10 pm

     Agreed randal. Hooton does not of course think that we should badmouth Len Brown but Browne did do this and this and this…… Badmouthing is so bad says Matthew. He must have come with the list all ready. Ratbag!
6. Irascible 6

   28 June 2010 at 2:49 pm

   I could hear the “sincerity” dripping from Banks’ tongue. A $10,000 mobile phone account!!! God bless Banks he’s economising. Len Brown spends $xoo on the mayoral mobile. Ridiculous expenditure put him on a pre-pay card and ensure he doesn’t overspend.
   Entertainment at the Mayoral box at the tennis!! Wasteful expenditure at a sport enjoyed by the affluent – commend the man. Len Brown supports a local man overcoming his deprived background by hosting Manukau supporters at a fund-raiser for the man…. condemn him for willful abuse of his mayoral status.
   Ah yes… I truly love the NZ media’s support of hypocrisy and endorsement of those who live by its rules.
   • ianmac 6.1

     28 June 2010 at 3:12 pm

     And Bank’s response was accepted and not questioned where Brown was grilled to a turn. “Just the normal Council operation really.”
7. parnellboy 7

   28 June 2010 at 3:36 pm

   On Nine to Noon this morning the leftie said that Banks’ team has been trying to drag Brown’s family into all this. No wonder he’s been a bit upset by it all.
8. Julie 8

   28 June 2010 at 4:05 pm

   I think part of Brown’s reaction has been because this hits him right in the heart of his person, his identity, because it is about being Moral and Not Abusing Your Position. As such I think it’s been quite a deliberate tactic by his opponents – to hit him somewhere they knew it would go to the very fibre of his being and he would be outraged and likely to respond in a way that could be detrimental to him. I’ve seen a similar thing done a few years back on a board I sat on, when someone called an opponent a racist, knowing full well that this person had been very involved in race relations issues for many years and would have their buttons pushed to such an extent that their response would be to their detriment (in that case, went red, yelled they weren’t a racist, and not long after stormed out of the room). It was a low blow, the person who struck it knew what they were doing when they did so, and ultimately (sadly) in our political context often the person that cries first loses. (And I could make a whole lot of comments there about the de-valuing/dismissing of emotional responses as gendered crap)
9. Carol2 9

   28 June 2010 at 6:55 pm

   Right on Julie !

   BTW, could members of the National Party research team on this blog please kindly identify themselves ?
   • lprent 9.1

     28 June 2010 at 8:03 pm

     Ummm we don’t require anyone to identify themselves beyond a handle. We just demand acceptable behaviour – by our standards.
10. Margaret 10

    28 June 2010 at 8:35 pm

    I don’t care how much they smear Len Brown, he will still get my vote – better than having John Banks & NACT in the drivers seat with a clear road ahead.
    • Macro 10.1

      28 June 2010 at 9:08 pm

      And Banks sure as heck isn’t getting mine either!
11. Bill 11

    28 June 2010 at 9:34 pm

    And then the red bannered leaflet calling for ‘fairness’ and ‘local control’ went out, I guess to cash in on those who might be having doubts about Brown but who would never vote for Banks or the right.

    And maybe that’s okay….to have another ‘left’ perspective…except it’s funded (to the max allowable?) and run by the right wing prick who brought us ‘democracy’ marches and pro smacking marches.

    So they hoping people will see the red of the banner and associate that with the left? And that they will read the headline about ‘fairness’ and ‘local control’ and associate that with the left too? And that they will think of Len Brown and maybe decide that this reasonable sounding chappie who they don’t know should get their vote instead? And hoping that it’s enough of a bleed to get Banks in?
12. sean14 12

    28 June 2010 at 10:12 pm

    Brown could have killed the story in one day, just like Shane Jones did. But, no. The people of Auckland will elect the super-mayor they deserve.

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 27 June 2010 at 10:10 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS