Not content with being proven wrong Eddie keeps digging a deeper hole. First a summary of the recent “Eddie” antics at The Standard. These came about in support of a Zetetic post that I called bullshit on (and proved him to be wrong).
In Eddie’s own words.
[three choices. Present evidence Dunne explicitly said he would support the partial sale of the energy companies and air nz, withdraw your comment, or face a three month ban. You know perfectly well the UF strategy was to never explicitly endorse any sales but, rather, to rule out sales that aren't on the table, thereby misleading the public on your position on the actual asset sales. You did it yourself here. If Dunne accidentally revealed the truth even once I didn't see it and nor did anyone in Ohariu. Eddie]
I told you to show Dunne explicitly said he would support asset sales. You have failed.
Your links do not show Dunne saying he would support National’s asset sales. Some mention asset sales that he wouldn’t support selling, but none that he would vote for. Indeed, the comments you link to are exactly the underhand muddying of the waters I mentioned above.
Allegations by Dunne’s critics that he would support asset sales are not Dunne explicitly supporting asset sales.
See you in three months.
It wouldn’t be at all hard to find if Dunne was telling the truth when he said “my position was clear pre-election”.
Yet no-one can find him ever saying he would support National’s asset sales or wouldn’t.
[Pete, congrats on tracking down the one time Dunne's strategy slipped and he admitted he would support National's asset sales. It took you along time and no-one else had been able to find such a quote. So, congratulations, you've proved that Dunne accidentally told the truth once in a forum that no-one noticed. Ban rescinded. Eddie]
Did Dunne openly say he would support national;s asset sales? Once. In one online forum.
The fact that I knew Dunne was being a duplicitous son of a bitch in avoiding (save once) giving an express opinion on National’s asset sales programme does not mitigate the fact he was refusing to be open about it.
You know this, Pete. You ran the UF line and repeatedly refused to express support National’s asset sales programme on this site. I knew what you were doing but that doesn’t change the fact you and your hair cult were refusing to be up front with the people whose votes you were seeking.
As well as a lot of other supporting evidence, there has been another quote (from Peter Dunne in a TV1 leader’s debate) that also proves Eddie and Zetetic wrong.
But Eddie couldn’t just walk away from a major blunder. He dug deeper. He sounded off:
The fact that I knew Dunne was being a duplicitous son of a bitch in avoiding (save once) giving an express opinion on National’s asset sales programm…
And made more accusations:
- “…does not mitigate the fact he was refusing to be open about it.”
- ”You ran the UF line and repeatedly refused to express support National’s asset sales programme on this site.”.
I called bullshit again. Accusations without facts.
When asked to “front up with some proof” there has been no response from Eddie.
And I’m still waiting for Eddie to operate to the same standards he demanded of me under threat, to front up with proof.
RightNow
/ May 20, 2012You’re tilting at windmills Pete. Outside of the echo chamber nobody gives a toss what they say.
Pete George
/ May 20, 2012I disagree. I think that if people knew what was going on they should give a toss. Otherwise our politics can be hobbled by secret online ops.