Comments on: A suggestion for Kevin

By: stephen

stephen — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 20:00:41 +0000

there should be a balance when using the terms as I’m sure I’ve heard the term “far right” in a New Zealand political context.

The National Front. Which is a head scratcher if you think about it…but why bother right!?

By: ephemera

ephemera — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:53:44 +0000

@3-coil

Not at all, in fact, it would have been quite hilarious, if only he had said it.

By: 3-coil

3-coil — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:21:45 +0000

Of course there would have been no problem at all if he’d just said “John the white motherfucker”…

By: RKBee

RKBee — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 04:47:35 +0000

‘but he engages and comes across as genuine and actively trying to achieve worthwhile things.’

He should try running for the senate.

By: Pete George

Pete George — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:33:51 +0000

You could look on the Kevin Campbell experience as a wee triumph for blog influenced politics – help exposing and weeding out the bozos before they become MPs.

John B Acts as a blogging contrast, he’s not always right but he engages and comes across as genuine and actively trying to achieve worthwhile things.

By: calendar girl

calendar girl — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:42:17 +0000

Campbell still doesn’t get it: “I admit it wasn’t a smart comment and it could be viewed negatively by some …..”. That’s like a classic Helen Clark apology dripping with euphemism (No offence was intended, but if anyone …etc). Just not good enough.

I was among the first to take umbrage at Campbell’s initial comment. He made it clear by his subsequent contextualisation that the comment was intended as a slur, and he got the kind of reaction and political red card that he deserved. Good for Key that he stood aside from it, but that doesn’t exonerate Campbell – the likes of whom we can do without in our politics.

By: Murray

Murray — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:40:39 +0000

Strife – someone is knob and they cut him loose.
Just dojg his job – clinging to an obviously corrupt minister because you need his vote.

The difference between Act and Labour. Which is which RRM?

Burt they didn’t make such a destinction with the Nuremberg Laws. Coincidently nor did Campbell.

By: burt

burt — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:21:32 +0000

I have made a slight correction; PS: Have a look at your genealogy. If you do have a father specified on your birth certificate you might be able to ~~If you~~ go back far enough, to~~you may~~ find a Jewish ancestor. Edit: Of course Jewish geneology is via the mothers family tree, but that's another issue.

By: JiveKitty

JiveKitty — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:06:03 +0000

@Murray: maybe it’s implied that there is no gradation in the left-wing – if you’re left-wing, you’re extreme. I’m sure I’ve heard people described as far left-wing in the media, but not with reference to NZ politics, I think. Which is probably for the best, as we don’t really have politically relevant far right- or left-wings here (our scale is quite compact in that sense). However, there should be a balance when using the terms as I’m sure I’ve heard the term “far right” in a New Zealand political context.

By: RRM

RRM — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:42:33 +0000

Aaaaaaand another one learns the hard way that SERIOUS JEWS ARE SERIOUS and Judaism is NO LAUGHING MATTER.

Always happy to see strife in ACT though

By: Murray

Murray — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:27:15 +0000

ISNT Jewish. Stupid fingers.

By: Murray

Murray — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:10:27 +0000

Thats another issue, Key is Jewish. He attends a Christian church. But in the minds of someone like Campbell its close enough that his mother was Jewish and he asserted that Key was Jewish so what he said was ok.

Disturbingly the essecence of the Nurenberg Laws.

Rather like the current media laws which have presenteerrs unable to comment on anyone who is not a pinko as being a “a far right wing….”

When have you ever heard them describe someone as being “a far left wing….” Even extremist loonies like Minto and locke get a free pass.

By: JiveKitty

JiveKitty — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:04:59 +0000

@Murray: yeah, I did note that unless somebody’s defining themself by the characteristic, there aren’t really many other reasons I can think of to call a person by said characteristic (and I did note that contextually it is unsettling, precisely because of what you explained in your point re: neuro-linguistic programming/presetting). Key obviously doesn’t fall into the category of defined by his Jewishness. Is he even Jewish? I don’t tend to pay too much attention to that kind of stuff as it is fairly irrelevant unless it informs their actions to a hugely obvious degree.

By: Murray

Murray — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:57:32 +0000

We should cut out the middle man and get them together.

By: Pete George

Pete George — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:59:43 +0000

Its a technique you use to cocerce political support and sell vacuum cleaners.

They are opposites (politicians and vacuum cleaners) – one blows hot air and the other sucks cool air.

By: Murray

Murray — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:48:29 +0000

Its not an insult to call someone Jewish Jive, but as you say, why do it at all. Do I call DPF the Jew Dave? Do i call him the National party hack DPF? No, because i’m not a journalist seeking to preset an auidiences predices.

And thats what it comes down to. Its neuro-linguistic programing using a technique called front loading. You are punching the predudical hot buttons to load your statment. DPF for example would recognise a survey question that begins “75% of people believe……” as being front loaded seeking agreement with something. It will give you an unrealistic poll result.

Its a technique you use to cocerce political support and sell vacuum cleaners. Either is unethical in my book.

By: JiveKitty

JiveKitty — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:43:14 +0000

The act of referring to somebody as a Jew isn’t a perjorative comment in and of itself, although contextually there’s something unsettling about a need to refer to someone as a Jew but I guess it could be relatively appropriate if somebody defined themselves by their Jewishness. However, it’s probably worth noting that his intent in context appeared to be as a slur (lest somebody infer that people here are inferring Jewishness is an insult). I realise this may seem obvious, but where people are hiding behind pseudonyms, as I am for certain reasons, arguments can explode over minor things and perceived slurs, and things can tend to get shouty inasmuch as one can display shoutyness through the typed form.

By: CJD

CJD — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:05:07 +0000

Unfortunately political parties are like churches in their enthusiasm to recruit new members. This means that in between the people of genuine good will a few crack pots sneak through. The liberal nature of ACT means that censorship is an entirely foreign concept to us. I have watched this particular character with growing concern since I joined the party. Fortunately with biggoted blowhards they tend to self destruct in spectacular nature. What I found to be the most hilarious section of the open letter was Kevin’s contention that he somehow represented the the “real” ACT Party. Here is a open response to you Kevin-ACT represents a broad array of beliefs. We do not judge people on their religion, race or even gender preferences and our support of a number of bills will bear this out. We genuinely care about New Zealand and New Zealanders. JOhn Key is a decent man and you had no right to attack him in the racist way you did (ever). I think you have entirely missed the point of what ACT is about and are better placed with some extreme grouping somewhere else.

By: Murray

Murray — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:50:01 +0000

Evidently he doesn’t understand the concept of having been given the bums rush workingman.

By: workingman

workingman — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:46:43 +0000

I am interested in how Kevin managed to email all these people including me. I am assuming that as part of his campaign to be elected to the ACT board he was given a list of members email addresses so he could communicate with them. I think it rather bad form that he has used this email list to now send his diatribe out, especially when he is no longer an ACT member so is really abusing the privilege of having been given that email list.

Isn’t there an NZ law against sending out unsolicited emails? Of course being an ACT supporter I do not expect the government to control everything, so I have made it very clear to Kevin that I am not impressed by him emailing me in this way. I have also emailed ACT saying I expect them to look after my email address a bit better than this.

Workingman