Abysmal line-up of no-hopers

Quote of the day:

Aside from other disturbing considerations, a Labour government is currently only possible by incorporating the most abysmal line-up of no-hopers ever to have presented themselves in our history. The Nats’ rowing boat television advertisement is spot-on . . .  Sir Bob Jones

A Labour/Green government would be bad enough.

Throw in New Zealand First and the Internet and Mana parties – together or apart – and the next three years would be even worse.

49 Responses to Abysmal line-up of no-hopers

  1. Bruce Whitehead says:

    They may just end up in charge of the country in a few weeks time, due mostly to a shortsighted & non impartial media, and the fact that people can’t see through that nice German fella with the nazi momento’s
    Shift some funds overseas now, before the dollar drops, batten down the hatch’s, sit back, & stock up on popcorn for the show.

    B Whitehead


  2. jabba says:

    I made a comment on KIWIBLOG .. general debate .. listing potential ministers .. scary as hell
    I also hear the noose is tightening on the hacker


  3. Mr E says:


    I’m hoping the voter will view any potential left coalition for what it is – An over promised coalition of the “abysmal”.
    I’m having a little faith.

    If the worst happened. I would seriously consider moving country.

    Imagine the War room with David Cunliffe, Russell Norman, Laila, Winston (and Kim).

    Imagine it.

    I’m hoping that National advert is wrong. When they forgot to include a bailer in the Left boat.


  4. Southern says:

    Of course the media want the labour, green etc monster to win, if the Nats get in with Colin Craig, what do we get, boring old stable Governing with an economy that keeps people employed, nothing to see here folks, but if the other team get in, imagine the fireworks, headlines galore thanks very much.
    The media are there to sell ads, there is no other reason for their existence, and people don’t watch run of the mill stable news, they want trouble, and that is what they will get.


  5. robertguyton says:

    [Deleted – off-topic]


  6. Dave Kennedy says:

    I wonder what would happen if we assessed all candidates based on their ethics and honest engagement with the public. When you make sweeping statements about a party and support Sir Bob’s description of Labour candidates as an “Abysmal line up of no-hopers” I guess you are implying that your National MPs are a cut above. My own personal experience of ‘dirty politics’ from a Minister not featured in the book and Cameron Slater make me come to the conclusion that such behaviour is just the norm for your party: http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2014/09/whale-and-tolley-attacked-principals.html

    It appears that those in National who I have generally admired for their integrity and honesty like Kate Wilkinson and Simon Power are demoted or pushed out and those who play dirty remain at the top.


  7. Gravedodger says:

    David Hay refused to all entreaties to remain in the green Party Dave!!!!


  8. Mr E says:

    “such behaviour”

    Such behaviour being? Talking to a blogger?

    Punishing words from Dave, Politician and Blogger.


  9. JC says:

    “I wonder what would happen if we assessed all candidates based on their ethics and honest engagement with the public.”

    We already do that with the Leaders’ Poll.

    Key comes first overwhelmingly, Cunliffe a distant second and the Greens trail the field.

    Again, in the Readers’ Digest recent poll of the most disliked people in the country Key is least disliked of the politicians and the Greens co-leaders most.

    The great ethics of the Greens is almost entirely self bestowed by the Greens on themselves but not by other politicos and the general public.



  10. homepaddock says:

    Dave – “a Labour government is currently only possible by incorporating the most abysmal line-up of no-hopers ever to have presented themselves in our history.” refers to the parties Labour will need to include in government.

    “I wonder what would happen if we assessed all candidates based on their ethics and honest engagement with the public.”

    Kevin Hague named doctors who work with ACC in parliament. One of those doctors told me the resulting publicity led to death threats against the wife of one of them. When the doctor contacted Hague about it he got no apology and was told that being dragged into political arguments came with the work he (the doctor) was doing.

    I’ve pulled Robert up for linking to his blog, consider this a warning that I’ll be treating others the same.


  11. jabba says:

    I see John Hart, a Green candidate is in favour of free speech and he said “‘ll defend free speech to my dying breath”.So, this means he supports Whaleoil just disagrees with some content. He also said “It’s time to clean up politics to restore public faith, and attract better people” mm conflicting messages here. This is relation to his tweet “Wondering how many good people have been put off serving in politics over the years thanks to the antics of Slater et al. Time to fix this”
    I’m sure he, like our Dave, is a nice bloke but?


  12. Dave Kennedy says:

    “The great ethics of the Greens is almost entirely self bestowed by the Greens on themselves but not by other politicos and the general public.”





  13. Dave Kennedy says:

    Jabba, does that mean you condone Ministers feeding personal information to Cameron Slater? Free speech is well and good but once you are elected to a public role certain standards should apply. Cameron’s post about myself was pretty grubby but should be expected if you try to engage with him, but Anne Tolley’s behaviour to a genuine expression of concern from Invercargill principals was arrogant and rude. It would also be a huge concern if she was using Slater to publicly denigrate principals opposed to National Standards.


  14. Mr E says:

    Dave, what is it you dislike?
    Politicians talking to bloggers?
    Bloggers having a free right of speech?

    It seems to me that Cameron blog lives and dies on its ability to attract the public. And from what I can tell he regularly gets over 100,000 daily hits. If people didn’t like Whale oil, i’d presume they would stop reading. It seems the public like to see what Cameron posts.

    Contrast that to you own blog. What are your stats Dave?


  15. Ray says:

    “The great ethics of the Greens is almost entirely self bestowed by the Greens on themselves ”
    How very true.

    But the world wide web grinds turgidly to a halt, as once again Mr Kennedy swamps us with a plethora of links instead of advancing the argument.


  16. Mr E says:

    PS Dave,

    You use a blog to publically denigrate the Government. Including during the days when you were NZEI.

    You are acting very hypocritical.


  17. jabba says:

    Dave, I would love to found out how much the Greens new about the real dirty politics and that is the grubby Hager publishing stolen e-mails for profit.


  18. Dave Kennedy says:

    “Dave, what is it you dislike?
    Politicians talking to bloggers?
    Bloggers having a free right of speech?”

    I dislike Ministers and their offices passing on personal information to bloggers for unethical purposes.

    I dislike blatant bias regarding OIA information releases to politically control the information that goes out to the public. Ombudsmen have already criticized the way that this is managed.

    I dislike Ministers of the Crown leading personal attacks on individuals rather than dealing with the issues.

    I dislike Ministers who openly supporting a blogger who encourages hate speech of the very worst and extreme kind.

    I dislike blogging where the blogger is paid to spread rumours about those who may limit the profits of the tobacco and alcohol industries.

    I dislike like the fact that all of this has lowered the ethical bar in politics and lowered peoples expectations of what is acceptable in politics.

    I would never want my blog to be popular in the way Slaters is and I write all my own posts. I am happy that my most read post has had 40,000 views and that my blog receives up to 34,000 views a month when blogging is only a sideline for me.


  19. Dave Kennedy says:

    “Dave, I would love to found out how much the Greens new about the real dirty politics and that is the grubby Hager publishing stolen e-mails for profit.”

    jabba, I can tell you honestly that I was just as surprised at the contents of Hager’s book as everyone else. I also thought it might have been about the GCSB. Hager operates independently of political parties and has been critical of the left in two of his books.

    It is interesting to see the enthusiastic support the Cameron Slater is getting here, you all obviously believe his blog provides a useful function and character assassination based on little more than rumour and innuendo is perfectly acceptable. It also is bizarre that some of you seem to be saying that I am no different to Slater myself. I challenge you to find a quote from my blog that replicates Slater’s approach.


  20. Dave Kennedy says:

    For reference here is Slater’s response when I wrote a comment explaining my professional concerns about Charter Schools. The comments he allowed underneath are just plain revolting: http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2013/07/not-for-profit-in-education/


  21. Dave Kennedy says:

    I should also say at the time he questioned my motives I was working part-time as a teacher of special needs children and shortly before worked with the Ministry to revise the IEP document (no pay received for this). See second page: http://www.minedu.govt.nz/NZEducation/EducationPolicies/SpecialEducation/PublicationsAndResources/FormsAndGuidelines/~/media/MinEdu/Files/EducationSectors/SpecialEducation/FormsGuidelines/CollaborationForSuccessIEP.pdf


  22. TraceyS says:

    Dave, I can’t believe my ears! You are an activist and you are complaining about getting attention!?

    Then you blame that attention on Government ministers? How about taking some responsibilty yourself. If a completely private life is what you want then just have one!


  23. jabba says:

    Hager was critical of Labour Dave .. I can’t for the life of me expect him to be critical of the Greens aye?


  24. J Bloggs says:

    I admire Nicky Hager. He’s sussed out a perfect publishing career, and keeps executing it to perfection. Writes a book that appeals to the conspiracy theorists and anti government brigade. Launches it in election year and lets the resulting media frenzy promote his book and drive the sales up. Spend the next year or two scooping up speaking spots and getting another book ready in time for the next election. Rinse and repeat.


  25. Dave Kennedy says:

    “Dave, I can’t believe my ears! You are an activist and you are complaining about getting attention!?”

    You didn’t read what I said Tracey, I completely expect the attention from the likes of Slater but for Tolley to attack me as though I was responsible for the letter was totally unacceptable. It was very disrespectful of the twelve principals who had collaborated to write it and sign it, she ignored them completely and didn’t address one of their concerns.


  26. TraceyS says:

    Oh but I did read you Dave –

    “I had the time to co-ordinate the letter and collect the signatures of the 12 principals involved. Unfortunately I was unable to present the letter in person due to reasonable objections from the school being visited…”

    Ummmm, Dave….

    A reporter rings up a Minster and says that a political activist (you in this case) wrote this letter and co-ordinated its signing etc etc. What would you expect a Minister to say in response?

    If a political person writes a letter, even if they get others on board with them, it’s still going to be seen as political. If you don’t like that then maybe you’re in the wrong job.


  27. Dave Kennedy says:

    You are making assumptions it wasn’t my letter and it wasn’t signed by me, good grief, you just accepting the spin…


  28. Gravedodger says:

    @ Dave I have been doing good works, make that really good works but please explain the TWO books Hagar the saga scribbler has written critical of the socialists and please dont use “Seeds of Distrust as that was pure anti GE and later used by Campbell to ambush a Labour Prime Minister in what became known as “corngate” and was not anti leftwing.


  29. JC says:

    “But the world wide web grinds turgidly to a halt, as once again Mr Kennedy swamps us with a plethora of links instead of advancing the argument.”

    I was going to let it go because I’d made my point but I’d point out that in his first link showing how loved the Greens leaders are he chose 2007 and Jeanette Fitzimons.

    In the second link it was an off topic story on how virtuous the Greens are in attending Parliament and in the third Dave referred to the 2013 Readers Digest survey showing how loved the Greens co-leaders were.. nevermind that further exposure saw them both drop in popularity in the 2014 RD survey.

    If Whaleoil played around with the link dates like that it would be “Dirty Politics” 🙂




  30. RBG says:

    ‘If a political person writes a letter’. TraceyS what is a ‘political person’ ? An MP? A parliamentary candidate? A member of a political party? A financial donor to a political party? A regional or city councillor? A regional or city council candidate? A community board member? A community board candidate? The person who signs the nomination form for a community board candidate? Would these all fit your definition of a ‘political person’? If so, by your reasoning everything any of these people write or say must be considered to be ‘political’, they are fair game for character assassination on blogs and they should not expect a to have a private life.


  31. Dave Kennedy says:

    It is only to be expected I guess, but I put up some good responses to Mr E’s challenge and you all ignore them and attack the fact that my evidence about the Greens ethics are dated or the sources are not reputable. I once wrote a post that highlighted “15 ethical fails under National” in 2012 (after Ele’s threat I won’t provide the link, but you can google it) and any simple google search is full of concerns regarding National’s lack of ethics and using slim definitions of legality to justify actions.

    I attended a political forum in a small rural town in Southland recently that National candidate Todd Barclay also attended. He was asked by a member of the audience if he thought that working for a tobacco company was a sound moral choice. His reply was that it was legal and he himself supported a reduction of smoking. The questioner quite rightly asked the question again because he hadn’t actually responded to the morality of his choice and Todd shouted at the questioner to stop interrupting him and refused to properly respond. He responded in a similar way to others who asked questions he could’t answer. This was heartland National and I was told afterwards that some of the farmers are seriously looking at Labour and the Greens for the first time in their lives.

    I only told this story because it appears to be a common theme, getting away with something through finer legal points is good politics for National now and if things turn pear shaped you just change the law. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10887302

    Back room deals, secret handshakes and setting Slater onto those who challenge the Government seems to be how National now does business, which is why (I understand) Simon Power left the Party.

    In talking to National people in Invercargill this overview by Selwyn Manning seems close to reality: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/04/investigation-nationals-campaign-flying-blind-what-national-fears-most-and-where-it-is-most-vulnerable/

    Rather than attacking all the messengers why don’t you guys just demand better of your Ministers?


  32. TraceyS says:

    ^ making an assumption or three there, Dave.

    One final question – why do you criticise others for what you commonly do yourself?

    If you’re that keen on a debate about ethics, then I am sure you’ll be only too keen to reply.


  33. Dave Kennedy says:

    “One final question – why do you criticise others for what you commonly do yourself?”



  34. Dave Kennedy says:

    “…the TWO books Hagar the saga scribbler has written critical of the socialists?”

    Seeds of Distrust and Other Peoples Wars. Both described events that were concerning that occurred under Labour Governments.


  35. RBG says:

    TraceyS @ 3.35. ‘political activist’. If someone signs a petition, buys a raffle ticket to support a cause, expresses an opinion online, writes a letter to the editor, attends a political fundraiser, or goes on a protest march, are they then an ‘activist’? As such, should they then not be surprised to be dismissed and have their opinions ignored by government ministers?


  36. TraceyS says:

    No, but someone who does a lot of it is.


  37. Mr E says:

    “I put up some good responses to Mr E’s challenge and you all ignore them”

    I bit like most of your responses to my questions Dave, you act like a judge and jury.

    Self absorbed nonsense.


  38. RBG says:

    “No, but someone who does a lot of it is.”
    Bit vague TraceyS and it DOES matter who is and isn’t an “activist”, because according to you at 1.48 yesterday, Dave Kennedy should not be complaining about being insulted on Slater’s blog and should not be able to expect to have a private life because he is an “activist”.
    According to TraceyS at 3.35 “a political person” should expect to have anything they are involved with dismissed as political stunts, as the Southland Principals letter was by Anne Tolley, though TraceyS has not yet told us what “a political person” is.
    How is New Zealand citizen to know WHEN they have crossed over the line and is then, according to TraceyS’ , a justifiable target for abuse (such as the women Principals from Southland whose weight and appearance were the subject of discussion on Whaleoil)
    You comment a lot on this blog TraceyS. I recall a comment sometime ago about you “signing up new members” and I think it would be a pretty good guess that you are a member of the National party. So, that would make you a “political person” and an “activist”. Would you be OK about having your photo put up on a political blog and people comment on your appearance?
    No, of course that would be wrong. That would be “Dirty Politics” . And that is what needs to stop!


  39. Gravedodger says:

    Massive fail DaveK.

    But then it was an impossible request for you to comply with, that said thankyou for the attempt to reply.

    Being written while a socialist government is in power does not have any relevance to your totally misleading claim; Hagar the Saga scribbler has ever written a single paragraph that is opposed to any socialist regime.

    He is a propaganda writer of lefty socialist ramblings and has zero acceptance that what he says based on stolen private correspondence under the completely erroneous mantra of being in “The Public Interest” is immoral, obnoxious, demeaning and a shallow imitation of worthy that you and the fellow travelers propound as truth.

    As I pointed out in my question, Seeds of Distrust was an anti GE rant used by a forgettable Little Creep to ambush PM Clark as a ratings raising and relevance ploy.
    Your second example is just a spurious anti war anti establishment grubby little magazine article masquerading as journalistic effort.

    Hagar the Saga scribbler is just a useful idiot who coincidentally releases print efforts to bolster failing political efforts of his fellow travelers who clearly now include you by your enthusiastic embracing of his garbage.

    The only meaningful further evidence of the paucity of your position would come should a right wing conservative scribbler reverse the situation and publish equally transparent ideological garbage denigrating your heros using similar stolen private communication traffic never intended to be published.
    Then the screeching of you and your seditious mates would be heard in the middle of the furthermost reaches of the South Westland beech forests.

    But thankyou for replying, my ongoing sadness is the total waste of your talent in such a morass of idealism and destructive effort when the serious beliefs of one such as yourself, social, educational and environmental, could achieve so much more to advance environmental and your clear personal aims within a mainstream Party and there is one that is simply crying out for such support as we speak.
    If you actually listened and comprehended how your leaders have subsumed the once worthy Green environmental lobby group to reach the treasury benches to perpetrate the hard left socialist cause while bypassing the moribund NZLP, you might see a glimmer of what I and many others understand but remains a denial meme for you.

    Norman, a previously avowed communist, came from a communist family in Queensland and struggled for any relevance until he gained his present path to where he stands using somewhat grubby tactical manipulation of the list to overtake Mike Ward and Delahunty who had gained higher list placings under the oh so transparent system of your party, to replace Tanczos, thereby gaining significant financial advantage as a parliamentary services funded “New co Leader”.
    I wonder if there were any similar injuries to Mr Ward along the lines of what was unleashed on poor old Krestinksy c1938
    Not dirty politics though.

    Ms Turei although getting to the top seemingly within the prevailing rules is much more notable for her journey and from whence she came. anarchy,ethnicity and cannabis are of little relevance to environmental other than as means and ends.

    Good luck for the 20th, whatever happens I will embrace the democratic will of the voters, however accepting the massive attempt to manipulate things by people, many as yet unknown using illegal electronic and financial inputs will never be accepted by me as legitimate.
    That is for another day as there is a small part of my psyche that will sit back with the popcorn and indulge, watching Mr c herding his bunch of cats if the unthinkable occurs.
    Last evenings efforts by Hosking will seem lightweight “that was the week that was” entertainment, if that bunch sans Horan, a total mystery there, plus Harre, Material, and Mr c have their executive meetings, who has the film rights? and maybe more telling the sound track?

    ” That is truly Dirty Politics ”

    Apologies for length feeling indulgent today


  40. TraceyS says:


    “So, that would make you a “political person” and an “activist”.

    I’ve got no problem with that and don’t always expect to receive accolades for it either.

    No one should.


  41. TraceyS says:


    “One final question – why do you criticise others for what you commonly do yourself?


    You need to re-read what you write. It is full of assumptions.


  42. RBG says:

    TraceyS, are you saying you have no problem with personal abuse and smears being directed at political people and activists?


  43. RBG says:

    TraceyS, it wasn’t ‘accolades’ I was talking about, as you well know, quite the opposite. You told Dave Kennedy he shouldn’t be surprised at having his views dismissed by the Education Minister because he is an activist and also that he shouldn’t expect to have a completely private life. As for the school principals in the photo Cameron Slater put up on his blog, do you have any sympathy for them regarding the abuse directed at them by Whaleoil commenters?


  44. TraceyS says:

    If you can ask a question without trying to put words in my mouth I might consider answering you.

    I will not hold my breath.


  45. RBG says:

    They were ‘yes’ or ‘no’ questions.


  46. RBG says:

    I am not ‘putting words’ in your mouth TraceyS. Simple question. Do you have any sympathy for the school principals whose photo was put on Whaleoil and who were then abused about their appearance? Mr E, Gravedodger, jabba and others, what is your answer to this question?


  47. homepaddock says:

    RBG – for the record I regard politics as a difference of opinion and the difference is usually on the route rather than the destination. Discussion should be on ideas. People who can’t do that without resorting to abuse are displaying their own shortcomings.

    That happens across the political spectrum. It doesn’t mean others who share or have some sympathy with the political views support the way some are expressed.


  48. TraceyS says:

    Yes I have sympathy for them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: