Wall on Goff

April 9th, 2011 at 12:12 pm by David Farrar

Michelle Hewitson interviews new Labour MP :

I asked her an absolute patsy question about Goff: Could he win the election for Labour? She said, “I think brand Labour can win.”

Ouch. One more vote for Parker/Cunliffe/Jones/whicheversuckercanbetalkedintoit.

Tags: ,

38 Responses to “Wall on Goff”

  1. Positan (390 comments) says:

    Another unrealistic, fantasising dreamer makes it into our parliament.

    May God defend New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. decanker (184 comments) says:

    Oh dear, they have to put Mallard in, now.

    Make a fight of it. And with his arm in a sling he might even get some pity points!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. hj (6,991 comments) says:

    A stuff poll has Winston ahead of Labour
    [time for morework on Winston DPF]
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/lightbox/national/politics/4864392

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    She’s got good taste in art, anyway.

    Too bad she’s completely mental: “I think brand Labour can win.”

    I mean really.

    And this is Little’s choice over five others?

    Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha.

    This is like the politics world cup and we’re watching SA get hammered by the mighty ABs led by JK. It’s like a dream come true. Anything can happen though and we’re only halfway into the first half. But so far, cautiously looking very good indeed.

    Isn’t it exciting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. decanker (184 comments) says:

    Honest question for those that sit on the right… who in Labour would you regard as your biggest threat to lead the party into the election? i.e. who could attract the vote of the so-called “ordinary hard working kiwi”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    Why Mallard of course. Duh. I’ve said since day three of Hughes that Labour should appoint Mallard. It’s obvious.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Is decanker Andrew Little? News flash decanker, most ordinary hard working kiwis have given up on the noddys.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    Yes it’s extremely hard to understand why Liarbore seems to think its going to work by retreating from the fortunate opportunity to install Mallard, an opportunity which is most unlikely to re-present itself in any tidy fashion prior to November. What exactly are they thinking, if anything at all?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. publicwatchdog (2,593 comments) says:

    “# hj (946) Says:
    April 9th, 2011 at 12:46 pm

    A stuff poll has Winston ahead of Labour
    [time for morework on Winston DPF]
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/lightbox/national/politics/4864392

    Oh dear – doesn’t look National has anywhere near the votes to ‘govern alone’ according to that poll – does it?

    More work like the corporate media campaign to discredit Winston Peters and NZ First that happened in 2008?

    :)

    In my view – that won’t work twice – people are now more ‘clued up’.

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com

    PS: In case you have forgotten (perish the thought :) – over 9000 (former?) National Party voters stayed home in the Botany by-election.
    I wonder if a lot of them are going to vote for Winston Peters / NZ First?

    (Word on the ground suggests that many of them are, and this Stuff poll tends to confirm that?

    EEEEEEK!

    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    In my view – that won’t work twice – people are now more ‘clued up’.

    It was never tried in the first place Penny for the ‘corporate’ media doesn’t exist it is in fact the lefty media, but I realise you don’t get that.

    What I don’t get is why you and some others don’t seem to understand that any ethically challenged politician on any side needs always to be challenged and forced to resign. Parliament has no place for people who are so ethically challenged they in fact lie to the Privileges Committee.

    Peters is a disgrace and anyone who supports this disgrace, shares it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Maggie (672 comments) says:

    reid, just for a good laugh, can you give me an example of the “lefty media”? Granny Herald perhaps, remember it campaigned against the last Labour government…..the Dominion Post maybe? The DP whose last editor ran away to join National and then came back as a columnist?

    hj, there are several million voters registered in NZ. Of those 508 replied to the stuff poll. Many of them may not have been registered voters. But there you are, wetting your knickers and salivating on command.

    As for friend Farrar, this is really sad. Sitting in his total room in New C munching on McDonalds and blogging away on his laptop. Geez, that man needs a life.

    [DPF: 20 demerits for getting personal. For the record I've been in a conference almost all day, and blogging from the conference hall.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    can you give me an example of the “lefty media”

    The way they let Hulun play them like a violin for the first five years of her Hulunship + this.

    I have lots more, like almost every single broadcast from National Radio, John Campbell, Tapu Misa, the entire Sunday Start Times, etc etc etc etc etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. publicwatchdog (2,593 comments) says:

    reid (6,709) Says:
    April 9th, 2011 at 2:18 pm

    Yes it’s extremely hard to understand why Liarbore …..”

    Who has been caught lying (again) here ‘Reid’?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10718054”

    Why ‘shonky’ John Key!

    Got a considered opinion on this one ‘Reid’?

    Also – have you bothered to check my research which CONFIRMS the corporate media campaign (with NZ Herald as the prime example) against Winston Peters and NZ First before the 2008 election?

    Or, are these FACTS just so unpalatable you simply cannot bear to even look at them?

    Gutless, or intellectually lazy?

    Which is it ‘Reid’?

    (Or maybe both?)

    (Meant, of course, in a caring constructive way :)

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    decanker labour is voter poison. Only thr hard core myopic diehards will be voting labour.

    Still FITH I see peeny not too bright. Why don’t you rock up to JK and accusde him of murder, give the DPS a workout and us some entertainment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. hj (6,991 comments) says:

    What I don’t get is why you and some others don’t seem to understand that any ethically challenged politician on any side needs always to be challenged and forced to resign. Parliament has no place for people who are so ethically challenged they in fact lie to the Privileges Committee.

    Peters is a disgrace and anyone who supports this disgrace, shares it.
    ….
    Who funds National?

    “The third, and by far the most serious, indictment against Mr Peters is that he “knowingly provided false or misleading information on a return of pecuniary interest”. More precisely, that he failed to properly account for “a $100,000 donation from Owen Glen”.

    Mr Plunket states that this judgement was delivered against Mr Peters following “a marathon inquiry by Parliament’s privileges committee”.

    Had it been delivered by a Court of Law this would, indeed, have constituted a serious blow to Mr Peters’ reputation. But, it was not. Parliament’s privileges committee is a political tribunal and it’s findings are not always the fruit of dispassionate legal judgement. Indeed, there are occasions when its decisions appear to have been arrived at via the most ruthless Machiavellian calculation.

    And isn’t it strange that Mr Plunket neglected to inform his readers that politically independent investigations by the Auditor-General and the Serious Fraud Office both found that Mr Peters had no case to answer?


    http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2011/01/seans-going-to-need-bigger-stake-to.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    Maggie can you please check your link, it just gives me the Herald’s front page.

    Who funds National?

    I’d expect for example Owen Glen will be giving us a really hefty donation this year, hj. Plus all the big business fat-cats as well. Why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. hj (6,991 comments) says:

    hj, there are several million voters registered in NZ. Of those 508 replied to the stuff poll. Many of them may not have been registered voters. But there you are, wetting your knickers and salivating on command.
    ….
    I found this on the Property Council website:
    “Pundits shake their heads at NZ First’s rising popularity – but they simply don’t understand the magic that’s unleashed when the electorate’s inchoate yearnings become emotionally connected to a politician capable of giving them voice.”
    http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2011/01/showtime.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. DrDr (114 comments) says:

    I think Winston is corrupt, at least morally anyway. We can’t prosecute him over the Owen Glenn saga or the $158k, but I really do think these issues must be kept highly visible in the build-up to November 26. This is due to the fact that generally some people have short memories and I’m sure Winston won’t be reminding them. Let’s hope the only vote for Winston is a resounding NO!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. nasska (11,478 comments) says:

    The media is owned by shareholders via corporates who would tend to have a right wing bias. It’s columnists & reporters hail mostly from the left. The editorial staff could lean either way but if they overly favour the left they’ll be sacked & the journalists wouldn’t create enough right leaning articles to fill the gaps between the ads.

    Probably it balances itself out but I would still like to see the facts given in “plainspeak” & the readers given the opportunity to make up their own minds.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    I think here statement speaks volumes about the state of the party and the mentality and attitudes of its upper echelons. s. Once a proud, representative movement with an ethical core and resonance with working people across society, now reduced to ‘Brand Labour’ no more resonant, ethical or relevant than any other soap-powder on the shelf.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    Had it been delivered by a Court of Law this would, indeed, have constituted a serious blow to Mr Peters’ reputation. But, it was not. Parliament’s privileges committee is a political tribunal and it’s findings are not always the fruit of dispassionate legal judgement. Indeed, there are occasions when its decisions appear to have been arrived at via the most ruthless Machiavellian calculation.

    hj that is the most disingenuous piece of drivel I have heard since the last time some lefty talked about this. The point hj, is the FACT that the EVIDENCE of the timing of the phone calls means in this particular case, the Privileges Committee cannot be wrong. Peters did lie to it. No other explanation is possible, regardless of your political stripe, based on the EVIDENCE. People have been convicted of serious crimes, based on less substantial evidence. This is not political bias, because everyone knows their decision was made on those publicly available FACTS and if anyone else was sitting on the committee it would have been impossible for anyone but a venal lying sleazy individual with ulterior motives to come to any other conclusion whatsoever.

    IF you think they were wrong, then pray tell, but please pray tell by addressing the FACTS upon which they based their decision: i.e. the timings of the calls. Pray tell hj precisely how 2 + 2 does not equal 4, in this case.

    P.S. please don’t waste anyone’s time here by addressing anything other than those particular precise facts, if you would be so kind.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. publicwatchdog (2,593 comments) says:

    “eid (6,713) Says:

    Had it been delivered by a Court of Law this would, indeed, have constituted a serious blow to Mr Peters’ reputation. But, it was not. Parliament’s privileges committee is a political tribunal and it’s findings are not always the fruit of dispassionate legal judgement. Indeed, there are occasions when its decisions appear to have been arrived at via the most ruthless Machiavellian calculation.”

    “hj that is the most disingenuous piece of drivel I have heard since the last time some lefty talked about this.”

    Really Reid?

    Politicians making judgments on other politicians (objectively their politically sworn enemies?) – is hardly going to be the most impartial and independent assessment?

    You will recall that the person who made the complaint to both the Police and SFO, about NZ First, was (objectively) a politically ‘sworn enemy’ – Rodney Hide?

    You will recall that both complaints came to nothing – no charges – no convictions – but arguably, the damage had been done?

    Have you bothered to have a look at the wording of my complaint to both the Police and SFO over John’s Key’s attempt to flush out commercially sensitive information about Tranz Rail, at a time he had an undisclosed pecuniary interest in Tranz Rail?

    (Which didn’t get ONE sentence in the NZ Herald, unlike all the ‘MAN ON THE MOON’ headlines that Rodney’s complaint got.)

    I know you have difficulty accepting the reality of the corporate media campaign against Winston Peters and NZ First – but I have provided the FACTS and EVIDENCE to support my allegation.

    It’s on my blog.

    I’ve done the hard work, putting it all together.

    All you have to do Reid (and others) – is READ it for yourselves.

    If you dare?

    NB: Winston Peters was never accused of ‘feathering his own nest’ – which is what I alleged that John Key had arguably done.

    Going to see a bit of consistency here from you, are we Reid?

    Going to use the same yardstick to judge different politicians?

    I won’t hold my breath on that one (sigh)…………

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. reid (16,442 comments) says:

    Politicians making judgments on other politicians (objectively their politically sworn enemies?) – is hardly going to be the most impartial and independent assessment?

    Penny your inperspicacity surprises and disappoints me. (Not really, I’m just softening the blow.)

    My 4:26 wasn’t saying Peters is dishonest lying scum and so is Liarbore for supporting him, simply cause the Privileges Committee said so. Oh no.

    I was saying – der – it was because it is undeniable, based on the Court of Public Opinion, which has looked at the timings of the phone calls and judged Peters is a disgrace and anyone who supports this disgrace, shares it.

    You Penny and hj, seem proud to do so, which surprises and disappoints me. (Not really, etc.)

    So please don’t waste anyone’s time here by addressing anything other than those particular precise facts, if you would be so kind.

    I won’t hold my breath on that one (sigh)…………

    Der Penny re: Key, I asked you to repeat that link, I told you, I only get the Herald front page. Duh. Crikey.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Rodders (1,755 comments) says:

    Penny says “Word on the ground suggests that many of them are”

    NZ First has a history of attacking migrants, so I presume “word on the ground” is a euphemism for “the gutter.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Maggie (672 comments) says:

    Maggie (560) Says:

    April 9th, 2011 at 2:49 pm
    reid, just for a good laugh, can you give me an example of the “lefty media”? Granny Herald perhaps, remember it campaigned against the last Labour government…..the Dominion Post maybe? The DP whose last editor ran away to join National and then came back as a columnist?

    hj, there are several million voters registered in NZ. Of those 508 replied to the stuff poll. Many of them may not have been registered voters. But there you are, wetting your knickers and salivating on command.

    As for friend Farrar, this is really sad. Sitting in his total room in New C munching on McDonalds and blogging away on his laptop. Geez, that man needs a life.

    [DPF: 20 demerits for getting personal. For the record I've been in a conference almost all day, and blogging from the conference hall.]

    Geez, Farrar. you’re a sensitive prick. People hurl personal insults around here by the dozen, some post nothing else, and you ignore them. Lighten up, FFS.

    Whats the matter were the snails off last night? New Caledonia is a rat shit hole, but at least enjoy your time off there. We can survive without you, you know. The way you bristle at the slightest criticism makes me think of Warwick Roger. He was a huge ego for no reason, at least you have a bit of a brain.

    [DPF: People are free to abuse me anywhere else on the Internet. But this is my home, and if people are rude to me in my home, I ask them to leave]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Dazzaman (1,140 comments) says:

    I asked her an absolute patsy question about Goff: Could he win the election for Labour? She said, “I think brand Labour can win.”

    Well….that’s confidence for you….Hahahaha!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    decanker,

    ” who in Labour would you regard as your biggest threat to lead the party into the election? i.e. who could attract the vote of the so-called “ordinary hard working kiwi”?”

    David Lange. But that’s just not possible. No one else there can win this time. Perhaps that’s why no one is leaping to unseat Goff. (Well, perhaps more that they won’t be guaranteed to spot to lead at the 2014 election.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. NX (504 comments) says:

    As for friend Farrar, this is really sad. Sitting in his total room in New C munching on McDonalds and blogging away on his laptop. Geez, that man needs a life.

    Now you’ve crossed the line maggie. There was absolutely no need to bring McDonalds into this.

    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. calendar girl (1,232 comments) says:

    Maggie @ 7:01: “Geez, Farrar. you’re a sensitive prick. People hurl personal insults around here by the dozen, some post nothing else, and you ignore them. Lighten up, FFS.”

    Arrogance unlimited. Go to the stranded or red alert if you want to find out how really sensitive hosts react.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. BeaB (2,123 comments) says:

    Hewitson did a brilliant hatchet job on Wall by letting her show herself as a complete tosser. Spare us these refugees from all our useless govt agencies.
    Clearly too another wee friend of Andy’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. NX (504 comments) says:

    Calendar girl:

    Arrogance unlimited. Go to the stranded or red alert if you want to find out how really sensitive hosts react.

    Agreed.

    On The Standard you’re actually denigrated by host just for taking an opposing point of view.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. decanker (184 comments) says:

    “David Lange. But that’s just not possible. No one else there can win this time. Perhaps that’s why no one is leaping to unseat Goff. (Well, perhaps more that they won’t be guaranteed to spot to lead at the 2014 election.)”

    But that doesn’t answer my question, there will be someone in Labour who if they became leader, National would think ooh, shit, we need to be on our game. Voters aren’t exactly wallowing in riches at the moment so surely there’s potential for swing.

    This place has plenty of self-confidence so I didn’t think it’d be worried about throwing up who the real opposition contenders are — surely you’re not worried Labour might take your advice?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    “there will be someone in Labour who if they became leader, National would think ooh, shit, we need to be on our game.”

    Not this time around. It’s quite a presumption to think there is – certainly no one has shone as a serious contender as yet (for a 2011 election fight)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Maggie (672 comments) says:

    Calendar girl:

    Arrogance unlimited. Go to the stranded or red alert if you want to find out how really sensitive hosts react.

    Agreed.

    On The Standard you’re actually denigrated by host just for taking an opposing point of view.

    Since when did the Standard set the bar? I thought you conservatives think you are better than them.

    You get denigrated for being different. Wow, that would never happen HERE.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Maggie (672 comments) says:

    If Farrar sees this blog as his home then that’s really sad. For most people home is where you enjoy the company of family and friends and forget the worries of the day. The net is just a distraction.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. NX (504 comments) says:

    Maggie:

    Since when did the Standard set the bar? I thought you conservatives think you are better than them.

    Emphases added.

    But keep it up Maggie. You’re doing a stellar job wearing us down. A few more spiteful posts & we’ll be voting for Phil Goff & Winston Peters.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Maggie (672 comments) says:

    Now what’s your problem, NX? Can you explain?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Pete George (23,559 comments) says:

    “there will be someone in Labour who if they became leader, National would think ooh, shit, we need to be on our game.”

    Not this time around. It’s quite a presumption to think there is – certainly no one has shone as a serious contender as yet (for a 2011 election fight)

    If there was a serious contender, or if there was someone people in Labour thought would be a serious contender, I think they would have moved in the last couple of weeks. If Labour doesn’t see a serious contender the electorate is even less likely to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote