No, Bill.

27 comments on “No, Bill. ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Rakaia George 1

   9 October 2008 at 8:41 pm

   Same old Labour – all we’ve had since (even before) the Prefu has been snide negativity. I hope that reaps the reaction from the electorate that it deserves (and I think it will, if the “can’t we get this over with now?” vibe I get from non-political types is anything to go by).
2. IrishBill 2

   9 October 2008 at 8:48 pm

   So you think what English said was positive?
3. rave 3

   9 October 2008 at 8:48 pm

   Nah RG, the arrogance of English when confronted with this gaffe, is the same arrogance that caused them to miscalculate on the reaction to junking Kiwisaver. They were so self-interested and out of touch that they forgot to ask those ‘punters’ who had done the calculation and joined up what they thought about halving their savings. Here their ‘principle’ of robbing ordinary workers took precedence over their ‘superior’ intelligence. Reason: arrogance of the patronising rich bastards thinking they know better than the ‘punters’. But the ‘punters’ bite back.
4. Pascal's bookie 4

   9 October 2008 at 8:57 pm

   RG, if it was Labour releasing this stuff, they would have dumped this one when Bill was in the House braying for hours on end about WP and principle.

   Right now it’s a distraction from National’s joke of an ‘economic policy’. So accusing this being a Labour dirty trick is an ever so positive play.
5. randal 5

   9 October 2008 at 9:06 pm

   they think a priciple is the one who gives them a bit of ‘fladge’ for being norty boys…
6. outofbed 6

   9 October 2008 at 9:11 pm

   I am confused, when English apologised about his Kiwibank for sale comment. was that was part of the winning at all costs strategy and therefore the apology meant nothing?
   So are they are going to sell Kiwibank?
7. tony norriss 7

   9 October 2008 at 9:22 pm

   This is all trifling stuff.

   Wait till National starts emphasising things that really relate to trust.

   For instance, the Electoral Commission stating that the Labour-Led Government’s Electoral Finance Act has had a “chilling effect on democracy”. Very sinister.

   How about Owen Glen saying of Labour that “he wouldn’t want to be in threnches with them”. Wouldn’t that make a good headline add for National, especially when National will be able to draw the analogy of New Zealand being in the trenches right now? Imagine this: “Here is a message from Labour’s greatest ever donor….”

   What about the pure wastage of public money buying a worn-out train system right when the country could least afford it, just in order to empty out the coffers to spite National? Boy, thats coming home to bite now.

   What about the Labour-led Government wanting to dick around with the way we have our showers? The ubiquitous tenticles of control infiltrating every aspect of our lives. The talk-back callers have been livid about this all day.

   What about HC covering up for Winston when she clearly had prior knowledge that could have ended this fiasco months ago?

   Don’t worry, Labour has plenty of its own trust issues that run much deeper than anything they can throw at National. As the saying goes, “if you live in glass houses, don’t throw stones.”
8. randal 8

   9 October 2008 at 9:42 pm

   this election is about trust…not Bankers Trust!
9. Daveski 9

   9 October 2008 at 9:43 pm

   At least he didn’t break the law, did he Clinton?

   I’m sorry mate but I laughed and laughed and laughed.

   The law is an ass and the fact that SP is guilty of breaking a law for doing something so trivial shows what a joke it is. We warned you!

   And Bill lets not get too sanctimonious – Labour can come up with “principled” election bribes when it matters. They just haven’t been caught out on tape. I’d love to have had a tape recorder of Cullen and HC after the privileges committee meeting!

   [what are you talking about? The EC complaint that Slater took against me? The one in which I was found not to have breached the EFA? Interesting you know about it so soon. SP]
10. Rose 10

    9 October 2008 at 9:47 pm

    well said Tony
    also not forgetting the arrogance of HC to ignore the findings of the highest court in the land because it did not suit her and having her Mps call round and try and influence the vote.
    How can you lot still defend her?? (without attacking National)
11. Robinsod 11

    9 October 2008 at 9:48 pm

    Jeez – you guys sound real desperate. You should start a support group…
12. jo zinny 12

    9 October 2008 at 9:55 pm

    Tony Norrisss,

    One trifling note is this correction of your assertion that Glenn was Labour’s biggest donor. In fact biggest donors by far – yes plural to remove them from your singularity – are voters in the electorate past and Election present. Resident and otherwise legitimate New Zealanders.

    Sure, I know you overlooked that, but then with the atti-speak (= spoken attitood) evident in your comments I’d expect that. Point is, will you do it again. Or feign no compris! Or something..
13. tony norriss 13

    9 October 2008 at 10:07 pm

    The point is this:

    Any Government that has been in power for 9 years is going to have a lot of baggage that can be thrown back in its face and bought back to the attention of voters. Labour has heaps without having to think too far, as I have pointed out.

    It is a very dangerous strategy to throw the dirt around in these circumstances. It strikes me that Labour must be very desperate to be trying these sort of tactics for the reasons I have just stated.

    I could also have mentioned the ugly conglomoration of parties that voters will be considering when thinking about voting Labour. When each of these has torn its pound of flesh out of Labour, then there may be quite a few promises they can’t deliver on, meaning that Labour cannot be trusted in many aspects due to the pragmatic necessities of negotiation. Not only that, voters will be horrified at the prospect of Winston posturing around and making himself the centre of attention when much more pressing issues need sorting.

    On the other hand, National being so close to the 50% mark is unlikely to have these tensions and so is likely to be able to deliver much more of its promises, and thus is likely to be seen as more trustworthy by the voters.
14. Danny 14

    9 October 2008 at 10:22 pm

    If stating “winning at all costs” is no big deal, then National cannot complain about the secret taping, because the taping itself must also be merely a tactic to “win at all costs”.

    National cannot have its cake and eat it too. Either the taping was below the belt and the comment was disgraceful, or; the comment was par for the political course and the taping was nice work.
15. Danny 15

    9 October 2008 at 10:26 pm

    … i look forward to the explanations that will be offered when the racist tapes are released …

    That’s the good thing about right wingers and alcohol, boy do they show their revolting true colours.
16. Robinsod 16

    9 October 2008 at 10:30 pm

    <i i look forward to the explanations that will be offered when the racist tapes are released

    The racist tapes??? Was Bob Clarkson there…?
17. Janet 17

    9 October 2008 at 10:41 pm

    Has that comment by John K against state houses in his patch made the media at all? I haven’t seen it mentioned except for on the Standard.
18. the sprout 18

    9 October 2008 at 10:44 pm

    No significant difference in tax policy
    Junking Kiwisaver
    More secret tapes with more to come
    Worryingly convergent polls on the way…

    I wonder if this was where National were hoping to be four weeks before the Election?
19. redbus 19

    9 October 2008 at 10:52 pm

    I tol’ ya that he was trouble. You know that he’s no good.
20. pohutukawa kid 20

    9 October 2008 at 11:09 pm

    In vino veritas they say
    Yet lying is so much the custom
    The safest way with certain folk
    Is drunk or sober not to trust ’em

    Anon
21. Steve Pierson 21

    10 October 2008 at 12:18 am

    Janet, that’s why if you want real political news you have to come to The Standard.
22. r0b 22

    10 October 2008 at 12:27 am

    This is all trifling stuff.

    You wish. Last round of this “trifling stuff” saw the polls close a few points. This round probably will too.

    People don’t like being lied to Tony, they don’t like being taken for fools. That is what National is doing. Bill English is on record that their “principles” are just a mask for “whatever it takes”.
23. Tony Norriss 23

    10 October 2008 at 6:52 am

    r0b said “You wish. Last round of this “trifling stuff’ saw the polls close a few points. This round probably will too.”

    r0b, you seem to be missing the point that if National decides to get down and dirty they have much more ammunition to use. They don’t need to rely on sound bites from a National Party function. They only need to remind the public of the public record that demonstrates very clearly that this Labour-led government has been the most corrupt government in New Zealand’s history. If they decide to do this, then Labour is toast.

    All Labour can point to is isolated incidents and comments without any reference to accompanying behaviour. What National can point to is contrived, cynical behaviour and policies that pervade the whole government.

    Something I forgot to mention above, of course, was Labour stealing $800k of public funds for the pledge card campaign, and the Ingram Inquiry cover-up. All pretty shabby, really.

    BTW, there is still time for two Investigate Magazines to come out before the elections. I am sure that Ian Wishart has one or two tasty tid-bits to come.
24. Robinsod 24

    10 October 2008 at 7:05 am

    I am sure that Ian Wishart has one or two tasty tid-bits to come.

    Squeak…
25. Carol 25

    10 October 2008 at 7:45 am

    National started the strategy of trying to sling dirt at Labour years ago. They’ve steadily been attacking targeted Labour MPs with the line it’s about principles. So now the left is hitting back. You indicate it yourself, Tony with this:

    ” They only need to remind the public of the public record that demonstrates very clearly that this Labour-led government has been the most corrupt government in New Zealand’s history.”
26. Dom 26

    10 October 2008 at 9:54 am

    How is playing something that Bill English said, something that is pertinent to the election and not like or even muck-raking (ie. no one is accusing him of being a child molestor or of having had a mistress) how is this a ‘dirty trick’? If Bill English is saying stuff he doesn’t mean or doesn’t believe in to strangers then he should stop – you can’t expect a stranger you’d never met before not to repeat what you say, they simply don’t owe you that duty of care, it’s not a confidential relationship.

Links to post

1. The Standard 2.01: The Standard Week: 3-10 October: posted on 10 October 2008 at 5:27 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS