About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

October 29, 2007 9:27am by David Farrar

The excuses start …

Clark: “I think he felt he was defending a woman’s integrity”

– NZPA

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment66

Uncategorised
Labour

Related Stories

Clark reveals she knew
Reaction to Privileges Report
Defending her honour

Comments (66)

Login to comment or vote

Lee C

Are we still on Winston Peters?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:30am
Michaels

If this was the best she could come up with, it may be time for new spin doctors. However I can see a precedent being set here. If he is demoted and not fired, on of course recommendation of the PM, anyone will now be free to wack their co-workers and take it to court if fired. And the lawyers will now be using the Mallard V Henare case. No real punishment. Demoting him is just a joke as if they win power after the election he will be straight back up again as we would have forgotten all about this.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:36am
krazykiwi

She can ‘think he felt…‘ till the cows come home, but mallard acted in a way that would have had any private or public sector employee subject to instant dismissal.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:37am
Craig Ranapia

FFS… Helen Heke playing the enabler to Trev The Muss – with Winston as Uncle Bully. We truly live in strange, strange times.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:40am
milo

Four legs good. Two legs bad.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:45am
llew

How much integrity could a woman seeing Mallard have?

rakaunui(moderation): llew, is this a comment that you are proud of.? (or that DPF would allow)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:47am
helmet

I’m sure this statement will backfire on Helen. It’s a stupid thing to say, and she looks ridiculous for having said it. She’s normally smarter than this.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:50am
Seamonkey Madness

Milo: hahaha!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:51am
Barnsley Bill

Anybody seen the movie V for Vendetta? Art imitating life.
A demotion is a ridiculous notion, dressing it up as punishment is bullshit. what will his demotion be? Less work for the same pay and perks.
Schadenfraude is definitely the word of the week around here. He has no sympathy due to him at all, this is simply a case of him getting a dose of his own medicine.
And Helen Clarke missing her live cross over to paul henry on breakfast this morning was a cop out. henry has been vociferous in hiss piss taking of clarke and mallard over the last week and you can bet the technical difficulties were boillocks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:53am
democracymum

Would Helen Clark have defended Mallard actions if he had hit a woman?

Let’s see how would that sound…
“Trevor was under stress when he punched Katherine Rich on the face and then wrestled with her on the ground.

I think not! The only reason Helen will treat Trevor with kid gloves is she knows if she pushes him too far he may jump off the Titanic that is the Labour Government. And then it will be the Labour Party up the creek without a paddle.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:56am
roger nome

Most people I know are laughing at this incident – mostly I think because Tau just isn’t nicest guy himself. Now if Mallard had hit someone who carries a bit more respect – i.e. a Bill English- then Labour might have something to really worry about. But as it stands I can’t see this denting labour’s public support at all.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:00am
infused

haha
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:01am
krazykiwi

aye, what democracymum said.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:05am
Craig Ranapia

Roger Nome:

It’s a shit for people like you and me who live in the real world, isn’t it? You know, the one where we’re held accountable for our actions without a focus group, and where standard of behaviour apply to evryone not just ‘nice’ people we like.

Oh well… you reap what you sow.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:11am
roger nome

CraigR-

I’m not attempting to moralise on this issue. I’m just commenting on what I see as the political (non-)implications.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:15am
Bok

Ah the sexist little nome is out. So if a women is say not a very nice person it’s okay for her husband to come and bash her?
Or how about your child is stealing from your purse, little thief smash him.
Or Roger the little bastard in the cot is not nice at all and wets himself all the time, crying, let’s smash him or hang him on a washing line.

Roger you never cease to amaze me.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:15am
roger nome

Bok-

Refer to the above post.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:16am
Bok

Well roger I am referring to the circles you move in :
“Most people I know are laughing at this incident – mostly I think because Tau just isn’t nicest guy himself.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:19am
Bok

By our friends will they know us etc.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:19am
roger nome

Also bock why are you calling me sexist?

If your referring to that time I (rightly) called you a “twat” it was being used as a non-gender specific insult. For instance – if I called you “prick” it wouldn’t make me a misandrist – it would just mean that I think you’re quite a petty and nasty person.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:21am
Bok

Oh dear, the sky is pink and the moon is made of cheese…go away you sad boy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:25am
Reg

So its is OK after all.
It is OK to hit people who question the integrity of a woman.
It is OK to hit a Maori MP that isn’t particularly popular.
Thanks Helen -and roger- for the clarification!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:29am
roger nome

“Oh dear, the sky is pink and the moon is made of cheese”

I can see you some some pretty severe delusions about yourself Bok. May I suggest that if in future you don’t want those sorts of insults thrown at you, you should refrain from falsely accusing people of being rapists?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:32am
casual watcher

So Trev whacks Tau for a comment about Sharon and then runs off to spend time with Brenda. Which woman was he defending Helen ? Pathetic !!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:35am
llew

rakaunui(moderation): llew, is this a comment that you are proud of.?

Not particularly – nor am I ashamed.

(or that DPF would allow)

Well that’s for you & DPF to decide I guess, but it doesn’t look so bad to me compared to what does get said around here.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:38am
roger nome

“So its is OK after all.
It is OK to hit people who question the integrity of a woman.
It is OK to hit a Maori MP that isn’t particularly popular.
Thanks Helen -and roger- for the clarification!”

Not really – frankly I think their both macho dickheads, and I would rather that neither of them were any where near power. Still though – the image of those two middle-aged bully boys rolling around on the floors of parliament does have a sadly comic air about it. That’s why I think people are laughing about it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:40am
Mark

It’s OK to hit people if you are a Labour MP.

This has been proven more than once.

Lol.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:44am
roger nome

LOL Really need to do some editing before I post …
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:46am
David Farrar

Llew – I think Mallard is fair target, but his girlfriend isn’t.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:49am
llew

Your call – although I consider that was swiping at Mallard. In an indirect way. And it was a tongue-in-cheek question, not a statement.

But your call.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 10:54am
hinamanu

Now,, why hasn’t the Labour and Greens PC brigade spoken out forcefully about this exhibit of male testestrone, overtly prominent vocal and physical exchange of intellectual ideas that would have school children thinking men are fighting to have a say in the feminist socialism of todays enforced political world.

Now why aren’t the PC brigade speaking out against this stone age phenomenon rearing its ugly free speech unfashionable head??
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:03am
Reg

DPF said:
Llew – I think Mallard is fair target, but his girlfriend isn’t.

She’ll have to keep her distance then David or she could be collateral damage!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:05am
Reg

roger I laughed about it too!
I laughed because it shows what goes around comes around and the thought of the contortions the Labour Parties spin-doctors would have to go to, to justify it, had a almost instantaneous effect on my funny bone.
But face it Trevor will be tarred forever as a hot-headed hypocrite and the longer he stays in cabinet the funnier it will be!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:16am
GPT1

I have consistently said that I am struggling to get to excited about this (and got in trouble with Craig about my uncaring attitude in relation to violence) but now I am annoyed. If Tau had stopped Mallard’s whinging with a quick tap on the jaw Clark would be calling for charges to be brought in the Hague and yet she starts with the mealey mouthed excuses when it is her own. Even worse, she talks about protecting the honour of a woman – this is the same PM who presided over the dirtiest political smear campaign (Brash and the other woman) in Parliament’s history (edging out the “take your pills” campaign against Nick Smith by a whisker). Another outstanding display of hypocracy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:59am
milo

So the message is simple. Physical violence is permissable if it is against the enemies of the Labour party.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 12:09pm
Spam

Even worse, she talks about protecting the honour of a woman

..and criticised Brash for something like letting her walk ahead of him, because she was a woman (what was the exact incident?)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 12:24pm
Inventory2

roger nome – Mallard is a serial “baiter” – that he reacted violently when provoked merely demonstrates that he can dish it out, but he can’t take it. Two words come to mind to describe that kind of person – “bully” and “coward”.

Clark can’t have it both ways. She endorsed Mallard and Benson-Pope’s attacks on Don Brash last year – have you forgotten the television images of her and Cullen grinning like Cheshire cats? As GPT1 suggests, it is nothing more than hypocracy on her part, and the “defending a woman” claim is a smokescreen – and a pretty lame one at that.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 12:28pm
helmet

Is this the same Clark who was upset that Brash didn’t want to shout over a woman but is now happy for Trevor to go the biff to protect a woman’s honour?

I can picture it, in the lobby, Mallard lines up Tau’s ugly mug…”this one’s for sharon!” ..POW!

Nope, don’t think so somehow. It was all about himself. he just can’t hack it when he gets a taste of his own medicine.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 12:29pm
Craig Ranapia

(and got in trouble with Craig about my uncaring attitude in relation to violence)

There’s only room for one drama queen on this thread, Grant, and I’m it! 🙂 But it was just such a weirdly retro girly thing for Clark to say in the first place – and at the risk of drawing an over-long bow, there are parts of the world where patriarchs violently ‘defending the honour’ of their women against perceived slights isn’t only patronising, but downright lethal.

Perhaps things have changed dramatically since I left Wellywood, but back in the day the Hutt Valley chicks I knew could clean the clock of any uppity man without any help.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 12:51pm
Inventory2

Just an idle thought……if Mallard hasn’t had any involvement with a woman by the name of Sharon……..why did he get so upset?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 1:00pm
Hoolian

The thing about the Mallard affair is that while it wasn’t premeditated, there was a long time between when the comment was said and when the altercation occured. Mallard, during that time, could have/should have cooled down. So not only did he hit someone, he had time to think about it.

Not that I’m saying he went out into the lobby with the intention of hitting Henare. I’m merely saying that he had plenty of time to cool off and that he showed more signs of being schoolyard bully than a political one

I also think its ironic that the Govt is so anti-domestic violence and yet will defend him. I say let him sink. Clark is being stupid, though its not totally surprising.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 1:09pm
David Baigent

Inventory2, Now you will have every one looking for the real Sharon.

Haha, what a circus..
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 1:10pm
burt

So woman need their honour protected with violence. Oh Helen, you have slipped up here…. Take a deep breath and remind yourself that woman can do anything and don’t need a man punching people out for them.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 1:55pm
stan

Guess who else is a bitch? Margo Wilson. Here’s from Rodder’s blog:

I had heard you rule at the start of Thursday’s sitting that your jurisdiction didn’t extend to the lobbies. I concluded on the evening of the 25th that there was nothing that I or you could do.

However, the following day TVNZ have alerted me to page 129 of Dave McGee’s Parliamentary Practice:

Indeed, formerly, the Speaker was not regarded as having jurisdiction over what occurred in the lobbies, except during a vote. Now the Speaker’s delegation of authority from the House to control admission runs as equally to the lobbies as to the Chamber and the galleries, so disorder in the lobbies could be dealt with by the Speaker if necessary.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 2:19pm
Lee C

Question: “Now,, why hasn’t the Labour and Greens PC brigade spoken out forcefully about this exhibit of male testestrone, overtly prominent vocal and physical exchange of intellectual ideas that would have school children thinking men are fighting to have a say in the feminist socialism of todays enforced political world.”

Answer: “Because it’s ok when a Labour politician does it…”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 2:41pm
Lee C

And remember the flak Don Brash got for his sexist statement that he went easy on Helen during debates ‘because she was a woman?’

Quite rightly too. Yet here we have Helen using that same kind of outdated sexism when it suits her purposes.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 2:45pm
Right of way is Way of Right

Damn Lee, I was just about to post on this same perception! Helen is SUCH a hypocrite!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 3:01pm
burt

Lee C.

Answer: “Because it’s ok when a Labour politician does it…”

Exactly, this is always the case.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 3:12pm
Castafiore

Wow, How on earth did the feminite cabal manage to wave this excuse.

Feminist’s don’t need men. Feminist don’t care about male chivalry etc etc etc !!!!

Ooopp’ss ,All of a sudden !!

A Women’s integrity must be violently defended.

Does that mean that his poor ex-wife is allowed to engage pugilistic medicine to treat her bullying former husband to protect her integrity????
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 4:17pm
gd

Revisit the time when Gerry Brownlee pushed a guy at an election rally The Socialists wanted nothing less than Gerrys head on a spike.

So its different now that boff head Mallards the culprit. Clark cant even lie convincingly She is a very sad sad excuse for a so called leader.

Can you imagine a captain of industry whose senior executive had just decked an executive from the competition.

The media would be all over the CEO demanding a firing at the very least.

You Socialist supporters are a sick sad bunch trying to defend the indefensible.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 4:47pm
Nick C

Man, the Labour Party were already in the deep end given their hypocricy, at a time when we have a major add campaign against domestic violence. And now i can smash anyone i want if im defending a womans honour, because Politburo member Trevor Mallard did it and Der Fuhrer Helen Clark said it was O.K.

This is only going to make the Government look worse. Clark needs a new Spin Doctor fast, may i suggest Roger Nome?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 4:53pm
PhilBest

Eh?????????? Our Prime Feminister trotting out the “noble male defending the women’s honour” thingy????? She MUST be losing it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 5:15pm
Hoolian

There’s an unnatural silence from the outspoken Left on this thread/matter.

Don’t tell me I have to got to thestandard.org for laughs. Its so much easier for them to come here and fill our lives with things to snigger at. As Mallard has proven, monkey’s are at their most entertaining when preforming.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 5:16pm
side show bob

I’m waiting for the socialist morons on the 9th floor to call in their old mates the counselling pro’s for old Trev. Clearly the man is in need of some serious anger management counselling, something this lot excel in. His recovery will no doubt be instantaneous.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 5:46pm
Tauhei Notts

I believe the NZPA quote was incorrect.
I recall Newstalk ZB quoting her as saying
“He was defending a married woman’s honour.”
Now that is unusual as the clear inference is that a female in a Civil Union has a different sort of honour. The key word in that quote is “married”.
Maybe a “partner” does not need her honour protected in such a violent way.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:07pm
PaulL

Well, I understand that the rower wasn’t married. Is Sharon married? Perhaps that is the issue?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:13pm
hinamanu

“Eh?????????? Our Prime Feminister trotting out the “noble male defending the women’s honour” thingy????? She MUST be losing it.”

It’s all a first class game of rugger my friend.

all the Nats have to do is be disciplined, keep momentum, keep the backs feed, don’t drop the ball, watch for the gaps and generally stay in the oppositions half.

As of now, National has possession and territory. If they don’t give away penalties, they’re all gonna be awarded against Labour.

Straw that broke the camels back. Thats all National has to wait for.

Or perhaps the waiting is over.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:53pm
hinamanu

hmm,,

think John Key would like that analogy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 9:54pm
kehua

The Duck would be well advised
not to bash old ”Thunder Thighs’
her reaction would be strong and fast,
She`d sit the Duck down on his arse
he`d scream and swear as his ballbag tore,
a victim of a gold medal oar.
And to further show her displeasure
She`d send his nuts to Tau for extra measure.

As for Helen`s line “pathetic”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:05pm
hinamanu

“a victim of a gold medal oar.”

Except the duck would say gold medal oarsome..

cause he’s a boxer you see,,

ie, ducks and weaves.. I better stop.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:15pm
The Natural Party of opposition

There’s an unnatural silence from the outspoken Left on this thread/matter.

I havent heard National jumping up and down either.
However carry on with you bluster.

The important thing though is, how are you going to keep on for a whole ear without announcing any policy ?

You have do something to regain the lead in the polls
What you going to do?

So Mallard Biffed Henare big fucking deal Its simply not important in the scheme of things

You all whine and whinge about integrity and the corrupt Labour Government

But National sit there unable to say what they really want to do because it would render them unelectable.

Not much fucking integrity there is there ?

I haven’t heard Key say anything since He informed us the war in Iraq was over,that a bit of an unatural silence isn’t it Hoolian ?

Keeping quit all the time in case you make a fuck up ,is not what good leadership is all about

I would be very surprised if he was leading the Nats at the next election.!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:40pm
The Natural Party of opposition

Keeping quiet all the time in case you make a fuck up ,is not what good leadership is all about
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:41pm
hinamanu

How can John Key put a word in without sounding smug.

The moment he opens his mouth he’s gonna sound condescending.

Silence is still a virtue
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:50pm
Anthony

A good leader shouldn’t need to comment on all current affairs (excuse the pun) on a daily basis – you would expect that only from over-the-top control freaks like …..
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 29, 2007 11:58pm
PaulL

NPO: yeah, whatever. I take it you have nothing useful to comment on relating to Mallard / Henare.

National are doing their homework on policy. Maybe it will be good when it comes, maybe not. Getting all conspiracy theory about it is a bit pointless. It actually takes time to create good policy. I guess if you are just following the polls for your policy then it doesn’t take as long.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 30, 2007 12:02am
Hoolian

Natural Party of Govt – The important thing though is, how are you going to keep on for a whole ear without announcing any policy ?

Are you stupid? It would be bad strategic form if National was to release ‘policy’ before the election. Policy discussions maybe, but not hard policy detail. To do so would give Government officials (yes, paid by the taxpayer) the time to read through it and pick it clean – all National’s innovation, fresh ideas, new perspectives etc would be stolen. Kinda like 2005 elections when National came out too early and released tax breaks for students. Labour then followed with interest-free student loans. Yes, I emphasise the “followed” part, as in afterwards, post, later, thereafter…

I’m pretty sure National aren’t just going to give away their policy so you lefties can nick it. Policy will come out in time, but obviously not soon enough for you.

Take Politics101. You really have no understanding of the political process. But then again, I don’t think you want to. Ignorance, after all, is bliss.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 30, 2007 9:02am

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Maori Party vs NZ First

NZ First’s Youth Branch »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Top Stories

General Debate 17 April 2024
General Debate 18 April 2024
Fire and Emergency costs blowout
Ministry of Education Cuts in Perspective.
This could explain the brickbat
UK Labour Deputy Leader in trouble
Graham Adams on MACA and the Court of Appeal
We still have an inflation problem
No excuse for fleeing
The Cass Report

Recent Posts

No excuse for fleeing 18 April 2024
This could explain the brickbat 18 April 2024
General Debate 18 April 2024 18 April 2024
We still have an inflation problem 18 April 2024
UK Labour Deputy Leader in trouble 17 April 2024
Ministry of Education Cuts in Perspective. 17 April 2024
Graham Adams on MACA and the Court of Appeal 17 April 2024
General Debate 17 April 2024 17 April 2024
Fire and Emergency costs blowout 17 April 2024
The Cass Report 16 April 2024
Another badly designed cycleway 16 April 2024
General Debate 16 April 2024 16 April 2024

Never miss a post

Email Address

Recent Comments

No excuse for fleeing
Fentex
General Debate 18 April 2024
MCōs
General Debate 18 April 2024
MCōs
General Debate 18 April 2024
MCōs
General Debate 18 April 2024
MCōs
General Debate 18 April 2024
Maggy Wassilieff
General Debate 18 April 2024
MCōs
General Debate 18 April 2024
MCōs
General Debate 18 April 2024
MCōs
General Debate 18 April 2024
Mike
General Debate 18 April 2024
Mike
No excuse for fleeing
cmm
No excuse for fleeing
cmm
No excuse for fleeing
Ghost
General Debate 18 April 2024
Sacha

Links

Climate Change: Turning the tide
No Right Turn
A question for you all on those sackings
Not PC
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
A Water Tank Is Not A Fire Risk
No Minister
Daily review 18/04/2024
The Standard
Jones finds $410,000 to help the government muscle in on a spat project
Point of Order
Word of the day
Hompaddock
Again, hate crimes are not necessarily terrorism.
Kiwipolitico
What Time Is The Protest March To The Iranian Embassy?
Utopia
The 4% inflation rate vs thousands of jobs cut highlights a need to redesign the Reserve Bank inflation targets
The Daily Blog
RACIST ADVERTISING
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Is the state coming for churches?
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
Super Rugby Predictions for Week 9
Stats Chat
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d