Slater: “Palino…severely tainted”

“Palino isn’t such a man.  He’s severely tainted and doesn’t deserve to have a second go, no matter how early his image revitalisation run is started…”

A post at Whale Oil (Cameron Slater on May 18, 2014 at 5:00pm):

PALINO FOR MAYOR? YEAH… NAAAAAH

Auckland wants to get rid of Len Brown so badly, it will accept anything that comes along that doesn’t look like it is going to work them over.

Palino isn’t such a man.  He’s severely tainted and doesn’t deserve to have a second go, no matter how early his image revitalisation run is started with the help of a paper that is looking to work its way into the next mayor’s office.

Asked about any regrets about the 2013 campaign, Palino said rogue elements — Brown sympathisers — in his campaign team undermined him. He declined to name them.

Political scientist Dr Bryce Edwards said it was extremely naive for Palino to think he’d land support from right-wing elements again, after questions over tactics used to out Brown’s affair.

“There was definitely skulduggery involved. Whether it involved Palino or not is, I think, the question that will continue to dog him because he hasn’t really put his cards on the table and dealt with it.”

Now he’s trying to blame Luigi Wewege and Bevan Chuang as “Brown sympathisers”?  Yeah, late night car park meetings never happened either, did they John?

You don’t have the support of the people you let down John.

Who let who down I wonder.

They know where you went wrong, and it isn’t about not getting enough votes.

Meanwhile, Palino was keenly following debates this week on Auckland’s draft alcohol policy, which would limit liquor availability and opening hours. Palino said getting drunks off the streets must be balanced with letting responsible diners have a late-night drink.

Yeah, whatever.  You ran away to another country.  You stopped talking to everyone, and now you are trying to reimage yourself via a compliant Herald pining to have another mayor on speed dial.

Not going to happen.

If Palino and Lusk and Slater thought they could shove the past under a dirty carpet and start a fresh campaign with no baggage they may be mistaken.

Perhaps they know this and they are just trying to dirty up the mayoral campaign and inflict as much damage on everyone else that they can.

A “if we can’t have it we’ll make it as hard as possible for anyone else to get it” sort of thing.

It’s hard to imagine that this is a serious challenge.

Leave a comment

43 Comments

  1. Mike C

     /  29th February 2016

    Guess we now have a pretty good inkling as to how John Slater and Simon Lusk got the jobs managing Palinos Election Campaign.

    It has long been rumoured that Slater&Co get paid “not to write demeaning insulting posts about people”.

    Why else would Cameron Slater write that post back in 2014 … and then do a complete 180 degree turn on his opinion of Palino very shortly after ???

    Reply
    • Mefrostate

       /  1st March 2016

      A week ago Slater wrote: “I’m also agnostic to any campaign, unofficial or official, at this moment in time.”

      In light of his article today, the above looks suspiciously like a veiled request for money/threat about the consequences of not paying up.

      A slight side-note, but it’s amusing to read Slater framing the promise of a 10% rates reduction as a policy platform. Only the simplest of voters are convinced by bribery of that nature.

      Reply
  2. Pickled Possum

     /  29th February 2016

    Just another WO obfuscation tactic …putting it out there that WO has nothing I say Nothing to do with Palino and his play for the big seat in Auckland, to even writing bad press about him just like he does/did to Jkey.
    Probably after all involved realised what a toxic brand with its own logo WO is and will be for a long time coming.
    Nothing that is blown thru the blow hole means anything to anybody anymore … IMHO
    just more of the same little games children play when they don’t get there own way, with WO keeping his tongue firmly in his cheek.

    Reply
  3. Pete Kane

     /  29th February 2016

    MC, it’s nice though, to see those so deserving of each other, ‘finding’ each other.

    Reply
  4. Given his previous effort Palino standing reminds me of some of the sports discussion today: ” Should Jesse Ryder be given another chance?”

    Reply
    • Mike C

       /  29th February 2016

      @Duperez

      Yeap … I am all for Jesse being given a second chance.

      We’re talking about getting in the ring with Slater again right ??? 🙂

      Reply
  5. Jeeves

     /  29th February 2016

    But- is there any evidence at all that Cameron Slater is actually involved, in any capacity?

    Reply
    • Jeeves

       /  29th February 2016

      And by “Cameron Slater” , of course I mean “FILTH”

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  29th February 2016

        Was that a necessary addition? It just brings you down to his level.

        Reply
        • Jeeves

           /  29th February 2016

          No it doesn’t Alan-
          it demonstrates my honestly held opinion, my consistency regarding that cockroach, and removes any doubt in any reader’s mind about where I stand.

          None of which can be said about Slater.
          I’m way above his level, and always will be, because unlike Cameron Slater, I’m not a piece of Filth.

          (it’s not a swear-word Alan).

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  29th February 2016

            Personal abuse degrades the abuser rather than the abused. Criticise his actions in preference.

            Reply
            • Jeeves

               /  29th February 2016

              His actions are filthy. So many of them in so many ways are filthy. He is filthy because of it.
              He is Filthy.
              Would you make the same defence of a Thief, a Cheat, a Liar or a Murderer??

              No, of course not.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th February 2016

              A thief, cheat or liar may not always or only be a thief, cheat or liar. It is better to say what they did. And definitely not to just call them filth.

            • Mefrostate

               /  1st March 2016

              Don’t you think you’re being a bit hypocritical Alan? Considering you resorted to calling me boring last week when I criticised your actions: https://yournz.org/2016/02/17/is-more-people-better/#comment-80221

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              Not really, Mefrostate. Boring is a verb as well as a noun and I was reacting to what you were doing, not what you are. I seemed to touch a nerve though.

            • mrMan

               /  1st March 2016

              No you were’t you disingenuous weasel.

              Why can you never admit to things Alan, what are you scared of? You make me sick.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              There’s a distinction between telling someone they are rude (or boring) and calling them a weasel but I suspect it is far too subtle for you, mM.

            • mrMan

               /  1st March 2016

              You mean like there’s a distinction between sane and being Alan Wilkinson?
              With you the epithet ‘Weasle’ fits like a glove.

              [So far this morning you have posted 4 personal attacks and nothing else. As you should know this sort of deliberate behaviour and attempts at inflaming and disrupting aren’t welcome here. If you persist then I’ll take action against it. PG]

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              While we are on the subject of admitting to things, I seem to have missed your apology to PG and the MP you impersonated? Transference much?

            • Jeeves

               /  1st March 2016

              Well I’m happy with my approach Alan- I reserve this opprobrium for the very select, the lowest of the low, the truly filthy- so spare me the lectures.
              I have no intention of following your arcane rules of engagement, no matter how genteel they appear on the surface.

            • mrMan

               /  1st March 2016

              “While we are on the subject of admitting to things, I seem to have missed your apology to PG and the MP you impersonated? Transference much?”

              I told you, I’ve got nothing to apologise for.

            • Mefrostate

               /  1st March 2016

              So your argument is that personal attacks are fine just as long as they focus on the action of writing comments?

              Does this mean you’re perfectly okay with Rob & co calling you names every time you pipe up?

              If so, then I’d like to point out that you seem to take pleasure in the possibility of having hit a nerve. Given that you and I have a fairly neutral history and I certainly have never shown deliberate malice towards you, the action of taking satisfaction from my annoyance would be a particularly nasty thing to do.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              @mM, yes, we know you refuse to admit you did anything wrong and we note you now accuse others of the same.

              @Jeeves, civilisation depends on arcane rules of engagement. I strongly suggest you rejoin it.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              No, I didn’t take pleasure in it. In fact I was sorry you left in a huff. But I did note it.

              Yes, criticising actions and statements is fine, the person not so much. I’m more than happy to defend myself against the likes of Rob and mM and usually have a chuckle when doing so.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              Oops, that was a reply to Mefrostate.

            • Mefrostate

               /  1st March 2016

              Eh, that just seems to open the floor for all sorts of personal attacks legitimised through a technicality. Seems like you’ll waste much more time defending yourself, and far less time actually discussing issues.

              Calling me boring as a way of avoiding the criticism was a nasty thing to do.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              If you think being called boring was nasty you have never belonged to a debating club, Mefrostate. You certainly need a much thicker skin if you are going to engage in political debates. I have been called everything under the sun so I just laugh and fire back.

            • Mefrostate

               /  1st March 2016

              My point is that the name-calling is a waste of everyone’s time and is usually the realm of the desperate whose arguments have run dry. Sad to see you resorting to them.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              They can be amusing if well done and appropriate. Entertainment is part of debate. Great political insults are legendary.

            • Mefrostate

               /  1st March 2016

              I think they just muddy the water – both here and in parliament.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  1st March 2016

              Yes, that’s mM on the Left, me on the right!

          • Conspiratoor

             /  29th February 2016

            “I’m way above his level, and always will be”. Really? That is some weapons grade hate going on there my dear old thing. Did he screw your missus?

            Alan is right though. Stick to the message if you expect to be taken seriously. #justsaying

            Reply
            • Jeeves

               /  1st March 2016

              I’m not playing to you as the audience. And FWIW, there’s not a scintilla of hate in anything I say, just honestly held opinion.
              Cameron Slatetr is Filth, as is Carrick Graham, as is Simon Lusk.
              It’s the nicest thing I can bring myself to say about any of them.

    • “That’s why he’s talking to Fairfax now (in an interview brokered via Cameron Slater)”

      “In light of that, here’s an interesting fact: Palino’s new campaign manager is Simon Lusk. (It’s Lusk, Palino presumes, who got Cameron Slater to approach Fairfax about this interview.)”

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/77228514/john-palino-why-its-time-to-forget-about-len-browns-sex-scandal

      So Palino might have engaged Lusk to run his campaign bit it could be that he didn’t realise Slater would be part of the package.

      Reply
    • Mike C

       /  29th February 2016

      @Jeeves

      Let me put it to you this way … 🙂

      Palinos Election Manager during his last Mayoral bid … was Cameron Slaters Dad.

      And for this Mayoral Election … Palino has chosen Slaters Best Friend to be his Election Manager.

      It’s not Rocket Science. LOL.

      Reply
  6. Pantsdownbrown

     /  29th February 2016

    Anything that is associated with Slater & Lusk can come to no good……..especially if trying to build a political career. Goff must be having a right old laugh…….

    Reply
  7. Klik Bate

     /  29th February 2016

    C’mon guys – let’s not be too hasty in writing off the chances of ‘The John’

    Let’s not forget, only six months ago everyone was writing off ‘The Donald’

    😀

    Reply
    • There’s some signs that ‘The John’ campaign is being modeled on ‘The Don’ campaign.

      But I’m not sure there’s the same levels of public anger against politicians in New Zealand as there is in the US.

      Reply
    • Mike C

       /  29th February 2016

      @Klik Bait

      I have always believed in Donald Trump and been on his side ever since he threw his hat in the ring 🙂

      However … Palino’s obvious association with Slater&Co will not win him the Auckland Mayoralty … because Slaters name has become Political Poison for every poor bastard that has become involved with him since 2014.

      Reply
      • Dougal

         /  29th February 2016

        I agree regards Trump. The US needs a president with a man sized set of balls but I do have some reservations. As far as Palino is concerned, regardless of is poor choice of campaign promoters he is forever tarnished by the infamous 90 minute episode with Chuang in his car and the Wewege connection. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows exactly what they were planning. Palino should have fronted and he would not be getting his NY panties in a bunch now if he’d cleaned up the mess before he high tailed it out of the country.

        Reply
  8. artcroft

     /  29th February 2016

    I take it Slater is hating on Palino as a smoke screen to his real motives; getting Palino elected. More paid for native advertising by the Whale.

    Reply
  1. Whale Oil’s Palino problems | Your NZ

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