It clearly part of DPF’s ‘job’ to post something everyday for at least a week about Carter. It is part of keeping the story active, keeping it in the public view. Doesn’t matter how meaningless the post is.
I love the way ‘trougher’ has entered the lexicon of the right. Given that a trougher is ” someone who eats lots of bad food all the time.” it seems very, very unlikely to be an accurate way to describe someone who has travelled extensively on the public purse.
@ American Gardener – you miss the irony. When he was still Education Minister, Carter sent an e-mail to a young person who had written in to him. Carter’s e-mail contained multiple spelling and grammatical errors. I suspect that this might be a gentle reminder, as well as a satirical comment on Carter’s Clouseau-like exceution of his attack on Goff.
Re Carter this is where the rubber hits the road. Goff can kick him out of caucus but does the Party have the goolies to kick him out of the Party? Andrew Little on radio this morning prevaricated when asked; mentioned legal issues etc. etc. They are still running the line that Carter is under stress (by inference unbalanced, mentally deranged and if we could we would lock him in an asylum – this is the way we on the left deal with dissidents). Carter of course is very clear headed; he faces another three years without the perks he has become accustomed to. So the party want to kick the messenger rather than heed the message. My guess is that the gay faction and the PC brigade are going to rally around to prevent Carter from being expelled and trade with the Unions to make it through to the next election so that they can get Little in place to unseat Goff.
Interesting to see Labour’s factions putting up a united front last week to “get in behind” Goff. Even Maryan Street did so.
But the damage in public perception has been done, which is that CC as a senior Labour MP made public, discontent that Goff can’t win the 2011 election (which we all knew anyway although not so much Goff really as Labour can’t).
In terms of timing – the latest MP expense claims were old news as soon as it was released (ie who cared), so was it that that drove CC to do what he did?
Or was CC looking at what the Australian Labor Party have done as inspiration?
Or the pressure on him?
Or did someone in NY “use” CC (eg as one of those “useful fools”) to do some limited damage against Goff but more importantly sow the seeds for behind the scenes maneouvering post 2011 election (to replace Goff and/or King) with someone else to carry on the Clark legacy?
For CC’s sake I hope not because if so, he has sure been “used” … and now been disgarded by his closest friends
CC has very carefully maneouvered himself into the perfect position to take over as Leader of the Jamtin Party from whence he will easily rally the necessary 500 members to raise it from the dead and enjoy all the perks of being a Party Leader in the House, will pipe up periodically when he is briefly in the country or when it is the most embarrassing to Phil-in, all the while “absolutely supporting Labour”.
He will be the ultimate supporter for Labour so just give him the nickname “jockstrap” and lets move on.
Indeed Doug. It seems that amongst all the bluster on Thursday, Friday and Saturday, Goff and those who spoke out to kick Carter forgot about the principles of natural justice. They had already tried Chris Carter, found him guilty and sentenced him to political execution without giving him the opportunity to mount a defence.
If that’s the kind of fundamental mistake the Labour leadership would make in dealing with one of their own, can we trust them to run the country?
Don’t forget that Carter has admitted his guilt and in fact re-emphasised what he initially said in his letter. It’s only the sentence, which does seem it could be a bit less clear cut than made out last week.
Rudman says “And if they stick to the Labour Party constitution, nor can they have him expelled from the party at this Saturday’s meeting of the New Zealand council.”
But he also says “Expulsion is the ultimate weapon, saved for the grandest of crimes and misdemeanours.It’s not something to be used by a leader in a tit-for-tat spat over the passing-round of a rude note cheeking yourself.”
Publicly undermining the Labour Party is not a grand misdemeanor? Do they want sand in the recovery gearbox?
Awesome Maggie – “Christ Carter”. He’s been crucified, but will he be resurrected?
Seriously, this is one trougher that Labour could do without. As much as I don’t want them back in power, I also think we need them to be a strong opposition party to keep National on their toes. It’s fundamental to our political system.
Yeah, yeah Kris, but did you write that note? Funny, I didn’t think of you until you pointed it out.
This is different to the Richard Worth thing. All the “victims” here are in Labour (maybe they need an epidural):
– Carter is a victim of diminished troughability
– Goff is a victim of poll trough, and Carter shat all over the sides of the trough making emergence more difficult
– the Labour Party is a victim of an opposition trough of low pressure with internal storm front
I don’t see how Labour can get rid of Carter. He is well past his 90 day probationary period. Have Labour followed the proper processes of counseling him and giving him written warnings? Because sending him a message to “go home and think about your future” via TV, or hinting that he has mental health issues in a blog post just aren’t going to be sufficient if Carter takes his case to an employment tribunal. Lastly, Carter will have the full force of the unions behind him… They’re not going to be happy that the sort of dodgy employer they’ve been looking to use to discredit National’s employment law reforms turns out to be their own political wing.
What is most amazing about Carter’s letter is that Goff didn’t just publically ignore it, especially once he knew where it had come from.
Two sentences about a supposed Goff gaff on the tradability of a week of annual leave entitlement, with a prediction about union based MPs will challenge Goff tomorrow, spread into two more sentences about general discontent with Goff and how happy this must make Cunliffe. That could have all died tomorrow as a non-event.
Then three short sentences about George Hawkins, the main point appearing to be that Labour can’t afford by-elections. So?
Once he nipped in the bud any possible move tomorrow, Goff could have quietly dealt with the matter in his own terms and time.
“The Petulant Poof deserves all he gets.” – ummm I think this might be the real reason the Right hate Chris Carter so much – he is a successful gay man. The Right hate uppity minority groups: the VRWC detest it when gay men, lesbians, brown men are successful and take every opportunity to shoot them down. That was Shane Jone’s real crime: being a user of pornography wasn’t the issue, being a brown one was.
Goff should quit and find a job where his considerable talents could be much better utilized. Tht’ what Preb’s and Moore did and ask either if they would go back to the Labour mess and the answer is veryclear. Even Moore is well embrased in capitalism and thinks its great.
Goff quiting would be the death nell for any Labour Party especially if King and co followed as they will. No one of Labour Principles left.
Then the outfit could be renamed for what it really would like to be.
Rufus – American Gardener is a troll who’s method is to take the stupidest position on any issue and attempt to defend it with the stupidest possible argument – psychobabble. “Projection” is a favourite of his, most of his replies amount to some varation on the theme – basically he thinks “it takes one to know one” is the strongest argument known to man…
Not that successful… He is currently in the process of being thrown out of his own party, the general public think his defining quality is a sense of his own importance and entitlement, and I haven’t been able to find a single person so far who can point to anything Carter did well in parliament except being Clark’s toady.
But the real question is not why the “Right” hate Chris Carter, but why the Left do. After all, Labour MPs voted unanimously to suspend him from caucus and there wasn’t a single National MP in sight.
@ American Gardener – it’s not the VRWC which is currently calling Carter “unwell”, “pretty irrational” and “self-destructive”. Those are all direct quotes from some of his senior colleagues; Phil Goff, Trevor Mallard and Maryan Street respectively.
Get with the game AG; the flack that Carter is drawing from his colleagues is far worse than what the blogosphere has been saying about him for years.
Carter was caught excessively spending tax payers money on frivilous luxuries, was petulant and unrepentant when it was publicised and was forced by Goff give an apology through clenched teeth. It wouldn’t have mattered if he was brown, Jewish, gay, transgender, Assembly of God or Pasifika – he had his snout in public trough. If he was heterosexual he’d be getting the exact same amount of stick for his conduct. Stop distracting with PC BS and fake conspiracy crap and try and get a sense of humour. Of course him being gay will now be reason for the most PC factions in the Labour Party to rally around him and undermine Goff’s attempts to be “rid of this turbulent priest”.
You remind me of a hilarious play I saw at the Court Theatre that featured a rugby playing kiwi bloke and his flatmate who was the Sexual Harrassment Officer on campus at Massey. It was the most hilarious piss take on political correctness I had ever seen and the entire audience were wetting themselves – except this precious couple dressed in the requisite hemp hand woven attire with the anti-vivisection, pro whale, vegen, Green Party, Pruis driving, Morris Dancing look about them. They scowled though most of the first half and staged a public footstomping walkout just before half time provoking the portion of the audience who could view them to laugh doubly hard!
I’ve seen some commenters on the right decribe John Key as a “successful” trader. I guess he is, if “getting filthy rich while producing nothing of any value” defines success. Now American Gardener describes Carter as a “successful gay man”.
Someone who’s spent the greater part of his adult life receiving a handout from the public purse isn’t “successful”, whether he’s troughing his way round the world on a diplomatic passort or sitting at home running a “news aggregator”.
Some people on both the right and the left have very distorted view of what defines “success”. I have a simple one – has the person made the world, or a small part of it, a better place? That might be through being a good employer, or doing voluntary work, or by lifting his own family out of poverty, or any number of other means. It isn’t by creating money out of nothing or by successfully ingratiating yourself with your party superiors so you can stay attached to the teat.
By that measure, Key still has the potential for success (though he’s not showing much propensity for it) and Carter has very little… though he could of course still suffer an attack of remorse for having achieved nothing while we were paying him and endeavour to put that right by volunteering his time to a worthy cause after the soon-to-occur end of his political career. But I ain’t holding my breath.
If Chris Carter is the archetypal “successful gay man”, then heaven help all other examples of successful individuals.
Although thinking about it, Weedeater, Chris “Once was a rainbow warrior” Carter is certainly an example of what it is to ‘successfully’ promote his sexual perversion, and to further push the normalisation of the homosexual ‘lifestyle’ and agenda.
If I had my way queers wouldn’t be involved with anything which required any amount of moral integrity and values based decision making and influence. That would include MPs, Chief Censors, teachers, lecturers, caregivers, church workers (priests), etc.
“If I had my way queers wouldn’t be involved with anything which required any amount of moral integrity and values based decision making and influence. That would include MPs, Chief Censors, teachers, lecturers, caregivers, church workers (priests), etc.”
Then thank goodness bigoted wankers like you do not get to make the choice.
All we have is one radtrad fundamentalist christian giving his POV.
I don’t even have to cite a Bible verse, and suddenly it’s a religious debate.
You’ve got to laugh at the handwringing liberals that frequent this site – a Christian even opening their mouth is controversial to these morons.