All posts tagged Zetetic

Zetetic – a silly goose

A Standard post by Zetetic, Good for the goose:

As you know, the Right says more money incentivises harder work. John Key felt he wasn’t working very hard when he first became PM on a net $250,000 a year, so he gave himself tax cuts and pay rises worth $100 a day. Just look at the results!

But I’m confused: why’s he cutting our pay with youth wages, higher Kiwisaver, and higher student loan repayments? Is it that rich people work harder when they get more money and poor people work harder when they get less?

Silly goose. Zetetic is very confused. “Our pay” is not being cut.

  • More youth now have a entry level employment opportunity they wouldn’t otherwise have had
  • Higher Kiwisaver rates don’t cut wages, it moves wages to savings, unless the employee chooses not to
  • Higher student loan deductions don’t cut wages, they pay off debt faster from the same wages

With that degree of confused thinking I hope Zetetic doesn’t work in any field that requires an understanding of employment, wages and deductions.

Zetetic concludes:

I guess the elite really do see us as a different species – mules, I suppose. And I see them as a different species but for different reasons and as a different species – leeches.

That’s typical old school union “us” versus those who provide them with jobs and livelihoods rhetoric.

I wonder if Zetetic was in a position to keep giving himself pay rises through the last few years when many workers and business owners had to do with less to survive the difficult economic times.

 

by Pete George on April 2, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged ,

Posted by Pete George on April 2, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/02/zetetic-a-silly-goose/

Not a Labour blog, not ‘The Standard’, a compliant cadre of comrades

Well, obviously The Standard is not a Labour blog, another post yesterday, this one by Zetetic, attacking Labour and Trevor Mallard’s twitty tweets yesterday attacking Russel Norman – Hatin’ on the left. The Standard has become very Labour unfriendly – a place of hatin’ on the left.

One that’s obsessively oversensitive to being seen as ‘The Standard’. Examples abound.

mike

Man why in hell are you continually posting anti-Labour stuff on this site? Your headlines are starting to make this place look like the front page of the Herald. Please go off and start your own party and let prejudiced people continuously throw shit at you – whatever – but please just get outta my face. And don’t give me the bullshit about ‘democracy’ and entitlement to ‘opinions’, neither of those words cover your pontificating – you’re worse that a chauvinist preacher shouting damnation from a pulpit. Crawl under a stone and leave us in peace. Please.

[lprent: Take your own advice - 2 months ban. Basically arseholes who attack authors don't deserve my time reading them. This isn't a "Labour" site - read the about. And you are a fool. ]

Who is the fool? mike didn’t say it was a “Labour” site.

Then ex Labour MP Stuart Nash comments, and gets reprimanded.

Stuart Nash

I agree with Mike – why all the anti-Labour shit on this site? Astounding and totally counter-productive. Was looking through a couple of old ‘Standard’ newspapers I have, as well as a few of the Labour Party Journals. Surprise surprise, not one anti-Labour comment at all. In fact, it was about spreading the word in a positive fashion. Hmmm. Not a bad idea me thinks.!

[lprent: It is a "labour movement" site, not a Labour party site. It is in the about. And politics is running under a MMP environment with multiple parties of the left.]

And another site Standard author chimes in:

r0b

This isn’t a Labour Party blog, Stuart, it’s a labour movement blog, an unruly collection of voices from the left. And historically we idealistic lefties have never been a particularly cohesive force (alas).

Then MP Clare Curran pops in a comment – The Standard has been pleading and demanding engagement from Labour MPs, this should be appreciated. Unless you are a pedantic Standard moderator…

lprent 14.1

Please don’t address the machine. From the policy.

Attacking the blog site, or attributing a mind to a machine (ie talking about The Standard as if it had an opinion), or trying to imply that the computer that runs the site has some kind of mind control over authors and commentators is not allowed. Making such assertions will often get the sysop answering you, because he considers that those are comments directed at him personally.

Talking as if there was a “Mass” just pisses me off because it so clearly isn’t the case. You need to view it as if every person here holds their own opinions and is happy to argue with virtually everyone else at the drop of a hat – because that is why people come to places like this.

The nearest thing there is here to a consensus is whatever I program and the policies that the moderators choose to enforce. Since those policies are mainly orientated to protect the ability of the site’s arguing individuals to carry on doing so, you get me answering.

Please don’t waste my time… Talk to individuals or to the contents of the post.

So MPs are implored to engage at The Standard and then get told not to waste lprent’s time. Go figure.

This part is funny:

You need to view it as if every person here holds their own opinions and is happy to argue with virtually everyone else at the drop of a hat – because that is why people come to places like this.

You can argue with “ virtually everyone else at the drop of a hat” – unless of course that person is a Standard author or moderator, arguing or criticising them is a banning offence.

Since those policies are mainly orientated to protect the ability of the site’s arguing individuals to carry on doing so…

…unhindered by criticism. The individuals who are allowed to argue are those who are left, who haven’t been harrassed off or banned or can’t be bothered with the double standards.

The nearest thing there is here to a consensus is whatever I program and the policies that the moderators choose to enforce.

That sums up much of The Standard culture.

lprent often open brags about his ‘behaviour modification’, his attempts to program the The Standard participants.

Even MPs are subject to programmed behaviour modification. Implored to engage – so they can obediently subject themselves to lectures and criticisms.

The Standard authors and moderators choose to enforce policies for sure, selectively, eliminating criticism and critics they don’t want while enabling and dishing out attacks and abuse.

“An unruly collection of voices from the left” – yeah,  those who are left after lprent has applied his rules.

They may be a compliant cadre of comrades. Just don’t call them ‘The Standard’.

 

by Pete George on February 11, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on February 11, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/02/11/not-a-labour-blog-not-the-standard-a-compliant-cadre-of-comrades/

“His talk of a rift in the Labour Party is crap.”

Yeah, right.

Labour’s heavy hitters at The Standard are going hammer and tongs. The blog has again highlighted Labour’s civil war with accusations of lying, and there is  obvious conflict amongst the site authors.

It could be an interesting weekend at The Standard.

Background

Last Saturday Eddie started the current spate of infighting with his post Shearer to put it to the vote. It’s probably not coincidental this was a week before David Shearer’s big opening speech of Labour’s political year. Unlike his post in November that sparked the ‘Cunliffe coup’ the response to this one seemed to fizzle. Until now.

Phase two of the stir arrived yesterday from partner in grime, Zetetic, with For a February leadership vote.

That restirred the leadership pot, as well as highlighting some obvious questions about Zetetic’s loyalties and motives, as I blogged in Zetetic’s loyalty and pseudonym confusion.

Zetetic’s post got the infighting going again, but nothing out of the ordinary in relation to what has been happening over the past few months.

Last night’s flareup

Mike Smith, representing Labour’s leadership office, fired a broadside last night at ‘Zetetic’ and ‘Eddie’ in Tell the truth.

Zetetic’s telling porkies.

I don’t think Zetetic and Eddie and all the other prophets of gloom on this site have a clue about what’s going on in the Labour Party – or the electorate for that matter.

Lynn Prentice (lprent) tried to get involved but has been overshadowed by the party heavies.

IrsihBill stepped into the fray.

I’d caution you against describing authors as liars, Mike. You’ve never been abused by other authors here, regardless of political differences, and it would behoove you to show a similar degree of respect in return.

Prentice:

Nah – reread it.. (I did). He is quite specific about what he thought the “porkie” was.

Now I have no idea if Zet said that (and I don’t think that he did from recollection). But Mike is correct in what the rule is.

Until the caucus doesn’t get its shit together, the vote isn’t going out to the membership.

Interesting dynamic isn’t it….

IrishBill:

Sorry Lynn, but I don’t think the tone’s appropriate. I would never, for example, write a response post to Mike that stated “I don’t think Mike has a clue about what’s going on in the Labour Party – or the electorate for that matter.” What I would do is say “I disagree with Mike and this is why”.

I think Mike’s done his argument a disservice and I’ll sort it out with him offline but my comment stands.

Interesting that he’s openly saying he will “sort it out with him offline” – no mention of sorting anything out with Eddie and Zetetic offline.

Technical arguments ensued over whether Smith’s accusation of lying was supported by facts, but that’s a side issue.

Both Eddie and Zetetic bullshit. There’s little doubt they are using The Standard to try and game play within Labour and it’s obvious they are trying to undermine Shearer’s leadership. Again.

So it’s easy to understand Labour’s head office being annoyed at a blog that mainly represents Labour interests (albeit factional) stirring shit with bullshit.

But through Mike Smith’s post all they have done is throw petrol on the inferno.

And Smith is also bullshitting.

His talk of a rift in the Labour Party is crap.

I guess that could be an indication of ignorance from the Shearer camp, but but surely they can’t be that blind.

It is obvious there is much discontent withing Labour membership.

It is obvious there is much discontent and a rift between Labour factional authors at The Standard.

It its very hard to believe the claims by Shearer’s office (and his loyal supporters at the Standard) that everything regardling party leadership and in caucus is hunky dory.

It’s obvious there’s bullshitting and rifting galore.

Expect a lot of heated comment over the weekend. Oh, and in amongst that Shearer has his first big speech of the year tomorrow. That already looks doomed to derision at The Standard.

by Pete George on January 26, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on January 26, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/01/26/his-talk-of-a-rift-in-the-labour-party-is-crap/

Zetetic’s loyalty and pseudonym confusion

‘Zetetic’ is a pseudonym used at The Standard. There seems to be some confusion as to what it stands for.

In ‘Cunliffe coup’ November Zetetic followed Eddie’s trigger post with one of his own that (intentional or not) added to the leadership challenge speculation.

Zetetic has again followed Eddie’s last Saturday at raising the Labour leadership issue – that attempt had seemed to fizzle even before Cunliffe made it clear he won’t be challenging Shearer in February.

But there’s some confusion over what Zetetic stands for.

Yesterday Zetetic posted Greens offer pathway to home ownership, better renters’ rights

The Greens have launched a big new housing policy (interest.co.nz has the most comprehensive report so far, Herald piece here) called Home for Lifet that fixes KiwiBuild and gives renters more rights. The problem with Kiwibuild is a lot of the target families can’t afford the mortgage.

Zetetic is promoting Green policy and criticisng Labour policy. And his closing remark…

Nice one, Metiria. Got my vote.

Sounds like he is supporting Green policy and leadership.

But in today’s stir For a February leadership vote Zetetic says…

No one in Labour can deny there’s a real issue with internal disunity. Not only is the caucus divided (and more than ever since the Shearer camp’s handling of the conference fallout), but there’s a major breach between the membership and the caucus. Unless this is fixed and we can get the party united we’re looking at another term in opposition after 2014.

Increasingly, people are coming to the view that the only way to heal this rift and unify the party is for caucus to take the leadership issue out to the membership this February so we can put it to bed once and for all. That’s what the conference was about. We wanted to make sure we were never ignored again. We simply want our right to vote, and whatever the outcome is I believe that will settle it.

So a pseudonym that supported Green policy over Labour policy and said “Nice one, Metiria. Got my vote.” is now talking as if they are a Labour Party member wanting a right to vote on Labour leadership.

Are these two Zetetic posts by the same person?

But in reality, if Shearer could show he was willing to give members a say by putting his leadership up for endorsement then I think he’d be rewarded for that and would likely emerge even stronger at the head of a united party. What loyal party member could not swing in behind his leadership if he’d been elected fairly by the caucus, the membership and the affiliates in a transparent and democratic process?

If the Zetetic posts are by the same person it does not portray the words and actions of a “loyal party member“.

It’s possible the Zetetics are one split personality.

Or is Zetetic like Eddie, another one entity trying to stir and pressure and influence the democratic processes that were agreed on at the Labour Party conference in November?

For all we know Eddie and Zetetic could be being used by the same Labour faction to try and influence the leadership outcome. Or Green faction (joke).

Such is the farce of political blog pseudonyms. Very undemocratic.

by Pete George on January 25, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on January 25, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/01/25/zetetics-loyalty-and-pseudonym-confusion/

Labour’s unofficial response to National conference

It started fairly mildly yesterday:

Nat conference protests

By: – 9:57 am, July 21st, 2012

This weekend the National Party is holding its annual conference at SkyCity (how appropriate) in Auckland. Protests are planned.  Be careful, keep it peaceful.

Hard to predict the size of the protests.  Probably not large, but they’ll likely get good media coverage.  Be careful, keep it peaceful.  Tight security is planned, and it’s inclined to overreact…

police-drag-off-woman

Hard to know if this is a genuine request to “keep it peaceful”, or a wink, wink, hint:
“likely get good media coverage”
“inclined to overreact”.

But the hit squad is out in force today:

Bill sez ‘time youse f*ck off’

By: – Date published: 9:34 am, July 22nd, 2012

An all-time record 53,900 people left New Zealand for Australia last year. Remember when John Key was going to stop the exodus by closing the wage gap? Yeah, that was a pretty funny joke. Now, here’s the punchline: Bill English now says that it’s a great thing that everyone is leaving for Australia. And the kicker, he wants to attract talent by driving down wages.

Typical over the top from Eddie, along with standard unsubstantiated unbelievable lines attempting to punch. Talking tough and foul isn’t very attractive.

Key confirms looters’ bonus

By: -  2:01 pm, July 22nd, 2012
In front of a room full of rich people, John Key confirmed today that, when they buy our shares in our company they will also get a free hand out from the Government if they hold on to their plunder for 3 years. There’s no legislative authority for National to contract to make such a gift, of course. But, when you’re plundering the State, what do rules matter?

Labour seems to keep wondering why the electorate doesn’t take them seriously as they contining with the wailing wolf approach.

by Pete George on July 22, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on July 22, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/07/22/labours-unofficial-response-to-national-conference/

United Future donation scandal

The Standard has raised the issue of donations to Peter Dunne and United Future:

Dunne clears the competition for his backers

A cynic might ask if Peter Dunne is out to eliminate the competition of his mates and (it is widely thought) donors in the alcohol and cigarette industries by setting ever higher barriers for other legal highs. And I’m that cynic.

I’m not against anyone selling something for human consumption having to prove its safety. But why doesn’t Dunne extend that to his the booze and bakky shills? Let’s be under no illusions – if the party pill industry was funding United Future, this law change wouldn’t be happening.

A cynic might asked why Zetetic has bravely launched this attack knowing I have just been muzzled at The Standard (he may have been involved in the muzzling).

But more important – how much is Peter Dunne and United Future funded?

Peter Dunne’s Ohariu electorate candidate return 2011.

  • one $10,000 donation from the United Future Party

So all that alcohol and tobacco industry money must go to the party then.

UnitedFuture party donation return 2011

  • Four donations totalling $15,000
  • One donation of $10,000

Total donations $25,000. More than that was paid out of United Future candidates own pockets. No sign of any generous benefactors of any sort, let alone from industries that have been alleged to fund the party.

So the scandal is that this old allegation keeps being promoted, this time by Zetetic, who didn’t think there may be virtually nothing to pin his smears to.

And to add ignorance to stupidity:

Incidentally, do you know where Dunne worked before becoming an MP? The Alcoholic Liquor Advisory Council.

It was quickly pointed out:

I thought ALAC was the crown entity to moderate the effects of drinking. ? You make it sound like a front for Super Liquor.

And Ross Bell comments:

A cynic would be wrong.

Instead we should be applauding Mr Dunne for following – pretty much to the letter – the advice he received from the NZ Law Commission as part of its seminal review of NZ’s obsolete Misuse of Drugs Act.

I don’t think we should be dissing a minister for following evidence-based, independent advice.

Rather, congratulations to Dunne for doing this. If Parliament passes this, NZ will be the first to try a regulated market for psychoactive substances.

So yeah, there are certainly hypocrisies in our approach to drugs, but credit where credit’s due.

by Pete George on July 17, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on July 17, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/07/17/united-future-donation-scandal/

The thinner Zetetic line

Zetetic posts at The Standard:

The thinner blue line

National is going to cut 125 police staff. They’re not sworn officers but who’s going to pick up the work they were doing? Sworn cops, of course. Course, tying up cops with paperwork will help the crime stats drop.

No link, as is generally asked for at The Standard to back up claims (sometimes on threat of a ban). Is this because the factual news report is at odds with Zetetic’s claim? From Stuff:

Commissioner Peter Marshall said the police budget would not be cut next financial year but they needed to make “modest reductions” to live within their means.

“In terms of non-sworn support staff positions that will be impacted, we expect that the number will be around 125.  However, the organisation was carrying around 75 vacancies so the task would be achievable with a minimum of difficulty.

He was right about the number, sort of, as it’s only 50 less than are currently employed (out of about 3000 staff).

“We are making a number of other organisational changes involving some centralisation of file management, HR and Finance functions.”

But that sounds like trying to improve efficiency in administration.

“I want to stress that there is no intended reduction in the constabulary headcount and frontline service delivery will not only continue to be maintained but will be enhanced.”

Who to believe, the Poice Commisioner or Zetetic, who  claimed it would impact on “sworn cops, of course”?

And Zetetic is also being “creative” with the truth saying that “National is going to cut 125 police staff”, as it’s obvious that it’s up to the police to work out how to manage within budgets (as they always have to, no matter who is in Government).

Zetetic appears again to be an RBS (recidivist bull shitter).

by Pete George on May 21, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on May 21, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/05/21/the-thinner-zetetic-line/

The Eddie and Zetetic lies

The recent case of factless assertions at The Standard by Zetetic and Eddie has been detailed in previous posts. From reading Eddie’s responses it seems that he/she thinks it’s ok to smear as long as there’s no facts to prove the smear wrong. The latest smears have been proven wrong.

Will that stop Eddie and Zetetic? Unlikely. They have a bit of history, they’re recidivist bullshit artists. Eddie has posted since:

Joyce’s latest brainfart

By: – Date published: 11:27 am, May 19th, 2012

This week, Minister for Talking Big and Not Delivering, Steven Joyce, had his second opinion piece in the Herald of the year and, naturally, it bore no relation to the ‘vision’ in the previous one, or any of the 5 point strategies or 8 point action plans he has produced to date.

Instead, it said ‘wouldn’t it be great if more international students came here?’. Problem is, his actions are driving them away. International student numbers plunged 7% last year. Why?

Because Joyce is cutting tertiary education.

Another accusation, without factual backing. Sure, international student numbers were down last year. Why? It didn’t take long for  facts.

Dave Guerin

I agree that Joyce’s op-ed was ridiculous but the reason for the decline in export education last year was the Chch quakes.The 37% loss in Canterbury students could not be made up by growth elsewhere.

You can find the full stats at http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/excel_doc/0019/102592/Export-Education-Levy-Full-Year-2003-to-2011.xls

Dave Guerin is CEO/Education Strategist of ED – “Education Directions Ltd  interprets the policy and strategic environment in which New Zealand tertiary education operates, which helps clients make better decisions.”He would appear ton have better educational credentials than Eddie.
So it appears that Eddie has made not only a factless assertion, but it’s a proven wrong assertion.
Eddie’s previous post?

Minister pleased with anemic economy

For quite some time, National has beem trying to claim credit for low interest rates…

An absurd claim in the headline – and another claim absent facts (and spellchecking).

And, of course, low interest rates don’t make buying a house more affordable.

They actually hinder people trying to save up a deposit because their savings get lower returns.

Another statement of apparent fact that is highly debatable. For a start, the interest can make a huge difference on mortgage affordability. And interest on savings is usually a very minor factor in raising a deposit.

So there seems to be a habit of making factless assertions, some are obviously wrong, some are proven wrong. Does this happen often? My guess (from observation recollection) is yes.

These factless and incorrect accusations and statements could be sloppiness, they could be ineptness, or they could be lying.

Do these factual indiscretions matter. Aren’t they just a couple of anonymous bloggers? Yes, they are anonymous, and they are bloggers. Many bloggers are anonymous, often with very good reasons for retaining anonymity – avoiding the personal attacks that identified bloggers get is one. Many bloggers are private individuals with businesses and jobs and families to protect.

There are quite a few political bloggers, with a wide variety of factualness, bullshit, and deleberate lying. What’s the problem with Eddie and Zetetic?

For a start, The Standard is not just another blog in a crowd.

As the most widely-read and influential leftwing blog in New Zealand, The Standard is a great platform to get yourself heard.

And – there could be a bigger lie. Or at least a hiding of the truth. And I think that matters.

Eddie and Zetetic appear to be doing more than personal blogging. There’s been claims they’re not actually people as such, but pseudonyms used by organisations. Even by parties. For example…

Footnote: We’ve put the name “Eddie” in inverted commas for good reason. There are several variants of Eddie, including Labour Party staffers. Merely suggesting that once copped us a six-month ban from The Standard; we didn’t name any names; just raised the possibility. We must have it a raw nerve. We don’t know who the current “Eddie” is, but if blogosphere chatter is to be believed, it could just be a Labour Party MP who gets in touble when he says things under his own name; we stress; could!

Zetetic and Eddie can’t be Labour MPs – The Standard has stressed a number of times that MPs must post their under their own identity. But is it possible either of Zetetic or Eddie is a proxy for MPs? That wouldn’t be difficult to do, or believe.

If Eddie or Zetetic are paid staffers I think it raises very important issues. Should parliamentary staffers be active in clandesdtine misinformation campaigns? I certainly don’t  think it’s appropriate at all. They are supposed to be working for us, not sabotaging the democratic process. Some of this trying to be addressed with Holly Walkers’s Lobbying Disclosure Bill, but that would have to be drawn from the ballot – and agreed to by enough politicians.

Eddie and Zetetic certainly do seem to have strong political agendas that are weak on facts. If they are fronts for and sort of political organisation I think that matters.

I think it should matter to people in parties orn organisations that may use secret skulduggery. Because while that skuldugery may seem “justified” if it brings down the enemy without, what if it’s also used within?

Eddie posted Some good vision which has proven to be a controversial speech within Labour. Some have seen it as a leadership challenge, others have seen it as inspirational.

But just say something like this was part of a factional fight – would it be good for an anonymous “identity” used by one faction to be used to promote one side?

Political organisations should be open and honest about how they operate – shouldn’t they? To their members at least. And to all their MPs. And they should really be open and honest with the public too, if they want to earn votes.

Our MS Media ha been criticised lately. They will always be criticised by people not getting favourable cover, media reports can be ruthless. But at least when broadcast or print media publish something we know where it is coming from. We often know the name of who wrote it.

Blogs and other online social media are much easier to misuse, in relative secrecy. Anonymous abuse is widespread.

Use of the Internet for anonymous abuse of our democratic process and our parliamentary process should be very concerning aspect, if it were to happen. Or if it is happening.

by Pete George on May 20, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on May 20, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/05/20/the-eddie-and-zetetic-lies/

“Eddie” digs dirt deeper

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.

In response to my challenge:

[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.

Eddie’s retraction:

[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:

  1. “…does not mitigate the fact he was refusing to be open about it.”
  2.  ”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.

by Pete George on May 20, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on May 20, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/05/20/eddie-digs-dirt-deeper/

Dunne isn’t angry, but…

On Friday Zetetic put up a post at the Standard headlined Dunne is angry. This got a lot of attention because of claims that were proven to false, and that Zetetic knew they were false. But that’s another (continuing) story with one part in Dishonest Politics. This is just a part of that story which so far has been overlooked – the claim of anger.

Zetetic wrote:

Underneath the ‘common-sense’ exterior, and all that hair, Peter Dunne is an angry man. He lashed out that those who pointed out he’s voting for asset sales he never told his electorate he would support. He screamed at losing TVNZ7 – Backbenches is his one chance to get on the telly. And he’s going feral on the Conservatives because they could usurp him.

The statement “pointed out he’s voting for asset sales he never told his electorate he would support” is what has already proven to be blatantly false.

The rest includes “angry”, “lashed out”, “screamed”, “going feral”.

It’s true that Dunne has been getting some media coverage lately, he doesn’t get much of that usually. How angry is he? He says:

This is all complete nonsense –for a start, I don’t do angry, and most of what passes for analysis here is sheer fantasy.

I’m sure Dunne sometimes gets frustrated in politics – anyone would – and may even do the occasional bit of apparent angry outburst. But he’s generally known (and criticised) more for his levelheadedness, and has a reputation of being sensible and just goes about his work outside the media glare.

Now as usual Zetetic didn’t provide any facts or examples, ‘Eddie’ doesn’t seem to demand that of him. So, particularly when associated with proven falsities, it’s easy to be very sketical of these claims. Most of the emotion seems to be from Zetetic’s language, not Dunne’s.

Zetetic closed his/her post with:

No wonder Dunne’s blood pressure is up. His little micro-niche in the political ecological is under threat.

Oh, and if you think Dunne’s angry now, just wait until Operation Ohariu.

Operation Ohariu is on the Labour PArty website with Charles Chauvel’s name on it.

On the 26th and 27th of May, in conjunction with People’s Power Ohariu, we’re going to send Peter Dunne a message. We need your help to do it.

So Labour have directly associated themsleves with People’s Power Ohariu now. That makes it seem more like an attempt at reliving a lost election.

Dunne holds the casting vote on asset sales – that’s how thin National’s majority is. The people of Ohariu can make a difference by sending their MP a message.

We need as many helpers as we can get to turn up to Ohariu, disperse in our numbers throughout the Ohariu electorate to get signatures on the Keep Our Assets petition.

Four shifts, two days, and 24,000 signatures.

That’s a huge target, surely thet don’t expect to get that many in Ohariu?

This will be the easiest campaign task you’ve had. People queue up to sign this petition throughout the country. All we need to do is give people the opportunity to have their say.

We’re calling on every Labour member throughout our region to help.

Labour bet the last election on campaigning against asset sales, and went backwards. It looks like they are trying to bet the next election on it too.  But the wisdom of that is another story. Back to the main point here.

I don’t think Dunne is angry, but…

I think Zetetic wants Dunne to get angry, he wants to get under his skin, to rile him, to provoke him, hoping Dunne will react into doing something that would make good anti-Dunne ammunition. I would bet that the ultimate aim is to try and destroy Dunne’s career.

It’s how “Zetetic” seems to operate. Factless accusations and smears to try and provoke a reaction that can then be used against the target. And “Zetetic” (and “Eddie”) aren’t alone in doing this.

More posts to follow on “provoke and hope”.

 

by Pete George on May 20, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on May 20, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/05/20/dunne-isnt-angry-but/

« Older Posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 74 other followers