When fear tactics backfire

Written By: - Date published: 2:47 pm, August 20th, 2013 - 93 comments
Categories: david shearer, john key, Spying - Tags: , , ,

John Key’s fear tactics backfired badly when he tried to smear David Shearer…

PM accuses Shearer of terrorism fear

Labour leader David Shearer has slammed prime minister John Key’s claims he would “run for the hills” in a terrorist attack, saying the last time he was involved in one he ran to help people instead.

The former aid worker’s exploits in war zones such as Iraq and Somalia are well-known. His wife was once held at gunpoint by a local guide in Somalia who then turned the gun on Shearer as he negotiated to have her released.

Key dismissed a large gathering of opponents to the GCSB bill in Auckland last night as a politically motivated and said on TV3’s Firstline this morning that if there was a terrorist attack at Auckland Airport opponents would “run for the hills” and demand to know why more was not done to prevent it.

“That would include David Shearer and Russel Norman,” he said.

“They wouldn’t want a bar of it. They’d be on your show saying the Government should have done more to protect people – mark my words.”

Shearer took exception to Key’s claims.

“The last time an attack happened I was actually in Iraq where a rocket came in and I ran to the people who were killed and wounded and helped out,” he said.

Shearer is not as smooth a politician as John Key, but he certainly has a lot more real-world credentials to draw on. Thanks John, for reminding us all of that…

93 comments on “When fear tactics backfire ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. burt 1
    20 August 2013 at 3:02 pm

    Key should understand that Labour have the funds from thousands of low paid workers at their disposal so that Shearer can keep his own money safe offshore while struggling workers pay for the publicity that will result in a large pay rise for him.

    • Tiger Mountain 1.1
      20 August 2013 at 3:11 pm

      How many things can a commenter get totally wrong in just one diversionary sentence? Burt is sure leading the motley crew today.

      • blue leopard 1.1.1
        20 August 2013 at 3:16 pm

        + 1 Tiger Mountain

      • burt 1.1.2
        20 August 2013 at 3:17 pm

        So yes or no;

        Do unions donate to Labour ?

        Are union fees extracted from predominately low paid workers ?

        Shearer will get a fat pay rise if he becomes PM ?

        Shearer hast got his own money tucked away off shore ?

        Election advertising is expensive and important for political campaigns ?

        • Colonial Viper 1.1.2.1
          20 August 2013 at 3:23 pm

          I think when Key said “run for the hills” he was describing himself. Bit of a slip there methinks.

        • Richard 1.1.2.2
          20 August 2013 at 3:30 pm

          Burt you are way off topic. Guess that means you can’t refute the argument.

        • leftbutnotdeluded 1.1.2.3
          20 August 2013 at 3:35 pm

          I repeat WTF are you on ?

        • Lightly 1.1.2.4
          20 August 2013 at 3:35 pm

          “extracted” – you mean voluntarily paid?

          And union members earn more than average, on average, in their fields.

        • blue leopard 1.1.2.5
          20 August 2013 at 3:39 pm

          @ Burt,

          Yes to all of the above. None of these factoids you provide make any difference to the following:

          Would I prefer to live in a country with a political party who promises to address the dodgy weakness of this GCSB bill ?

          YES!

          Do I despise living in a country where the party in government do not respect democratic principles (unclear if they even understand them)

          YES!

          Do I think the current government is concerned about NZers interests?

          NO!

          Do I think the current government, whose sole interest appears to be misinforming NZers to sway public opinion so that public opinion votes against NZ interests and meets goodness-knows-whose interests instead, is a competent, effective government?

          NO!

          Do I think NZ would be better off with a government made up of current opposition parties that are responding to NZ public opinion and actively working toward meeting these interests on a raft of matters?

          YES!

          Your comments, Burt, are a distraction to the very important matters this post relates to. Why do that?

        • Mary 1.1.2.6
          20 August 2013 at 11:29 pm

          Your illogical and unrelated string of assertions notwithstanding, without the unions wages would be far far less.

      • Colonial Viper 1.1.3
        20 August 2013 at 3:19 pm

        Shearer is a true hero. Key on the hand, is a hero to the bankster class.

        • AmaKiwi 1.1.3.1
          20 August 2013 at 9:52 pm

          Key is one dangerous b*st*ard. He ignores our logical arguments and launches simplistic personal attacks on us. See Chris Trotter’s quote from Mein Kampf.

      • lprent 1.1.4
        20 August 2013 at 5:24 pm

        burt has hung in here for (what seems like) eons picking up skills to deal with the people leaning left. Problem is that you have to explain what he got wrong and why… One of our posts with a large numbers of comments consists of r0b and burt arguing the meaning of retrospective….

        • rob 1.1.4.1
          20 August 2013 at 9:43 pm

          Burt is certainly retro as in retrograde
          He should understand that Key wants to read his mail!!

          • lprent 1.1.4.1.1
            20 August 2013 at 10:56 pm

            I sure that not even Key would want that much advice about the retrospective nature of his GCSB legislation……

            Has anyone explained that aspect to burt yet?

            oh dear… what have I unleashed..

    • leftbutnotdeluded 1.2
      20 August 2013 at 3:34 pm

      WTF are you on ?

    • Draco T Bastard 1.3
      20 August 2013 at 5:52 pm

      And burt rolls out his double standards again.

      burt, all organisations work the same way – lots of people pay in very little to maintain the people doing work that benefits them all. This includes National and Act but that is, according to you, ok because they’re rich people and not poor people.

      Why is it, burt, that you think that poor people shouldn’t organise the same way as the rich people do?

      BTW, I believe that Labour MPs pay a 10% tithe of their government paid income to the party.

      • lprent 1.3.1
        20 August 2013 at 10:53 pm

        I believe that Labour MPs pay a 10% tithe of their government paid income to the party.

        They do. Greens do a similar amount as well

  2. amirite 2
    20 August 2013 at 3:17 pm

    Figuring out that the public does not love him blindly any more, Key is reduced to scraping the bottom of the barrel. Keep digging, Johnny.

  3. Bill 3
    20 August 2013 at 3:28 pm

    Most people would run to help. That’s something that’s well understood. Understood well enough to be exploited in drone attacks….the ‘double tap’ or whatever term is used, whereby a second drone is dispatched 10 minutes or so after the first to wipe out rescuers.

    But maybe John Key was referring to natural disasters where people, according to most media, turn feral (thinking of the coverage of the Haiti earthquake)…except that they don’t.

    And then there are places like Christchurch where ‘running for the hills’ would take some considerable effort and require a fairly high level of fitness.

    So John Key is a wanker and David Shearer acted as most people would act in the given circumstances. And I’m pointing out the normality of David Shearer’s reaction simply because I detest any whiff of hero worship or attempts to establish any such meme (and yes, that was what I was picking up).

    We’re all heroes when the chips are down.

    • Colonial Viper 3.1
      20 August 2013 at 3:41 pm

      Well, some people are cowards, or plain self involved when the chips are down. The NZ Herald articles on how people walk straight by people in distress for instance.

      Secondary attacks/IEDs targeting first responders are a typical tactic. It’s therefore not a great idea to run to the site of a suspected IED explosion and the SOPs reflect that.

      Watching it all on a TV, it’s easy to forget how very nasty these conflicts are.

      • Bill 3.1.1
        20 August 2013 at 4:05 pm

        Yup. Should have put the word all in parenthesis…some people go into shock, some people get ‘the fear’ or whatever. But generally speaking, when a serious piece of shit lands, ‘everyone’ gets to clearing up the shit. And I’m saying that trait is in spite of numerous instances where people, in every day circumstances, walk on by with their head down or gaze averted when someone is getting beaten up or whatever.

        • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1
          20 August 2013 at 4:15 pm

          People are socialist by instinct, it would be nice to have political leaders who owned a philosophy which understood that.

          • burt 3.1.1.1.1
            20 August 2013 at 4:23 pm

            People are socialist by instinct

            People are social and caring for their family/tribe.

            Socialism seeks to force that natural human behaviour to exrtend to people who are both unknown to us and also who we may think don’t deserve our compassion and support.

            You are just making shit up when you seek to conflate natural human compassion with the ideology of socialism. That is like saying people will never fight over food, never compete with each other….

            This is the problem, socialism is a blunt instrument which attempts to mandate family behaviour across all of society. It is very very unnatural to be required to have less for people we care about so that people we don’t know can also live without taking personal responsibility for their own needs.

            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 3.1.1.1.1.1
              20 August 2013 at 4:32 pm

              First you say it promotes diversity (people you don’t like) then you blither that it mandates behaviour.

              It can’t be both. You’ve got no clue what Socialism is, so why don’t you stop demonstrating your profound ignorance?

              I note that you think “personal responsibility” means “I’m all right Jack.” Truly the ethics of the gutter.

              • burt …
                20 August 2013 at 4:44 pm

                Umm…

                mandate diversity – how’s that working for you.
                mandate sharing – how’s that working for you.

                When a fat prick from down the street comes and helps himself to the last of the food in your fridge – you will be happy right…. Cause he is hungry and needs more food to maintain his 22 stone frame than all of your family put together.

                Ooops, I forgot – socialism is all about caring and helping others – unless you think they already have more than you in which case all the ideology goes out the window and you are allowed to denigrate them – Perhaps call them a “rich prick” or some other ultimate socialist insult.

                • Bill …
                  20 August 2013 at 5:02 pm

                  Socialism also involves the commons Burt. And anybody who fucks with the commons does so at their peril. Ever thought about what being meaningfully ostracized from your society might mean in terms of your medium and long term prospects for survival?

                • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                  20 August 2013 at 5:39 pm

                  Burt smells of cheese, because he rubs it all over himself every night.

                  Note: this comment uses the Burt™ reality filter, where reality is 100% made up.

            • blue leopard 3.1.1.1.1.2
              20 August 2013 at 4:50 pm

              @ Burt,

              Depends who you consider part of your tribe as to whether you view natural human compassion as being unduly conflated with a political ideology.

              I view my tribe as rather large, and not all of them I know.

              The person who cut the wood that makes up my house would have to be part of my tribe, they have helped me to find shelter. Same with the person who designed my house, trucked the wood in and those that built the house (in this case I do know some of them)

              My car, the many people who went into designing the car I drive, who created the metal, who trucked the parts, who put it together.

              The food I buy. The people who grew it, the people who brought it to my district, the people who stacked it on the shelves and I bought it off.

              The examples are near endless.

              There are many people who have assisted in my life, they all have families; some of them will be old and need a pension, some of them are likely to be unemployed (given the unemployment rate and lack of jobs).

              If I am wealthy, I gain my wealth from many unknown people too.

              I am defining tribe here as an extended social web that assists one another; although this may not be a very good definition, because do people in my tribe have to directly help me in order to be part of my tribe? I don’t know if this is so.

              If a political ideology discourages the view of how interconnected we are with others, how dependent we are on many people (alot of them unknown,) and teaches me to only consider my own narrow interests, pitting such against others, it not only does me a disservice personally, leading me to have dishonest and faulty views on how my fortune is gained and society actually functions, it also attacks the very structure that makes our society function healthily.

              So do I prefer an ideology that does the opposite? That makes use of the best in my nature and encourages a kind hearted, or at least forgiving, attitude toward others in my world, who may be in less fortunate circumstances than myself?

              Yes I do.

              Do I think such an ideology has the vision to create a healthier society than one that encourages the least positive aspects of human nature?

              Yes I do.

              You only have to look around at world affairs to see just how effective encouraging people into a narrower and narrower focus on self interest gets us.

            • Bill 3.1.1.1.1.3
              20 August 2013 at 4:58 pm

              People are social to their….wait for it…society

              Modern nation states seek to impose a society that encompasses people who are unknown to one another. And that comes at the cost of a discrete and functioning society/community.

              You are just making things up when you suggest that socialism can ever exist among anonymous and detached individuals. Any attempt to bring such a thing into being would indeed involve imposing forms of blunt totalitarianism from an empowered ‘above’.

              Socialism results when there is a legitimate and dynamic social contract that is constantly being developed and refined through the meaningful participation of all that all members of that society.

              And since complexity can only arise from simple initial conditions (rather than from being constructed and imposed from above) socialism also involves the natural interaction between somewhat discrete societies and peoples projecting the values inherent to their habits and behaviours onto their interactions with other societies – or parts of other societies – during the osmotic spread of different influences (ideas) and senses of social identity.

            • Murray Olsen 3.1.1.1.1.4
              20 August 2013 at 7:03 pm

              “socialism is a blunt instrument which attempts to mandate family behaviour across all of society”
              Ha. It’s neolibs who continuously spout rubbish about running a household budget and think that it gives some meaningful insight into the economy of a nation state. Poor Burt, you can’t even be right by accident.

      • AmaKiwi 3.1.2
        20 August 2013 at 9:55 pm

        People who blog here are NOT cowards. We continue to speak out knowing the NZ Gestapo and their master can track us down in a split second.

        That takes courage.

  4. tinfoilhat 4
    20 August 2013 at 3:36 pm

    Key really is a vile little man.

  5. tinfoilhat 5
    20 August 2013 at 3:56 pm

    Was watching in the house earlier on and it seems that Shearer may have been having the odd tete a tete with Key on the GCSB bill and has kept the Greens in the dark on the whole thing.

    What’s going on with Labour ? When will the Labour voters and activists come to their senses and switch their allegiance to the Greens and Mana ?

    • RJL 5.1
      20 August 2013 at 4:02 pm

      Not really, it looks like Labour offered to come to a consensus on the GCSB bill with National. Which was exactly what was done on the 2003 Bill — *National* voted for the 2003 bill.

      However, it looks like Key’s idea of “consensus” was for Labour to accept his bill as is, and if they didn’t, well he doesn’t need their vote if he has ACT and Dunne’s vote.

      • mickysavage 5.1.1
        20 August 2013 at 7:42 pm

        Yep and the lesson should be do not trust Key under any circumstances.

        • tinfoilhat 5.1.1.1
          20 August 2013 at 7:46 pm

          Or Labour from my Green perspective.

        • RJL 5.1.1.2
          20 August 2013 at 10:15 pm

          Yes, don’t trust Key.

          But nonetheless, if GCSB reform really is both important, urgent, and “non-political” like Key sometimes suggests, then a consensus on what to do between *all* the parties in parliament is exactly what should be attempted.

          Of course, practically, what usually happens in such cases, is that National and Labour (plus non-entities like Dunne) come to a consensus and deliver a great big collective “fuck you” to the Greens. Like with the 2003 legislation.

          Which would hardly be a “win” for NZers, either. However, I would have thought that a keen negoitator like Key would back himself to get most of what he wanted in any negotiations with Labour, without such drama we’ve seen.

          The only way that Key’s actions with the GCSB legislation really make sense, is if he/National has calculated that by being tough and walking over the protests of Labour/Greens/etc he gains/retains more support from the electorate than he loses. Which may ultimately have been a mistake on his behalf.

      • burt 5.1.2
        20 August 2013 at 9:03 pm

        RJL

        Yes, the arrogance of it. Next up will be Bill English saying – we won, you lost – eat that !

  6. Bob 6
    20 August 2013 at 4:02 pm

    “The last time an attack happened I was actually in Iraq where a rocket came in and I ran to the people who were killed and wounded and helped out,”
    I wonder if he was telling John Key this story in John Keys office. He would have had to kill some time while waiting for Russel Norman to leave so he could sneak out. I guess David Shearer’s questions in parliament today were a case of his fear tactics (aka GCSB paranoia) backfiring, funny how what comes around, goes around.

  7. Tigger 7
    20 August 2013 at 4:03 pm

    Key, of course, would not run. He would crap his pants and cry instead.

    • Sable 7.1
      20 August 2013 at 4:16 pm

      Maybe we should all pitch in and send him some adult diaper’s along with a George Bush tea-shirt and a one way ticket to Iraq.

    • Anne 7.2
      20 August 2013 at 7:21 pm

      He did. In the debating chamber when an unfortunate gentleman tried to harm himself by jumping off the balcony. The opposition MPs who were the ones in danger of being hurt behaved with decorum. What did Key (who was on the other side of the chamber and not in any danger) do? He lost his cool and then tried to make it look like it was somehow Phil Goff’s fault and cut him the slit throat gesture.

      The mark of a true coward.

  8. Sable 8
    20 August 2013 at 4:12 pm

    Ha! Keys in a war zone what a laugh. The only fire fight he’s most likely experienced is a minor mishap with the bbcue.

  9. fambo 9
    20 August 2013 at 4:25 pm

    Help – there’s a madman running the country!

  10. fender 10
    20 August 2013 at 4:37 pm

    Looks like Key and the ruling elite will have to fund an incident or two to emphasise the point you will need “protecting”.

    • Jenny 10.1
      20 August 2013 at 5:08 pm

      A phoney but timely coincidental false flag Terrorist scare is overdue, any day now. Nobody will be caught, (well nobody but some mentally unstable fall guy will be caught). Maybe a fire a la Reichstat sort of thing. Maybe even an assassination and then an assassination of the assassin.

      • Don't worry be happy 10.1.1
        20 August 2013 at 5:46 pm

        Well there has been a deafening silence about the Korean guy with the SUV who tried to kill Key recently……something about a deal that went sour. Any journos out there?

  11. Ad 11
    20 August 2013 at 5:24 pm

    Shearer has to be very very careful to sustain the mana of last night’s meeting into the remainder of this week. He won’t get any fear or favour from Key and nor should he.

    I think it’s incredibly unhelpful of Shearer to expose in Parliament today a secret negotiation with Key about the GCSB Bill.

    Firstly because exposing a conversation with any Prime Minister into Parliament’s question time is an incredibly serious step that totally salts the field of any such conversation ever taking place again on any matter before the government.

    Secondly because it deliberately excluded Russell Norman (his likely coalition partner) – which goes down great in the trust department.

    Thirdly because what Key and Shearer are briefed on in the context of the drafting of the GCSB Bill are matters of national security, and certainly not something to be drawn on in Parliament.

    Shearer has on this issue finally got the broad left united behind him. Please, Shearer, don’t blow it now.

    • BM 11.1
      20 August 2013 at 5:46 pm

      Too late, he’s blown it.

      I’m interested to see how Paddy Gower spins it on tonights news.
      After watching the video, all I can say is Shearer is a complete idiot, he makes George Bush look like Einstein.
      .
      Honestly,There’s no way in hell any New Zealander with more than 2 brains cells would want that fuck wit controlling the country.

      Terrifying prospect.

      • amirite 11.1.1
        20 August 2013 at 7:02 pm

        on the planet you live on, yes. You must be filling your nappy.

      • Sable 11.1.2
        20 August 2013 at 7:20 pm

        Oooh look Bullshit Merchant is back with yet another slurry of insults as a substitute for a valid argument. More barking but still no bite…

    • CeeH 11.2
      20 August 2013 at 8:22 pm

      I was gutted when I heard about this so-called secret meeting. John Key sure made a big drama of it. The man couldn’t contain himself. How could Shearer be so dumb? But then I remembered how beguiling and artful John Key can be at twisting things around. Hoping Shearer can explain.

      • burt 11.2.1
        20 August 2013 at 9:05 pm

        This is politics in NZ. The sad thing really about this is that if the shoe was on the other foot Labour supporters would be crowing about kicking it to Key. The tribal warfare is so pointless, perpetuated only by loyal partisan foot soldiers. Change the game – don’t vote for either of the self serving major parties.

        • lprent 11.2.1.1
          20 August 2013 at 10:46 pm

          My god, are you cheerleading for the conservatives now? I can’t imagine that Act is worth trying to salvage. It has had a bad case of Brash Banks.

  12. Murray Olsen 12
    20 August 2013 at 7:10 pm

    Shearer’s meeting with Key, and the exclusion of Russell Norman, if that’s what actually happened, is another piece of evidence that some in Labour see National as a more natural coalition partner than the Greens. Shearer and ABC have to go. There is too much at stake to keep them around.

    • Colonial Viper 12.1
      20 August 2013 at 7:15 pm

      A Grand Coalition to rule NZ for a hundred years.

      • Bill 12.1.1
        20 August 2013 at 7:34 pm

        Jenny Shipley openly suggested such a formal coalition when she was PM. It has stuck in my mind because I was flabberghasted by the msm who let it slip by as a sound bite and failed to offer up any reaction whatsoever.

        Anyway, at some levels we have an informal coalition with nothing much beyond a revolving leadership when viewed from a broad economic or foreign policy perspective.

        I was reading some wikileaks cables the other night and the amount of bending over backwards by Labour with regards US concerns over possible ministerial positions for Green party ministers post election 2004(?) was quite astounding. No major portfolios within foreign affairs, economy etc. I very much doubt that anything has changed in that respect.

        • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1
          20 August 2013 at 7:53 pm

          Yep. And I’m damn sure that Green staffers have read the exact same cables.

        • tinfoilhat 12.1.1.2
          20 August 2013 at 7:58 pm

          Yet you still have a majority of activists at sites like this desperate to get Labour into power but only willing to throw a few crumbs to the way of the real parties of the left…… yep and sadly I could level the same claim at the NZ union movement as week.

          • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.2.1
            20 August 2013 at 8:11 pm

            Yet you still have a majority of activists at sites like this desperate to get Labour into power

            Go ahead and name five who fall into this category here at The Standard, if you can. You know, just to show that you aren’t full of shit.

            • tinfoilhat 12.1.1.2.1.1
              21 August 2013 at 8:57 am

              Anthony Robins, MickeySavage, lprent, Eddie, Mike Smith

              • lprent …
                21 August 2013 at 9:51 am

                Ah, I see that the artform of not answering the question is still strong. There are activists on this site beyond the authors.

                But even here you are foolishly wrong. Perhaps you should *read* the site rather than pulling ideas out of your navel fluff?

                I stated last year that I would be voting for the Greens because I didn’t like the direction that the Labour caucus was travelling in, and that the Greens looked far more competent. I doubt that I will be changing my mind because they are long term trends.

                At the 2011 election Eddie said “It’s a bit of a toss-up, actually.” between Labour and the Greens.

                I have no idea what way Mickey would leap at present. But I suspect he’d be like I was last election and loyally help out Labour.

                I think that Anthony and Mike are still strong Labour supporters. In my observations, I’d say that both have reservations.

                The Labour Party is in my view rapidly losing their party.

                Basically you’re stupid if you think that we don’t evaluate our support and for whom. It is only fools like yourself who work of out of date presumptions – probably because you’re too lazy to think.

                You’d have been better off saying that “the majority of activists at sites like this being desperate to get National out of power”. That would have been accurate because they are completely incompetent at the task. Who we’d support to do the task varies.

    • karol 12.2
      20 August 2013 at 7:17 pm

      Agreed. Enough! Russel Norman made some important points in his questions to Key today. s far as the MSM is concerned that got ignored in favour of Shearer’s inept antics.

    • Sable 12.3
      20 August 2013 at 7:23 pm

      Its no secret I think Labour and National are both pond scum. Still I’d be surprised by a National/Labour coalition. I think no amount of protection would save Shearer from the wrath of Labour supporters…

  13. Poem 13
    20 August 2013 at 7:35 pm

    The only one who has blown it is despot John key AD and BM who sound more desperate to make a mountain out of a molehill. If the nats and their supporters think that the key led national party is going to come out of the next election unscathed, you have a another thing coming. I wouldn’t be surprised if the national party end up suffering their greatest defeat ever since their formation in 1936.

  14. Poem 14
    20 August 2013 at 7:38 pm

    And Bill, not everyone has that level of compassion, fortitude, courage and strength to do the kind of job that David Shearer did, and in a crisis I know who I would put my trust in and that would be David Sharer, not a self serving currency trader like John key.

    • Colonial Viper 14.1
      20 August 2013 at 7:42 pm

      compassion, fortitude, courage and strength

      You should definitely fall out of love with political figures. None of them are worth it, you have to keep damn close tabs on ALL of them.

      • tinfoilhat 14.1.1
        20 August 2013 at 7:47 pm

        “You should definitely fall out of love with political figures. None of them are worth it, you have to keep damn close tabs on ALL of them.”

        QFT !

      • Poem 14.1.2
        20 August 2013 at 8:17 pm

        I dont love any politician Colonial Viper, I greatly admire people like David Shearer for the humanitarian work that he did in war torn countries, it is not the kind of job that anyone can do.

        • Colonial Viper 14.1.2.1
          20 August 2013 at 8:20 pm

          neither is Leader of the Labour Party.

          • Poem 14.1.2.1.1
            20 August 2013 at 8:48 pm

            Well that’s your opinion, I think Shearer deserves a shot and left to do the job, I think he will do it well, if given the chance. A Labour led coalition is a hell of a better prospect than what NZ has now under the insane despot john key who has gone crazy with power and his self serving national party.

            • Colonial Viper 14.1.2.1.1.1
              20 August 2013 at 9:00 pm

              I think Shearer deserves a shot and left to do the job, I think he will do it well, if given the chance.

              Each month is a chance. That’s 19 or 20 chances so far. There aren’t that many chances left.

              Well that’s your opinion

              A line that the Prime Minister could have uttered quite comfortably.

              A Labour led coalition is a hell of a better prospect than what NZ has now under the insane despot john key who has gone crazy with power and his self serving national party.

              Yes. And I’m looking forwards to more demonstrations of Labour’s ability and willingness to work closely and supportively with the Greens.

              • Poem …
                20 August 2013 at 9:18 pm

                well it is your opinion, its not anybody else’s is it? How many chances do you think key has got left?
                Shearer is the ongoing target of national party electioneering and yet he is still standing. And you sound doubtful CV?? or more is it your wish that Labour and Greens dont get on? As things stand now, I dont see why Labour and the Greens including other opposition parties cant continue to work together.

    • Bill 14.2
      20 August 2013 at 8:02 pm

      Would that be the type of compassion that drove him to go in and bat for those receiving sickness entitlements?

      As for ‘fortitude, courage and strength’, well…we all have them in some measure or other. And my comment wasn’t about his job or his motivation for taking up such a job or his execution of that job – it was about the common reaction of people in emergencies.

      But I take your point over which of the two to better rely on in a life threatening situation.

  15. logie97 15
    20 August 2013 at 9:34 pm

    Why do we give the likes of burt oxygen…?

    • lprent 15.1
      20 August 2013 at 10:44 pm

      Because he follows the rules of the site and engages in robust discussion, sticks broadly to the topic at hand, and lots of people argue with him and he with them. We try to moderate on behaviour, not on beliefs. Good thing too when you consider that you’re all wrong (IMAO) ! 😈

    • Tracey 15.2
      21 August 2013 at 8:14 am

      Because it adds to the debate. It would be stupid to have a site where everyone simply agreed all the time, especially when the parties they seem to favour most are on the opposition benches.

      Debate is one antidote to a closed and self righteous mind.

      • Bob 15.2.1
        21 August 2013 at 9:44 am

        +1 Tracey, that is why I come here rather than Whaleoil or Kiwiblog, I would rather see what is generally the opposite opinion to my own and debate the merits of both, than sit around a blog patting people with similar views to mine on the back!

  16. vto 16
    20 August 2013 at 9:57 pm

    .
    Key has launched a pre-emptive strike on the issue of his muscles that is all. It is one of his weaknesses and one of Shearer’s strengths so he has struck first – peeeooowwww……

  17. gobsmacked 17
    20 August 2013 at 10:00 pm

    Shearer showed great courage and compassion in his previous work. More than Key ever could.

    Unfortunately in his 50’s Shearer then made an extraordinary career change, and he appears to lack the kind of honest friends that would tell him how totally unsuited he is to this new line of work.

    Sure, we all make mistakes. Trouble is, we’re all paying the price for his.

    • Poem 17.1
      20 August 2013 at 11:02 pm

      Well, New Zealand and its people are most definitely paying for the mistake called John key gobsmacked.