Bradford on Greens in 1990s
May 30th, 2009 at 10:33 am by David FarrarBryce Edwards has a very detailed and comprehensive post on Sue Bradford, one of the contenders for the Green co-leader without a penis position. I recommend people read the full post, but could not resist one quote from Bradford in the early 19902:
she found the Greens to be either ignorant of or hostile to worker and union issues. She describes two kinds of Green: hippie dropouts content to make pots, be creative and smoke dope; and those who are quite right wing, “who think it’s fine to send the unemployed out to work that is environmentally sound like cutting bush tracks” ‘ (Leget, 1993: p.68).
Heh.
The results of the election will be known later today. The market is strongly picking Turei.
Related posts:
- Bradford threatened to quit if Greens are not left-wing enough
- Greens abandon Bradford, she claims
- Bradford on the Greens
- Nandor on Bradford
May 30th, 2009 at 10:55 am
“Sue Bradford, one of the contenders for the Green co-leader without a penis position.” oh fuck – mental picture
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 11:00 am
“Green co-leader without a penis”, are you sure?. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to find out, man, she scares the crap out of me.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Bradford’s chances are being discounted due to the anti-smacking legislation. If Bradford doesn’t get the position, it is a clear indication that the Greens regard that legislation as a political mistake that they’d like to distance themselves from.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Who gives a flying fuck who leads the Greens? Total fucking bunch of no-hopers.
The irony is that there are a LOT of green policies that I’d be keen to see more taxpayer money spent on, but I cannot fucking STAND the Green party for two major reasons:
1. Their social (-ist) policies. Seriously, fuck off with your voodoo, you shitwitted drug addicts. Stop trying to tell me what to do.
2. Their subscription to the cult of global warming.
IMHO we could really return NZ to a near pristine environment if we dropped all the social welfare crap, lowered tax and spent a larger portion of the remainder on environmental protection – cleaning up the waterways is a great example.
Additionally, the potential for ecotourism is massive. Spending money on some environmental issues (i.e. NOT ‘green’ lightbulbs) really is an investment in the country’s future.
So, err, yes, on topic again: Who gives a fuck who leads the communist party?
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
The herald business supplement back page “The Insider” yesterday seemed to think Bradford had it all sewn up.
That put a smile on my face for a few hours! With her at the helm, (and a lot of members like what she’s done) the Greens are toast.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
It always puzzles me when she is described as an ‘advocate for unemployed rights’ or some such description. Surely the best advocacy one can perform for the unemployed is to get them into employment? Am I missing something here?
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
I care who leads because I’m long on Turei stocks on iPredict. I just wish there were more information coming out of the convention to know how delegates are going. FrogBlog’s entirely silent.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
OR, their voters like new blood (with just enough experience) as much as the rest of the population.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Though I do expect that Bradford’s past activities do come into it to, just not as much as davidp suggests.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
All hail Bradford!!
I would vote for her to become leader.
Just fantastic really.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Will key like Bradford?
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Heh, reminds me of a radio interview with Russel Norman. Interviewer asked if a hermaphrodite could fill both Green co-leadership positions, then asked Norman if he was a hermaphrodite, which Norman refused to answer.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Are you a hermaphrodite noskire? Your language patterns are exactly those of one (or two, depending on how you look at it).
Vote:Viking2 – Key already likes Bradford, as do most of the politicians in the house. It’s only the bitter, the twisted and the gullible who are frightened of her.
May 30th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
See the useless Claire Trevett’s analysis of these two communist scum lacks any depth whatsoever.
They’re communists Trevett you despicable coward. Write the truth.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Forget to take your pills today village idiot?
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Extra, extra read all about it, woman has different views now than she had 16 years ago!
Another Kiwiblog exclusive David, great work as ever.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Extra, extra – Bradford still on the public teat decades later.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
I heard the two speak. I was vaguely impressed by both.
Bradford talked about keeping integrity to core values, Metiria talked about integrity to the Green Party democratic process.
Bradford talked about having policies with more depth than a tagline, Metiria talked about the effectiveness of tagline marketing in getting core messages to the public.
Bradford talked about sticking it to the right-wingers, Metiria talked about making gains no matter who they had to talk to.
And so on.
And then, during question time, they assured the audience that they agreed with their opponent on every single one of those points. Bradford thinks the 2008 campaign was great, the Green Party grassroots democratic process is great, that making gains by shaking hands with the Nats is necessary. Metiria thinks core values are important, depth of policy is important, and you have to be wary of the Nats and co.
I think the main thing I took away from it was that Bradford has a very nice smile when she uses it, and should endeavour to use it more often; and that the Green Party is designed in a way that prevents (or hinders) much of the top-down hierarchical tendencies of other parties.
And there was something about body paint.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
ooow, wittle sonic is giving me negative karma ’cause I teased him.
diddums.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
I’ve never hit a Karma button in my life Expat, must be another fan. Does anyone seriously waste time with them?
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Good stuff Ryan. Sounds like those two were going to a LOT of effort not to ‘demonise’ each other by ‘agreeing with their oponent on every singe one of those points’, but the key is what they each initially focused on IMHO. Looks like the glacial slide to the centre will continue…
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
>>Does anyone seriously waste time with them?
Ummmm yes I just negatived karmed that stupid comment
Vote:How the hell else do you think the karma ratings get there?
May 30th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
FWIW there are a lot of invisible Negative Nellies out there.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Bradford lucked out on leadership role…oh dear what a shame… move on nothing to see here…
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Yes, well, there’s one direct quote I remember: “I don’t care where our votes come from.” – MT.
However, that has to be taken in context with her praise of the bottom-up structure of the Greens – the members end up selecting policy, rather than a manifesto as such.
That’s the real feeling of difference I got amongst so much blurring between the two. MT likes the process, SB likes the policy. Obviously they both like both, but the feeling I got was a slight difference of emphasis.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
…who think it’s fine to send the unemployed out to work that is environmentally sound like cutting bush tracks” ‘
THat’s what PEP was about and everyone loved it.
Was the most succesful programme this country ever had.
Opposition gang members were working together. I witnessed that myself.
Young people worked and felt good about themselves.
THe length of duration was extended from six months to twelve months and everyone stuck to it.
Bring it back today and it would be just as popular.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Ryans description of their speeches reminded me of this:
John Jackson: “It’s time someone had the courage to stand up and say: I’m against those things that everybody hates.”
Jack Johnson: “Now, I respect my opponent. I think he’s a good man. But quite frankly, I agree with everything he just said.”
John Jackson: “I say your three cent titanium tax goes too far.”
Jack Johnson: “And I say your three cent titanium tax doesn’t go too far enough.”
Im abit dissapointed Bradford didnt win. Theyre both crackpots but Bradford is more obvious about it and that what the environment leaning voters need to see.
Vote: