National: for a more confused future

Written By: - Date published: 9:54 am, September 12th, 2008 - 14 comments
Categories: election 2008, flip-flop, john key - Tags:

On Sunday, John Key, apparently off-the-cuff, announced he would dismantle the Families Commission and give the money to church groups, who just happened to be the people he was speaking to at the time. Then, he had to speak to UnitedFuture Leader Peter Dunne. The Families Commission is his baby and Key will probably need UF if is to be PM. So, we saw an immediate reversal of his promise to the church groups to placate Dunne. Now, a third policy has emerged whereby the Children’s Commission will be folded into the Families Commission, which seems more like make-work for the dreaded bureaucracy then any real change. We wait with baited breath for a fourth National policy on this issue, probably next time Key is talking in private and wants to win some votes.

Thankfully this chump isn’t actually making real decisions. Can you imagine if he had been Clark’s place deciding whether we should send troops into riot-wracked Tonga in 2006 to protect the evacuation of foreign nationals? The plane would have been half-way there, he would have ordered it to turn back, then ordered it turn around again and head on to Tonga, and once they had landed he would have extended their mission to include fisheries patrols.

You can um and ah and change your mind to your heart’s content when your job doesn’t actually have any power but we can’t afford a PM who makes decisions on a whim and reverses them with equal frivolity.

UPDATE: Sue Bradford blogs similarly over at frogblog.

14 comments on “National: for a more confused future ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. East Wellington Superhero 1
    12 September 2008 at 10:22 am

    John Key, a chump? Good one, he’s already far more successful than you will ever be.

    If he’s such a chump then why is Labour’s ONLY significant election tactic to attack John Key? Answer – because Labour is shit-scared of him because they know he’s good.

  2. vidiot 2
    12 September 2008 at 10:25 am

    And still a little boy waits…

    Where’s YOUR POLICIES ?

  3. leftrightout 3
    12 September 2008 at 10:26 am

    Define ‘successful’, he has a lot of money? Big deal, that doesnt qualify him for anything in politics, certainly not being the leader of New Zealand.

  4. Benodic 4
    12 September 2008 at 10:27 am

    East Welly – I thought you were an English man?

  5. toad 5
    12 September 2008 at 10:31 am

    Sue Bradford blogged similarly this morning over at frogblog, also suggesting that Key is having it both ways on hitting children.

  6. Steve Pierson 6
    12 September 2008 at 10:31 am

    EWS. Impressive powers of prescience you claim to have.

    But making a mint on being a currency speculator doens’t fit my definition of ‘success’ and even if it did it wouldn’t in itself make him a good candidate for PM… just because someone’s a world champion runner doens’t mean they would be a good ballet dancer.

  7. East Wellington Superhero 7
    12 September 2008 at 10:46 am

    Ah, he didn’t just make money from currency trading (and even if he did what’s wrong with that – better than being parasite Labour party board member appoinment or a state-paid lecturer come party creature come politician).

    Has a wife and two kids and come from a poor family. Not successful – good one – get real.

    Also, you don’t become wealthy and the Leader of a political party by chance. To suggest Key is a chump is just ridiculous.

  8. Dom 8
    12 September 2008 at 10:53 am

    Chump – noun meaning a stupid or foolish person; a dolt.

    Key’s actions alone this week make him a chump.

    Even if we believe someone from his party accidentally lost their policy to throw up your hands and go ‘don’t know who screwed up and they’re too scared to come forward so I’ll let it slide’ makes him a chump leader.

    To change your mind THREE times so far on the Families Commission makes him a chump.

    To make a ‘how sorry we are’ video about Sergeant Wilkinson’s death and not even mention Wilkinson’s name but instead make the focus about ‘another death to the scourge of P’ makes him a chump.

    To promise to do something about the smacking law while at the same time saying there’s no need to do anything makes him a chump.

  9. yl 9
    12 September 2008 at 10:59 am

    EWS,

    “Has a wife and two kids and come from a poor family”,

    again this doesnt mean that you are any less of a chump or should be running the country. They are not characteristics of leadership.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership

    have a read you havnt expressed any of these characteristics when talking about John keys merits for the top job.

    Based on your analysis of what it takes to become a political leader, during the 1990’s the National party created a lot of people for the job.

  10. forgetaboutthelastone 10
    12 September 2008 at 11:01 am

    “If he’s such a chump then why is Labour’s ONLY significant election tactic to attack John Key?”

    Err – its because John Key is such a chump that _one of_ Labour’s significant election tactics is to attack him. If John Key didn’t stuff up so often (i.e. if he wasn’t such a chump) there would be nothing to attack.

  11. Bill 11
    12 September 2008 at 11:16 am

    East Wellington Superhero and others.

    If you have a particular distaste over JK’s individual abilities being highlighted in a negative manner, then why don’t you side step and retort with substantive arguments based on Nat policy and get him out of the spotlight?

    It would be a welcome and meaningful diversion.

  12. Phil 12
    12 September 2008 at 11:44 am

    $20 says that during the campaign, Labour claim John Key is like someone in American politics… Dubya

  13. dave 13
    12 September 2008 at 2:14 pm

    Hey I know I am banned for a month but I did want to tell you that you have some facts wrong, so I trust that this would see the light of day.

    1. Key spoke to the Family First conference on Monday, not Sunday.
    2. He never said he would dismantle the Families Commission
    3. There were no church groups at the Family First forum
    4. The NGO that Key specifically mentioned for increased funding was the Parents Inc group, who were not at the conference either
    5. there was no reversal of policy.

    [lprent: we’re always interested in corrections. I let the poster decide what to do about them. ]

  14. Pascal's bookie 14
    12 September 2008 at 2:26 pm

    “$20 says that during the campaign, Labour claim John Key is like someone in American politics Dubya”

    If Brett Dale speaks for the LP, and you switch Key for Clark, win! 😉

    http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=3030#comment-87169