Why did Norman go nasty?

June 3rd, 2013 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

Andrea Vance writes at Stuff:

Norman had a comprehensive list of examples to back his assertion that “something in rotten in the state of New Zealand politics…something is rotting in the Beehive.”

He cited: the SkyCity deal; Hobbit employment law changes; the sacking of Environment Canterbury councillors; dumping of proposed MMP changes; a ban on deep sea drilling protests at the behest of oil companies; and recent disabled carers’ legislation.

Let’s be very clear. It is absolutely appropriate opposition parties attack the Government for decisions they don’t like. I do wish they would stop lying about deep see protests being banned. They are not. All that is banned is protests within 500 metres of a commercial operation, as the right to protest doesn’t trump the right to do your lawful business.

Anyway absolutely legitimate to attack the Govt and the PM for decisions you dislike.

But the 20-minute address marked a departure from the Green’s particular brand of play-the-ball-not-the-man-politics. Norman launched a personal attack on Key, painting him as a Muldoon-style bully. There was also a snide reference to Key’s personal wealth: he is “irritated if we are not all grateful for him generously agreeing to be PM.” And he trashed Key’s trademark genial disposition.

“The next time you see smiling, …he’s smiling because he’s giving favours to his mates while undermining your democracy,” he said.

What Norman is doing here is trying to paint Key as an evil person. He’s trying to make people think that Key actually hates ordinary New Zealanders and just pretends to be friendly when he is smiling.

It is ridiculous, as anyone who knows John Key would testify. John Armstrong writes:

Muldoonist? John Key? cannot be serious.

The Green Party co-leader’s assertion that the “divisive and corrosive” behaviour exhibited by the leader of the National Party is akin to that of his most notorious of predecessors is certainly headline-grabbing. It also verges on the ludicrous. Sir Robert Muldoon was without question our most belligerent, abrasive, polarising, dictatorial and vindictive politician.

The fear and loathing he was capable of generating within his own ranks – let alone in the wider world of politics – was summed up by a caucus colleague who said he went to Muldoon’s funeral only so he could be assured the lid on the coffin had been nailed down properly.

I knew Muldoon, unlike Norman. Norman only moved to New Zealand five years after Muldoon died. I can’t think of an MP who is more different to Muldoon in personality, than John Key.

This is shown in Key’s response to Norman:

Prime Minister John Key was remarkably restrained in his response to Greens co-leader Russel Norman’s personal attack on Saturday. Dr Norman called Mr Key corrosive and said he is ”irritated if we are not all grateful for him generously agreeing to be PM”. Through a spokeswoman, Mr Key said the Government is ”focused on the things that matter – like building a strong and stable economy with more, better paying jobs to help New Zealand families”.

I can’t recall the last time John Key did a nasty personal attack in a set speech. Making a joking reference to Labour and Greens as the devil-beast is not a personal attack. It is a political one.

Here’s a challenge. What”s the worst thing John Key ever said about Helen Clark? To the best of my memory he attacked her Government, not her. In fact once he beat her, he helped get her a job at the UN.

I think people can decide for themselves who has decided to be corrosive. Now I’m not complaining about it. I think it is good that people are now able to see what the Greens are prepared to do, in order to get into power.

UPDATE: Karl du Fresne, who was a journalist under Muldoon blogs:

Russel Norman’s speech to the annual conference of the Greens, in which he compared John Key with Robert Muldoon, rated a 10 for desperation and a zero for credibility. …

Norman arrived in New Zealand from Australia in 1997, and on the basis of his speech I would guess that’s about as far back as his knowledge of our political history extends.None of the prime ministers we’ve had since Muldoon could be compared with him, for which we should be grateful. He was a vindictive bully who cleverly exploited the politics of fear and division, and never more so than during the 1981 Springbok tour.

In fact I would suggest that in terms of personality, Key is the least like Muldoon. Anyone old enough to remember the political unpleasantness of the late 1970s and early 80s – which probably excludes a lot of Green voters – would have reacted with astonishment to Norman’s bizarre attempt to compare the two men.
Muldoon’s default facial expression was a snarl. Key’s is a grin (or if you want to be harsh, a smirk).

Arguably, the politician who most closely resembles Muldoon, and who served his apprenticeship under him, is Winston Peters. Like Muldoon, Peters has a penchant for demagoguery. But even the New Zealand First leader falls far short of Muldoon’s menacing intolerance of dissent, though it might have been a different story had he ever won power.

That’s the Winston Peters that the Greens are preparing to go into Government with?

There are only two possible explanations for Norman’s attack on Key. The first is that, as postulated above, he knows nothing about our modern political history (not that that stops him from promoting himself as a credible alternative leader). The second, which is even more worrying, is that he knows the comparison between Key and Muldoon is absurd but ran with it anyway. Perhaps he senses the Greens’ momentum is slipping and is prepared to resort to extreme measures to get some traction.

I think it is the second.

Tags: ,

117 Responses to “Why did Norman go nasty?”

  1. wat dabney (3,775 comments) says:

    The Ginger Whinger.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. WineOh (630 comments) says:

    Kudos to the press for having the guts to slam their golden boy.

    Now lets watch to see how Russel claims to have been misunderstood, or taken out of context… spin spin spin.

    The only pollies I can remember in recent NZ history stooping to these lows were David Cunliffe, Trevor Mallard, Winston Peters, and rewinding a bit further Helen Clark (remember those “cancerous & corrosive” comments about Don Brash anyone?)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. ZenTiger (435 comments) says:

    I read his speech and it was over-the-top rhetoric. I laughed at the vain attempts to paint Norman as a “nice-guy statesmen” whilst simultaneously proving the opposite with his gutter politics.

    It left me with the impression that Norman had not “gone nasty”. There now is a chance he always was.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Viking2 (11,488 comments) says:

    Saw that on telly. Wondered what planet the fuckwit was on. Muldoon was an arsewipe once in power. Clevver and had a mind as sharp as a tack but an arsewipe none the less.

    Wuzzel is whinning, greazy slobbering communist. He exudes slime.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. tvb (4,430 comments) says:

    The Greens thought they were going to glide into Government next year and the Government was terminal etc etc. They even had a bit of traction on some beltway issues like the Kim Dot Com saga and GCSB and some mild criticism from the Auditor General on the Sky City deal. They even started measuring the curtains. Their other Leader threatened legislation to break a commercial contract. But then some polls came out that suggested the Key Government was far from terminal. So Norman turns sour. Winning Government next year will not be a lay down misia. The Greens will be looked at very closely indeed and so will labour as their bed partner. Yes the far left will be competitive. But so is National providing the economy holds up.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Dave Stringer (188 comments) says:

    An interested read for me was Russell Norman’s speech to the party conference this weekend.
    Interesting because 80% of it was criticising what the current government is doing / has done. What I was looking for was what the Green Party would do if given power of government. I guess I found it here:

    Greens believe that the special interest lobbyists should be exposed to the sterilising effect of sunlight.
    And we will let the sun shine in.
    Greens believe that ordinary people should be the decision makers in this country. Ordinary people should have the power.
    And we will fight to restore that power.
    Greens believe that collective dignity comes from working together to make the world a better place.
    And we will fight to restore that dignity.
    We believe that in spite of everything that is wrong in the world, in spite of the chaos and madness we see on the news every night, that in our little corner of the south west (sic) Pacific we live in a society which is far from perfect but where justice can prevail.
    And we will fight to restore that justice and restore your right to your day in court.

    It looked OK until I read it a second time and thought it through. For instance:

    “special interest lobbyists should be exposed to the sterilising effect of sunlight. And we will let the sun shine in”.
    This is good stuff. Let’s legislate that all lobbyists must be listed in a public register, that they must produce monthly statements of what lobbying they have done, and what they have spent/used in the course of that lobbying. To make this effective, legislation must be passed making the detailed diaries/appointment books of all MPs and senior civil servants freely available on-line.

    “Greens believe that ordinary people should be the decision makers in this country, should have the power. We will fight to restore that power. “
    This looks good, but somehow recent evidence suggests that this is not the Greens’ belief. For instance, while there was a clear majority of citizens against the “no smacking legislation”, the Party pushed ahead backing it, similarly, when a government that clearly stated its intent to sell one form of assets in order to create another, the Party did everything it could, at tax-payers’ expense, to try to have that mandate removed.

    ”Greens believe that collective dignity comes from working together to make the world a better place. And we will fight to restore that dignity>”
    Again, looks good on the surface, but fails when looked at in light of recent evidence. For instance, when the government insisted on closing down a dangerous mine on the West Coast, the Party protested about the number of people put out of work; however, when a new mine that would employ people in the same area was proposed, the Party insisted that it should not be allowed to happen!

    “We {note, not longer the Green Party but now “we”} believe that in spite of everything that is wrong in the world, in spite of the chaos and madness we see on the news every night, that in our little corner of the south west Pacific we live in a society which is far from perfect but where justice can prevail. And we will fight to restore that justice and restore your right to your day in court.”

    Motherhood and apple pie is what I call this statement.

    “And we will fight to restore that justice and restore your right to your day in court.”
    This suggests that I have somehow lost justice and the right to a day in court. I haven’t! Justice is the application of laws passed through proper process in Parliament, process that any government must follow, irrespective of position on a very limiting one-dimensional political spectrum. As long as laws, passed through proper process, govern us I have lost nothing. Yes, a future government could change the law, that’s what happens in a democracy. There is no need to resort to violence, or “fight”, in order to change the statute books, you just have to win enough votes to do so, I’m sure when the day comes that the Green Party has sufficient elected members of the house of representatives to lead a government it will enact as many laws as it deems appropriate to put into effect the promises it made to the electorate to achieve that position. In the meantime, democracy is served by allowing the current government to do exactly that.

    FINALLY, I have to say that the ad-hominem attack by the co-leader of the Green Party against the elected Prime Minister has destroyed any inclination I had to support the Green Part financially or with my vote. I cannot believe that the founders of the Party would condone such an attack, and cannot believe there is a long-term future in New Zealand for a Party with such leadership; a belief borne out by the dearth of attendees at the Annual Meeting this weekend.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Norman is a nasty desperate little man who failed at politics in his homeland and couldn’t believe his luck when the greeny losers of Aotearoa promoted him beyond his wildest expectations.

    He is failure supported by even bigger failures.

    He senses 2014 is his best chance of achieving power as he only has to outdo Captain Mumblefuck to look good, not a difficult task.

    Being a dumb Aussie he has failed to realise that personality politics don’t work in New Zealand.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. GPT1 (2,122 comments) says:

    The irony is that the closest thing to Muldoonism I can think of is the Green/Labour proposal to nationalise power supply.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 47 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. marcw (249 comments) says:

    He seems to have forgotten the Green’s support of the Electoral Finance Act of 2007- surely the most undemocratic piece of Stalinist legislation ever passed in NZ. And they objected to it being removed, the only Party to do that. Maybe he just got pissed being called a fruit loop, and decided to prove for once and for all, that he is.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Andronicus (219 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 49 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. MT_Tinman (3,204 comments) says:

    I have (thankfully) met Norman just the once. Our conversation – one on one – lasted about 20 minutes.

    In that time I gained the distinct impression that should I ever shake Norman’s hand I would need to the count not just my rings but the fingers holding them.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    Just a loser.

    The difference between jk and the ginga? I know for a fact the ginga hates my guts.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Longknives (4,764 comments) says:

    Why did Norman go nasty??

    Clearly because he never got his flag back…

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. MT_Tinman (3,204 comments) says:

    I’m willing to bet he’s not keen on the rest of you either Dime – particularly your investment portfolio :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. NK (1,244 comments) says:

    And he gave that speech to, wait………………120 delegates.

    Bwahahaha. Even an ACT conference on a bad day gets 150. Barely anyone in the Green Party is even prepared to listen to this communist liar.

    Unless, of course, they were all denied entry because they wore perfume and aftershave?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Reid (16,509 comments) says:

    There are only two possible explanations for Norman’s attack on Key.

    No there’s a third. The third possibility and the one that I prefer personally is that Wussel is so far off the planet that he really truly believes what he said.

    Every single thing the Gweens say has between the lines a complete misconception of the conservative character. Every single public comment is always but always couched in terms of the conservatives really truly wanting to deprive and hurt and damage people because that’s what – the Gweens allege – they deep down really truly enjoy doing. That’s what most of the Gweens really truly seem to believe. And their public statements always have that message between the lines.

    Of course, duh – they can’t come right out and say that, but it’s there, just like Helen Kelly’s every comment has behind it a deep-seated hatred of every single employer. But with the Gweens it goes beyond mere employers and covers the entire gambit of politics. The Gweens really truly appear to believe that conservatives are out to rape and destroy the environment, the economy, the country’s international reputation, you name it, they think it.

    This wouldn’t be a problem if this mentalism was confined to a fringe of idiots, but sadly its seeped into the media, and now you have influential prime-time media broadcasters with huge audiences (by NZ stds) believing exactly the same things. And there is no counter-voice.

    That’s the worst and most highly dangerous part. There is no counter-voice. And sadly this matters, these days, when you have around 4-600,000 numbers of poorly educated Joe Moron and Jane Bimbo watching the telly and formulating their voting opinion based on the broadcasts of these wreckers and haters and assorted idiot hangers on.

    …something rather more sinister lurks beneath

    You’re so right, Andronicus. You’re so right.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. wat dabney (3,775 comments) says:

    The Greens rely on hysterical environmental scaremongering and harnessing young people’s authoritarian instincts; giving them license to behave like little fascists.

    Their calculated AGW lies and the demonising of honest science were all intended to vault them into power, but the entire scam is falling apart in front of their eyes. It’s now or never. If they can’t get into power with AGW then it’s hard to see them ever getting in without it. Russel knows this. He knows that AGW could well be the Green Party’s Stalingrad. He knows the Greens could be witnessing their high water mark and that people won’t forget their cynical self-serving lies and intolerance.

    It’s slipping away from you Russel! WWGD? (What Would Goebbels Do?)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. hj (7,033 comments) says:

    Metiria Turei is real nice and cuddly, much like Margaret Mutu.

    “Many of our kids would have seen Campbell Live’s poll last night where 70% of people agreed that the cartoons were *an accurate portrayal of Polynesian people*.

    Comments are closed. You will not be able to post a comment in this post.*

    http://blog.greens.org.nz/2013/05/31/does-our-country-really-hate-us/

    *??? Not sure the poll was put quite like that??
    * because manure will fly?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. hj (7,033 comments) says:

    wat dabney (2,736) Says:

    ahhh Wat. A tern of events, I see? AGW discredited? When will the ice melt- when will we here about it?

    edit:
    (turn of events- tern is a bird)
    (hear about it- here relates to place..)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Chris R (70 comments) says:

    The green carapace has been cast asunder and the true socialist garbage is now being paraded. Norman’s gang of filth are now able to be seen for what they are: socialist totalitarians in the style of Stalin.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Chuck Bird (4,895 comments) says:

    Judith Collins once called Benson-Pope a pervert but that was entirely justified. He should have been charged and he would have been if Clark had not shafted Peter Doone. Clark probable would have been charged too as the police found there was a prima facie case against both of them.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. JC (958 comments) says:

    Yes, I can understand a degree of frustration coming in after a good deal of publicity, standing as an equal on the podium with Shearer and probably doing some damage to the Nats on asset sales.. and for what..

    ..3 relatively poor polls and then the body blow.. 19% of Green supporters think he and Shearer would be poorer managers of the economy than Key and the Hillbilly.

    Doesn’t that indicate a split in the Party?.. a fifth of his supporters have no confidence in him in Govt? Maybe that speech was a message to his own people.. an act of defiance to the older Queen st environmentalists and some red meat for the young far lefters.

    How did his petition go? all those months to collect signatures and a fair chunk of taxpayer money and he still didn’t cross the line with “90% of NZers” who oppose asset sale.. what happened to the army of signature collectors?

    There’s not a lot of humour coming from the Greens these days.. compare that with Muldoon in 1975.. in fact they are campaigning more like the sour Muldoon of the 80s.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. YesWeDid (1,048 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 36 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Harriet (4,975 comments) says:

    Well he would try to convey that Key is Muldoon – just look at what he wants to introduce to the economy:

    THE THINK SMALL PROJECT FOR THE PRIVATE SECTOR! :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. hj (7,033 comments) says:

    I think the Greens new approach (biting) signals frustration. Catherine Delahunty described the Greens as a “mixed church” at the Unity (Marxist) conference. Trying to accommodate the sensible and not so sensible elements together means they can’t quite get a laudable policy statement.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Lentil eaters have always been jealous of meat eaters “Big swinging dicks” Harriet! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Fisiani (1,039 comments) says:

    At election time every National attack ad should blend the policies of Greens with Labour. ie. a change of government stops any progress, will close down coal gas and mineral exploration, will ban fishing and farming, will stop road building and nationalise key industries. Power prices will surge due to ETS taxes. Every business will be hit by more tax and your showerhead will be shrunk.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    hj

    The real problem is that the greens are made up of a rejects and malcontents from all the leftist religions – they are all too looney even for the left . The sandal wearing fair isle jumping wearing green is slowly being moved sideways and in their place you have Russell and delahunty – one a marxist and one insane, and others a bit more watery than those two.

    The greens are doomed – they are as relevant as the poor saps you still see flogging “The Daily Worker” about the place.

    and sensible and the greens are polar opposites and should never be mentioned in the same sentence.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Surely the saving of up to $300 on your powerbill will more than offset the extra $3000 in Greeny evil fuel user taxes Fisiani? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    I’m beginning to suspect that Nandor was a better prospect as a Greeny Leader! :)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. OneTrack (3,114 comments) says:

    Yeswedid – key joked about the parties because of their recent policies. Norman attacked the man – left wing 101 nasty politics

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Than (475 comments) says:

    @YesWeDid – That does not explain why Dr Norman decided to make his comments personal.

    He could have still have hit back. He could have talked about “the National party”, or “this government” and still brought up all the issues like SkyCity/disabled care and the courts/protests at sea. His speech could have been 95% the same and raised all the same actual points, without going personal.

    But instead he decided to be nasty, and went directly against one of the Green Party’s (alleged) values.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    I’m beginning to suspect that Nandor was a better prospect as a Greeny Leader,

    JB

    he just never used his ability to get near his potential, he clung to that secondary school student atitude towards dope and couldn’t move on into the real world where I thought there was a place for him, but he never grew up but he was certainly miles ahead of anything they ahve in parliamnt presently.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. OneTrack (3,114 comments) says:

    Fisiani – yes, because that is just the start of what they would do

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Simon (727 comments) says:

    Why did wusell go nasty?

    23 yrs outside of govt they have got nothing. None of their plans work. Wusell wants to print money. M1. Thats it 23 yrs and these clowns want to print money.

    Basically the greens dont have anything worthwhile or relevant to offer the modern industrial 21st century society.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Nandor’s eyes were much further apart.

    http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=nandor+tanczos&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=qSGsUdzfOcSKkgWWhoCoAg&sqi=2&ved=0CDQQsAQ&biw=1512&bih=850

    And he wasn’t a Ginga!

    And what’s best…. he WASN’T A FUCKIN AUSSIE PRICK! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    he just never used his ability to get near his potential, he clung to that secondary school student atitude towards dope and couldn’t move on into the real world where I thought there was a place for him, but he never grew up but he was certainly miles ahead of anything they ahve in parliamnt presently.

    As far as I know, he spent quite a few years not talking about cannabis decriminalisation at all, but could never shake the stigma/association/stereotypes.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. jcuk (693 comments) says:

    The sad thing about the Greens is that while they have quite a few good ideas they also have a lot of crackpot stuff and after the weekend I have even less confidence in the people running the party. It was low before now it is zero.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    As far as I know, he spent quite a few years not talking

    he was on here a few weeks ago banging the same old drum. It wasn’t the stigma or stereotype it was the fact the he never grew in the roll as an MP he stayed a “teenager” either he wasnt interested or Donald and Fitzsimmon didn’t let him

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Henry64 (83 comments) says:

    “Through a spokeswoman, Mr Key said the Government is ”focused on the things that matter – like building a strong and stable economy with more, better paying jobs to help New Zealand families”.”

    Well done JK – that’s the perfect type of response and more in tune with what the majority of the voting public would want to hear from a Prime Minister. Keep it up.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Kea (12,841 comments) says:

    If they can’t get into power with AGW then it’s hard to see them ever getting in without it. Russel knows this. He knows that AGW could well be the Green Party’s Stalingrad.

    We are seeing this in many green based parties. They are getting panicky and desperate as the whole AGW scam crumbles around them.

    If they had stuck to real environmental issues they would be in a far better position. Sadly real evironmental issues have had little exposure, unless they could be linked to funding AGW.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    The Greens have always escaped critical examination from the media because they’ve been seen as a bit of a joke (banning deodorant, for example) and because they’ve always been far from power. They were Clark’s last choice of coalition partner after NZ First, and they’re the only party in parliament to have never been in government, if you can ignore Hone being in government before he set up Mana. In terms of effectiveness they’re NZ’s least successful political party.

    But that’s changed. Labour will need to form a coalition with both the Greens and NZ First if they’re to hold power in 2014. So voters and the media are starting to look properly at the Greens and they’re not liking what they see. Which is an unpleasant leader, and some pretty whacky policies that are unpleasantly nationalist. They resemble the sorts of policies that are responsible for trashing the economies in countries like Argentina. The Greens are starting to panic.

    The more that people see of Norman, the less they like him. Oddly, that won’t effect the Green vote which relies on a hard core of the far left and the impractically idealistic. But it will effect the Labour vote, because voters would rather have a moderate coherent National government than a coalition involving the Greens. And Labour. And NZ First. And Mana. And probably the Maori Party… A coalition of losers and weirdos.

    My prediction for 2014: Unemployment will continue to fall. The economy will start to show solid growth. The government will have the country’s finances under control. On the other hand, the opposition will fight each other for vote share by trying to buy votes, by coming up with really whacky policies like printing money, and by pandering to racists. An easy win for National.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    They are getting panicky and desperate as the ……

    and Captain Mumblefuck is the only person in the country poltically thats not seeing this. Its actually bloody cruel
    what labour are letting happen to Shearer.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. duggledog (1,559 comments) says:

    Maybe the Nats’ spin doctors ought to go and do a little digging around Norman’s and Turei’s histories. What’s the bet there’s some utter gold back there in the distant past.

    It’s not like they’re above recounting ‘horror stories’ of Key’s and Joyce’s histories of being… successful self made businessmen…

    I’d say there’s some awesome photos too

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    A photo of Metiria adorned only in her bone would be more than even Johnboy could look at! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. YesWeDid (1,048 comments) says:

    ‘He could have still have hit back. He could have talked about “the National party”, or “this government”’

    But John Key is the government, he is the National Party, he is front and centre in everything, it is 100% brand Key all the way, at least that is the way that they sell it.

    Talking about anything other than Key would seem like Norman was avoiding him, too scared to go ‘there’.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Black with a Vengeance (1,865 comments) says:

    Nice Mr key should just bust out the old throat slitting gesture again.

    No words necessary!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    A photo of Metiria adorned only in her bone would be more even Johnboy could look at!

    JB

    She’s about as close to normal as they have. I had a very short conversation with her at the Big Gay Out and she is really lovely but shes in a party of loonies so therefore “off with her head”.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Are you concerned that our wonderful leader adopts the glorious posing of your ancestors Angry Darkie?

    And here was us thinking you cannibals would be stoked! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Paulus (2,632 comments) says:

    Medically it is called “Paranoia”.

    Should see a shrink.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    She needs to lose a few inches around the hips (and elsewhere) to get me as keen as you obviously are PEB! :)

    I thought Green diets were healthy? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. duggledog (1,559 comments) says:

    Russell Norman: challenge John Key to a verbal duel!

    Snap debate! I dare you.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Warren Murray (311 comments) says:

    Armstrong’s assessment is bang on. It was a preposterous comparison to make, esp from someone who didn’t live in NZ when Muldoon was PM. I wonder if Norman will compound his gaff by repeating it?

    That said, I sometimes wonder if people are too quick to vilify Muldoon? It might be worth, if possible, comparing Muldoons popularity half way through his second term with Key’s.

    Is Shearer a Rowling? Does Labour have another Lange in its caucus that will lead it to a landslide in 2017 (after Shearer stubbles in 2014)?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    “Does Labour have another Lange in its caucus”

    The gay fellow from Wellington Central looks like he has been eating a lot of fish and chips recently! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    “Does Labour have another Lange in its caucus”

    Not a fuck was given about that- I would however be worried if they had another Douglas stuck away somewhere

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    They have an Oliver Cromwell… check out Andrew Little very carefully! :)

    http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=oliver+cromwell&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=iDGsUazSN42_kgWmz4Bw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=1512&bih=850#facrc=_&imgrc=BIDjymqpKS2lzM%3A%3BsorjxmYZ4q7U-M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fupload.wikimedia.org%252Fwikipedia%252Fcommons%252Fthumb%252F2%252F24%252FOliver_Cromwell_by_Samuel_Cooper.jpg%252F220px-Oliver_Cromwell_by_Samuel_Cooper.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fen.wikipedia.org%252Fwiki%252FOliver_Cromwell%3B220%3B267

    Pair of specs….change armour for suit and tie…. he’d be a ringer! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Than (475 comments) says:

    @YesWeDid –

    If John Key “is the government” (pretty dubious premise, but I’ll go with it for the sake of argument), then surely by definition talking about the government is talking about John Key? Norman could even have underlined the point by saying “John Key’s National government”, or “this government under John Key”. It mentions the name (because that proves he isn’t scared of him, somehow), still keeps the objective points, and avoids personal attacks.

    Green Party values, number 6 – “Engage respectfully, without personal attacks”. Russell Norman had a laundry list of specific policies and decisions to criticize the government for. He could have stopped at that. Instead he decided to be needlessly, pointlessly nasty.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Looks about as morbidly exciting as those old photos of Oliver too! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. kiwi in america (2,454 comments) says:

    Norman is a hard left true believer – a classic watermelon. At least Rod Donald (who I once met and had a discussion with after a 1991 pre MMP trip to Germany to interview the party secretary for the Free Democrats the swing party of German politics – Donald was faultlessly professional and could work well with others who had sharply different views) and Jeanette Fitzsimmons were environmentalists at heart and that mostly drove their politics. Norman is Keith Locke with a PhD and without the Communist mother and sister. Locke, whilst believing in reprehensible policies, was at least honest about his hard left leanings – Norman has been elevated to the Greens leadership precisely because he tries hard to sound reasonable and centrist whilst retaining most if not all of Locke’s beliefs and world view. His interview on RNZ’s “Focus on Politics” was revealing – when confronted over his anti business stand he waffled on about meeting business leaders as if that somehow made his socialism more acceptable – he genuinely believes his own spin and that business are beating a path to the Green’s door.

    The media have had a long love affair with the Greens – their political virginity after being in Parliament for decades but never near the levers of power even under Labour has reinforced their extremism rather than moderated it. All they have moderated is their rhetoric and image (eg Matiria Turei’s remarkable new collection of designer outfits after years of dowdy Morris dancer style home spun organic hippy ones). A new generation of political journalists no longer have those old trade union style loyalties to Labour that one sees in traditional centre left hacks like Barry Soper – the Greens are hip, young, trendy and not tainted by the grind and compromise of governing and so up until recently, their leaders could say and do almost anything (including a senior Greens Parliamentary office staffer’s partner trashing election hoardings) and get away with it.

    The worm is slowly turning. Norman’s “printing money” line (that he defends not eschews) has revealed the easiest weakness of the Green’s tax and spend economic policy and, as the economy’s improvement accelerates, their planned profligacy and wild socialist spending spree is coming across as increasingly potentially damaging to the recovery. The joint power policy announcement, seen by many on the left as a crowning example of what a new Labour/Green government would look like, saw for the first time in NZ political history a major historical party with decades of prior governance experience allowing a key policy plank to be hijacked by a more extreme potential coalition partner whilst in opposition. Clark had shown to middle NZ that Labour could be leftish but still isolate the more extreme policies of the Greens. Shearer’s panicked policy announcement has nailed Labour more tightly economically to a hard left agenda and people are now looking more closely at the Greens including journalists.

    Norman’s comments come amidst the backdrop of the Green’s hubris in believing they could sleep walk to victory and to a third of a left government’s Cabinet and has led to the mask slipping. Talk of sunlight but excluding journalists from almost all sessions at their conference did not go unnoticed in the Press Gallery. This rant by Norman is his impatience showing through and the media have sensed the overreach here. Norman’s absence from NZ during the dark days of Muldoon meant he was unable to place his comments in any remotely relevant context. That older saner heads in the Greens were not consulted or listened on this matter speaks volumes for the ideological bunker the Greens live in and arrogance they have developed over years of flattering media coverage.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    19% of his own voters think he would be worse for the economy than John Key?

    It’s no wonder he was an angry wee chipmunk.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    If you end up as a political failure in Australia and you end up as a political failure in New Zealand where should you go?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    (eg Matiria Turei’s remarkable new collection of designer outfits after years of dowdy Morris dancer style home spun organic hippy ones)

    She’s nowt but a wolf in socialites’ clothing

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    Where is the toad, the girly sycophant, when you need her him?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Dirty Sanchezing? ……(Licking wounds) ! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    I posted on this yesterday and Robert Guyton launched into me. He demonstrated one of the new Green problem – an arrogant belief in their own infallibility.

    I suggested the Greens had lost their nerve and ditched their principles to try and finally get their hands on power.

    The Greens have ‘lost their nerve’ – you what? Surely their newly expressed boldness shows that they are full of self-confidence and taking it to the ‘opposition’ fearlessly. Lost their nerve is the very opposite of what’s happening, Pete, believe you me.

    They don’t care about respect any more, they will do what they think it will take to implement their socialist policies.

    http://yournz.org/2013/06/02/once-were-tree-huggers/

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Viking2 (11,488 comments) says:

    I would however be worried if they had another Douglas stuck away somewhere

    Why. It would help move the country to the right once more.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    “If you end up as a political failure in Australia and you end up as a political failure in New Zealand where should you go?”

    Southland!

    Now who’d have thunk it PG! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Bill did of course and he only failed in NZ! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Mayor of Invercargill do you think JB?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    Vance, the hack Andrea Vance, always giving the Left a free pass. Disgraceful journalism.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. RF (1,404 comments) says:

    Manolo. 6.17pm. Apparently Toad is taking time out in hospital. He was overcome with the toxic stench from the sweaty armpits of the few dozen soap dodgers that attended the conference.

    Thank god the hall is to be demolished on EQCs instructions as the smell still lingers even after the great unwashed have left on their goats.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. wat dabney (3,775 comments) says:

    Matiria Turei’s remarkable new collection of designer outfits after years of dowdy Morris dancer style home spun organic hippy ones

    One is struck by the similarity between Turei and the way the Chinese President’s clothes-horse of a wife Peng Liyuan is paraded about presenting an acceptable face for thuggery.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. RF (1,404 comments) says:

    wat dabney. 6.37pm. Think of Kermit the Frog and then picture Turei. Could be brother & sister. Just saying…….

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    He failed in Manurewa PG and whatsmore his tow ball fell off! :)

    Folk that roll their Rrrr’s tend to be more forgiving I guess! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. hj (7,033 comments) says:

    Green Party Vision

    In our Vision, Aotearoa New Zealand is a place where people respect each other and the natural world we share. It is healthy, peaceful and richly diverse*.

    [multicultural - expect immigration from the sort of places Tin tin has visited]

    We know our different histories and we are secure in our identity. Our way of living honours Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

    [ there’s a big fat can of worms

    One of jh’s themes has been dis-satisfaction with the Green Party for not being specific about the outcomes of our policy in relation to the Treaty. “What, specifically, will this country be like if we go down this course?”. It’s a question I have heard many times over the years, and it usually speaks from a position of fear and insecurity for Pakeha: what if I’ll be worse off? or even what if there’s no place for me?

    I want to acknowledge that actually we are asking people to do something (and we are doing it too) quite different from what we usually ask with our policy. Normally we have a very clear idea of the outcome we are seeking, and establish a policy to reflect how we will get there.

    But the Treaty is different. The words all have the potential to sound pretty hammy, but fundamentally the outcome being sought is a process: the process of absolute good faith negotiation, in which we Pakeha engage from a position of honour – acting ethically and morally.

    That process involves courage because we don’t know the outcome (and because we know we have it pretty sweet just how things are, let’s be honest). It is pretty scary, but it’s also pretty damn exciting!

    http://blog.greens.org.nz/2010/05/03/my-speech-at-blackball-2010/

    Our children, our elders, our families and our communities are at the centre of national life. Each person’s unique contribution is valued. Participation, justice and quality of life for all are valued over individual attainment of wealth.

    [as clear as mud... you'd wanna see it operationalised]

    Our economic system enables people to meet their needs from the bounty of the earth, within nature’s limits. Indigenous ecosystems are restored and replenished.

    [what about “our share of climate refugees” and (being) even more multicultural.

    Life in our country is a celebration of diversity and creativity. All are able to participate meaningfully in decisions that affect our own and future generations. We recognise the rights and interests of those who cannot speak for themselves.

    [we don't care much for our uniqueness our culture is a base culture in which other cultures will tumble around without consuming our culture] – arrogant bastards.

    These islands shine in the world for a tradition of ecological living, fair trade, human rights and peace.

    [and for being far away and not being directly involved in border disputes etc]

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Why ?

    Ask Clint.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    P.S. These tossers are not allowed perfume or deoderant but…..

    Their co leader tints her hair.

    Hey Clint, how does that work ?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    Pete George said

    I posted on this yesterday and Robert Guyton launched into me. He demonstrated one of the new Green problem – an arrogant belief in their own infallibility.

    I suggested the Greens had lost their nerve and ditched their principles to try and finally get their hands on power.

    Brother Guyton visited my blog as well at the weekend Pete, with a cut-and-paste of Norman’s comments about Key. He reckoned that I would not have the courage to allow the comment to stand. He was wrong; I published it if only to show how arrogant some Green Party activists have become with exactly the syndrome you describe Pete.

    In the meantime, Guyton now knows that he has forfeited the right to comment at my place again, but his comment will stand as a memorial to a party of idealists who became idealogues, and whose nastiness could no longer be hidden. It is good that the true thoughts of the likes of Norman and Guyton (a former Green Party list candidate) are out in the public arena so that the myth that the Greens like to play the ball and not the man is thoroughly debunked.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Interesting to see Dave Stringer’s comment at 3.04 pm has (currently) 27 likes and no dislikes.

    Also interesting that he posted the same on Frogblog – currently 7 likes and no dislikes.

    And not surprising that many Green supporters (and ex supporters) take exception to the Norman enraging.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Clint says,

    ‘Jeez, havent you read ‘Animal Farm’ yet you drong ?’

    Some pigs ……..

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    The guy is an unrepentant communist and an idiot…and, little known outside “the beltway”, one of the least popular MP’s. Even his own caucus don’t much like him much, and don’t make much effort to disguise the fact.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Clint says…

    “Wake up you drongs. There are rules, then there are other rules for us Pigs”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Ross12 (1,432 comments) says:

    From Andrew Bolt’s blog after the latest Essential Poll in Aussie

    “Interestingly, the Greens primary vote – 11.8 per cent at the election – now bumps along at just 8 per cent.”

    So the Greens are going down in Australia– how long before the 12% wake in NZ ??

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Nostalgia-NZ (5,220 comments) says:

    ‘Perhaps he senses the Greens’ momentum is slipping and is prepared to resort to extreme measures to get some traction.

    I think it is the second.’

    Hard to imagine that Norman is reactive as that, a little wishful and naive thinking it looks to me. The election is a long programe during which presumably all the candidates gain experience and learn. If he has indeed been reactive, even petulant – he should be smart enough to address that long term. In the future he might be able to claim to having ‘called’ JK and JK’s manner and attitude to the voting public in a way less ‘offensive’ and convince some of the electorate that he’s ‘put his foot’ down about honest politics and drawn a line between politics and ‘self interest.’ If it’s been an opening ‘salvo’ on which he is set to intensify the spite it may work against him, if it’s a line drawn on which he intends to take ‘generous’ advantage in a more subtle way it could have worked. Stopping for a moment in developing the point that DPF made that Norman didn’t, or doesn’t appear to have known the life and times or Rob Muldoon, looked at in another way, Norman is more representative of the age of a group of voters with similar ignorance of the Muldoon era with its modern evoked conception of a past ‘tyrant’ represented in the modern age.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    D G @ 7.15 ,, correct amundo, spot on.

    Problem is….

    “How can the the sheepele be bought up to speed ?”

    These green shitheads have the advantage that they can appeal to the lowest common denominator.

    A dishonest lying soundbite, a lazy incompetant ‘Journalist” and there, you have won the sheeple vote.

    Question is…

    How can this be countered ?

    If the answer is, “It can’t”

    Then we are all doomed.

    There must be an answer,,,,

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    Personally I think Norman has been told ( by Clint!)to have a crack at Key to see howthe left side of NZ reacts.
    If he gets negitive pushback then he will try another track, if its positive he will push on.
    Afterall its not as tho he is trying to convert the swinging centerist voter, he is aiming to steal more of Mumblefucks lunch.

    He has 15 months to the next election? plenty of time to resile from these comments and play nice.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Tauhei Notts (1,724 comments) says:

    Kiwi In America wrote about the media’s long infatuation with the Greens – their political virginity they admired.
    Well, I think this speech has de-flowered the Greens.
    And that is a good thing for New Zealand. For quite some time I have worried about the future of our country with a government run by people like Russel Norman. My brief chats with a number of people in the 18 – 35 age bracket have suggested that it is a real possibility. But now Russel has been kind enough to show us his real character, that fear I had of Russel in power has diminished considerably.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    Personally I think Norman has been told ( by Clint!)to have a crack at Key to see howthe left side of NZ reacts.

    No, just the same old Russel petulance we have seen before – like when the nasty man took his flag

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Tauhei Notts
    It seems unlikely to me that Norman’s speech could be anything like the game-changer you seem to be looking for. Indeed, it is entirely possible that the voters Norman is chasing share his view of Key.
    This speech is unlikely to mean much in the long term. Political events are often accorded more significance in the blogosphere than in real life.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Jeez Tauhei.. @ 7.48

    With an attitude like that from you we are all doomed.

    Talk about the Chamberliain syndrome…

    Problem is Noddy… Russells ideas do catch hold with drongs who are not exposed to anything better.

    We need Chamberlains like you like we need an effing hole in the head.

    So your philosophy is,,,, Sit back, trust the 18-35 year olds.

    Trust the kids.

    Do nothing… It will all come good in the end.

    Effing moron.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Last point.

    We deserve all that we get as a society if ‘Clint” calls the shots.
    And good people stand by and cop it up the chook.

    So sad. So fukin sad.

    May as well elect Clint as President .

    We going to do sumsing or just bend over and cop it ?

    Are you ?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    This speech is unlikely to mean much in the long term.

    On the contrary, it will be very hard to undo the effects of this speech. Now Norman has openly shown he’s prepared to lie and launch personal attacks he can’t just say “whoops, that didn’t work, I’ll try the nice approach next time”.

    When Frogblog is divided – and more against than for the Norman enraging – then the Greens have a serious problem that can’t be wound back.

    By going this dirty Russel Norman is tainted, possibly to the extent of being toxic to the clean Green brand.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    I’d be more worried that the party could only get 120 along to it’s conference and AGM. That hardly bodes well for growing influence in the halls of power

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. RF (1,404 comments) says:

    Tauhei Notts. 7.48pm. “De-flowered the greens.”. Cut to the chase.. the correct term is “Fucked the Greens”.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    The Greens have munged their beans.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Dirty Rat (383 comments) says:

    Oh for god sake Farrrar, toughen up Princess. Everyone knows that Norman is full of shit, that that is no needfor you to go all blubbery panty waisted cry baby about it …geez..You are the sook of the week, do you need a cuddle ?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    PG, I agree he cant pull back and hide from the comments but I doubt that will stop him from trying.

    bhudson, I dissagree. I cannot believe that Norman made this change in tactics without a ‘hey Clint” discussion. This is not a kneejerk petulant reaction I think he is having a go at being a hard man! Ha!

    Key will destroy this twat in a live debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    Hard, incredible, impossible to believe that these economic illiterates and staunch totalitarians, the Luddites, can get over 10% of the population’s vote. Do we have so many imbeciles around?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    Coalville,

    Nah, I can just imagine his screeching, whiny voice giving that speech – “give me my percentage points back”

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    Do we so many imbeciles around?

    No. The only reason the Greens got more than 10% was that Labour was worse than woeful.

    Whoops…

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. RF (1,404 comments) says:

    Do not get side tracked by Norman as we have the Sheep waiting in the wings and keeping under the radar. Beware of the hun in the sun !!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. slightlyrighty (2,475 comments) says:

    The question is, why did Norman go nasty??

    The statements he has made about Key are designed to what end? Does he actually believe these statements or is he out to attract the votes of people who believe these statements. In either case it is a very dangerous or downright stupid move for somebody who is possessed of a Doctorate in political science.

    What would be the downstream effects of this diatribe? I don’t claim to have the qualifications of Dr Norman, but it does not take a political scientist to figure out that the only place that this speech could gain support from are the greens own potential co-alition partners, and even then only from it’s far left factions. At the same time, the center vote will in all likelihood be nudged further towards the right, as the swing voter starts to wonder what would actually happen if the rhetoric was matched by action.

    If this is the best that Norman can come up with, then we will see the Political Scientist doctor get roundly schooled by a B.Com graduate. Makes a difference when your world is shaped by reality as opposed to political theory and dogma, doesn’t it?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. dishy (248 comments) says:

    The thing for me is that Norman said that John Key has “banned protest at sea”. Norman knows that this is not the case. Norman is a liar. Many journalists will know this, but what’s the bet none of them mention it? They love to have a go at Key, Banks, Dunne and co., even when the evidence isn’t there. Fuck them.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    In part this is “taking Key on”, some say taking Key on at his own game but that’s misguided. If Green strategists think that Stormin’ Norman is out Keying Key they are badly mistaken.

    But this is also likely to be an attempt to outscore both David Shearer and Winston Peters as the de facto Leader of the Opposition.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Nostalgia-NZ (5,220 comments) says:

    Not as ‘badly mistaken’ as you PG. You seem to have a ‘think big’ policy going on, Norman Russell would seem to have another strategy unfolding, one that shouldn’t take you long to work out. Give it until Christmas – the working out that is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Everyone does know that expression on John Key’s face is a smirk, right?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Whatever strategy they might have unfolding they have stuffed it up already. Rebranding as a mallardian party is likely to be as successful for the Greens as it has been for Labour over the last four and a half years.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Everyone does know that expression on John Key’s face is a smirk, right?

    Yeah, cracks me up. Been looking for succinct description of it for a while. You hit it with a nail. I’ve always been confused by those who think it portrays humor. It’s always been a ‘smirk’ to my sense of ‘style’.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Nostalgia-NZ (5,220 comments) says:

    Hardly ‘rebranding’ Pete. Good effort apart from getting the ‘main bit’ wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Nice how the person Norman is being played here to attack the Green brand. Coz as we know what one “ethnic” person does reflects on the whole group.

    It would seem that Norman was trying to connect abuse of power – imposed Super City, the removal of ECan and the back room deals with Hollywood and Sky City, the actions of ACC and now EQC to claimants to the personal leadership style of John Key – smirk, handshake and knife in the back – the term used by employees he laid off during his private sector days.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “Everyone does know that expression on John Key’s face is a smirk, right?”

    Everyone in your knitting circle, yeah.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. BlairM (2,341 comments) says:

    he just never used his ability to get near his potential, he clung to that secondary school student atitude towards dope and couldn’t move on into the real world where I thought there was a place for him, but he never grew up but he was certainly miles ahead of anything they ahve in parliamnt presently.

    Referring to Nandor, I remember him saying he never owned a watch before entering parliament, and he made much show of destroying it in his valedictory speech. Kind of sums up why he never got anywhere.

    Also, Rastafarianism is the most ludicrous religion anyone could possibly invent (and there is stiff competition out there for that title). You could just about justify belief in it as a black Jamaican nationalist who was attracted to its political themes. But Nandor is an Englishman of mostly white European descent. I’m not sure why he believes that a deceased Orthodox Christian Ethiopian Emperor is the reincarnation of Jesus Christ.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. BlairM (2,341 comments) says:

    As for Red Russell and his attack… the Left in NZ have been trying this on for years now – this idea that if they just keep attacking John Key’s character eventually people will wake up and realise what a heartless bastard he is. It doesn’t work. People genuinely like John Key. I’ve said for years that in politics, you never attack your opponent where he is strongest, you attack him where he is weak. Key’s strength is that he is a nice, pragmatic guy that you would want to have a beer with. Trying to convince people that he is really nasty and that you wouldn’t want to have a beer with him at all is simply doomed to failure.

    Hopefully, Russell keeps it up, because it will keep him out of power.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. sparky (235 comments) says:

    Blair M,

    The truth is, that John Key is not a nasty personality. He quips every now and then, at a party, but I have not heard him personally attack anyone. As for Ginga Commo Norman, he is just a Nasty person with crazy ideas, full stop.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. kiwi in america (2,454 comments) says:

    Tauhei Notts
    The media deflowering will take some time and some more arrogance and hardball by Norman and other Greens before they (the media) will surrender their version of Camelot. It took Obama’s Justice Department snooping into mainstream media reporter’s emails before they finally were prepared 5 years later to honestly report on Obama’s deficiencies. Such was the desire to not rain on the parade of the fairy tale of the first black President that they willfully turned a blind eye to some of America’s most egregious government scandals (the Fast and Furious gun running fiasco and the multiple fiascos over Benghazi). The NZ MSM’s lack of curiosity over the impact of Green policies has been palpable fuelled by the Greens seeming innocence and eschewing of the usual gotcha politics-as usual-games played in Wellington. Norman’s personal attacks on Key have seriously undermined that innocence. The proximity to power and the greater melding of Labour and Green policy provisions has suddenly sharpened the minds of the more inquisitive journalists. The deliberate sabotage of the MRP share float was instructive but even then left leaning sympathizers like Rod Oram were still carrying Labour’s water over their power policy while more experienced political journalists like John Armstrong and Colin Espiner saw the power policy for exactly what it was. When more easily swayed journos like Tracy Watkins report on being astonished by the Muldoon analogy, you know Norman has gone too far.

    The next round of polls will be interesting (excepting the now discredited Roy Morgan). If National holds or goes up slightly we are going to see more infighting amongst the left as Labour, Greens and Mana try to cannibalize each others votes. I’m picking the Greens will get more shrill and sharply political (and nasty) as they see their right to rule in a left coalition fade slowly under the weight of their ridiculous costly promises. They will surrender one of the key points of difference – their seeming freshness and niceness. The left is never pretty when its true intentions are revealed and when their policies face proper rigorous scrutiny.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Nostalgia-NZ (5,220 comments) says:

    ‘The next round of polls will be interesting (excepting the now discredited Roy Morgan). If National holds or goes up slightly we are going to see more infighting amongst the left as Labour, Greens and Mana try to cannibalize each others votes.’

    Clueless.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Black with a Vengeance (1,865 comments) says:

    Jeez you talk some shit, kiwi in america!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote