The Dim-Post

August 28, 2008

Bonfire of the Vanities

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 6:33 pm
Tags: ,

Obviously Winston Peters ‘fuck off and die you lying vermin’ routine has been really effective at getting the media to cut him some slack: I can’t wait to see how well it will play with the Serious Fraud Office.

As Peters looks set to bring his second government coalition in a decade crashing down around his ears its worth taking the time to just stop and admire how totally pointless this whole debacle is. It was not illegal for Peters to accept a $100,000 donation from Owen Glenn, but when the New Zealand Herald published an article alleging that he had done so he decided to to deny everything and demand that the editor and political editor of the Herald resign. He then went on to cheerfully nurture feuds and vendetta’s with some of the most formidable investigative journalists in the country; even though he knew that the stories they were publishing about him were true he denied them and then threw temper tantrums every time more evidence emerged.

Although this is a financial scandal in a superficial sense the real engine of Peters destruction is his vanity: we now know that Clark has known about Glenn’s donation since February; she is smart enough to have seen this coming.

Its not hard to imagine Clark remonstrating with Peters and getting the same run-around he’s given the country (‘there was no donation to me; the donation was to my lawyer’) with Peters eventually losing his temper and telling Clark to support him or lose his vote and have the country go to the polls while she was twenty points behind. The past few months must have looked to her like a slow-motion car-crash with Winstons drunken ego in the drivers seat.

About these ads

12 Comments »

  1. Peters eventually losing his temper and telling Clark to support him or lose his vote and have the country go to the polls while she was twenty points behind.

    Surely Clark would have gotten a rise in the polls if she hit the nuclear button back in February?

    Comment by Peter Metcalfe — August 28, 2008 @ 7:02 pm

  2. Surely Clark would have gotten a rise in the polls if she hit the nuclear button back in February?

    I don’t think so. Failure to bring a government to term makes a leader look weak.

    Comment by danylmc — August 28, 2008 @ 7:14 pm

  3. NB. IMHO She needed to call Peters bluff when the Herald produced the emails – but at that point she was 26 points behind in the polls. She’s paying for it now.

    Comment by danylmc — August 28, 2008 @ 7:15 pm

  4. Failure to bring a government to term makes a leader look weak.

    2002. The Alliance split between the Progressive Caucus and the Personality cultists was cited as cause for the snap election. Clark won handily.

    Comment by Peter Metcalfe — August 28, 2008 @ 7:16 pm

  5. Yeah, but Labour were several million points ahead in the polls and the alliance split was more of a flimsy pretext than an actual crisis. And Labour still dropped a few points during the election campaign, losing votes to Dunne, Winston and the Greens.

    Comment by danylmc — August 28, 2008 @ 7:20 pm

  6. Indeed, this whole debacle is brought about by Winston’s ego, coupled with his obsessive secrecy paranoia.

    It was all totally unnecessary, which is why the electorate needs to send him packing.

    Comment by adamsmith1922 — August 28, 2008 @ 7:24 pm

  7. Peter Metcalfe, care to clarify who were the Progressive caucus and who were the Personality cultists in the Alliance split? ‘Cos they both sound like labels that could only be applied to one side of that, to me. But I digress.

    Danyl your last sentence reminded me rather vividly of the Winston Peters of the 1970s and 80s, Mr Muldoon…

    Comment by Julie — August 28, 2008 @ 7:45 pm

  8. Julie,

    IIRC the Progressive Caucus were Laila Harre and Matt McCarten and gang while the Personality Cult was Jim Anderton and his chosen disciples. This scheme ignores Philida Bunkle whom neither side wanted.

    Comment by Peter Metcalfe — August 28, 2008 @ 7:52 pm

  9. And Kevin Campbell who just wanted everyone to get along and have a big group hug ;-)

    Thanks for clarifying, I was confused because Progressive was the name Jim later adopted for his own party.

    Comment by Julie — August 28, 2008 @ 8:23 pm

  10. “The past few months must have looked to her like a slow-motion car-crash with Winston’s drunken ego in the driver’s seat”
    Interesting observation (though I inserted some possesive apostrophes).

    She obviously just kept looking at her paperwork and hoped it would all go away.

    But Winston…

    Any other politician could have walked out of this with just a bit of mud on them “ Yeah, I got some money from Glenn, surpised me too.. Yeah I played the electoral law to the limits, but I did it because I am the good guy and they are all bad. If I inadvertently misled Parliament in any way I am sorry” story plays for a couple of days and it goes away. Winston goes back into default mode and campaigns about how evil media and big business are out to get him.

    Only Winston would raise the stakes at every opportunity calling everyone a liar, daring them to prove him wrong. When he knows the Prime Minister has told him that Owen Glenn gave him a donation… and then to go into that press conference with the No sign.

    It beggars belief. I am lost to explain the motivation, perhaps total hubris (in the true sense of the word) or possibly working hard the 5 percent theory.

    Comment by Ian Llewellyn — August 28, 2008 @ 9:16 pm

  11. Only Winston would raise the stakes at every opportunity calling everyone a liar, daring them to prove him wrong. When he knows the Prime Minister has told him that Owen Glenn gave him a donation… and then to go into that press conference with the No sign

    I’d have loved to have seen Clark’s expression when he stood up in front of the press and accused the Herald of forging Glenn’s emails and then demanded that Murphy and Young resign.

    Comment by danylmc — August 29, 2008 @ 6:41 am

  12. With our long experience of Winston and his particular ploy of sticking strictly to the wording of the question and taking whatever allowance imprecision offers him (the lawyer effect), why has no-one recognised/acknowledged that Winnie is speaks the truth while offering no solace to any questioner? Owen Glenn did not give him any money – the cheque was made out to the Spencer Trust, which legally is not WP. Ditto for Sir Robert’s generous donation. Who will end up with egg on their face? Not Winnie, is my guess.

    Comment by Stephanie — August 30, 2008 @ 7:28 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 408 other followers

%d bloggers like this: