The Sarah Dowie media dam has burst, as has her political career

After Sarah Dowie was named by the Herald yesterday as the MP who had an affair with Jami-Lee Ross and who sent the text that is now revealed to be the subject of a police inquiry, the dam has burst in mainstream media, who had held back from naming her since October, despite Ross naming her on radio and being named frequently in social media.

Also revealed openly yesterday is that Dowie was one of the women who featured in Newsroom coverage of four women who claimed to have had bad experiences with Ross – see Profile of a narcissist in Four women speak out.

Fran O’Sullivan (via Facebook):

“Is the unnamed person in this Newsroom story Sarah Dowie? If so, I would suggest the police investigation is misdirected.”

But accepting one side of a relationship breakup is fraught with potential problems. There is often blame on both sides.

And there’s an issue when an MP makes serious anonymous accusations through the media, as Jock Anderson says:

Why does the media accept such allegations without naming the person making them??? They name the person against whom the allegations are made…

If a source is a primary complainer/alleger it is unsafe to give them anonymity…Otherwise they could say whatever they liked…And if it is good enough to name one it is good enough to name the other…

It’s up to any newsroom to talk the complainer round so they can be identified, otherwise what credibility can be put on what they say??? It’s far too easy to let unidentified complainers simple rabbit on without any checking or corroboration of what they say…When people are identified they are more careful about what they allege…It’s basic journalism…

Dowie may (or may not) solely be a victim of Ross, but she has done a number of things that I think it’s valid to question – like having a relationship with another MP which complicates (and potentially compromises) doing her job enormously, like sending the text, like biting back anonymously through the media, like not fronting up and outing herself.

This article by Graham Adams at Stuff is harsh on Dowie, but it may in the main be a fair enough critique: Parliament’s star-crossed lovers who crossed each other

It’s always an interesting — and often sobering — exercise to reread the maiden speeches of MPs years after their debuts in Parliament and to compare their stated values and ambitions with how they have fared since their first foray into the heady realm of national politics.

Dowie’s career as an MP is now severely compromised. If she doesn’t resign or stand down at the next election there will be a lot of pressure on National to stand her down. It looks like she has already lost a lot of support.

One thing that Dowie’s speech in 2014 made abundantly clear was that no one would ever be able to accuse her — the first female MP for Invercargill and a graduate in both law and environmental science — of modesty, despite her mentioning the virtues of humility.

She began by congratulating herself on her decisiveness in seizing the opportunities that had come her way on her path to Parliament. “I am mindful of the journey that I have travelled to be here. I am reflective on the definitive decisions I have made, the key opportunities I have seized, my discipline, my faith in the end goal…”

She went on to speak in favour of self-determination and making your own luck. She believed that you “reap what you sow” and that you should “play the hand you’re dealt” as well as you can, and “with hard work and perseverance, eventually things must go your way”.

Above all, her speech appeared to be designed to show her parliamentary colleagues that she was a true-blue Nat. She was one of them. They could count on her.

Four years later, it seems that her emphasis on personal responsibility was merely a handy slogan used to impress her House mates and not a guide to live by.

We now know that she thought it was a good idea to launch an anonymous hit-job on Newsroom against her former lover and fellow MP Jami-Lee Ross, in which she implied she was a victim and that she was sucked into the relationship by a very bad man who had pursued and flattered her.

So much for personal responsibility and self-determination you might think — or her avowed principle of fighting “hard but fair”. A fair fight would have seen her identifying herself as one of the authors of the Newsroom mugging at the time it was published.

It would also have included the fact that she was, like him, a married MP with two children, and that she was 10 years older than him and an experienced lawyer.

How different that anonymous attack would have appeared if readers had been given all that information at the time the article was published. Her casting herself as a victim would have seemed to many to be far-fetched and extremely self-serving.

While Ross clearly looks bad she doesn’t look very good herself in this.

Mike Houlahan (ODT): Dowie’s reign as Invercargill MP looks to be over

Sarah Dowie’s short-lived political career looks all but over.

The Invercargill MP from 2014 is almost certain not to be a National Party candidate in the 2020 election – assuming she does not resign beforehand.

Well-informed sources said the affair had caused turmoil in National party circles in Invercargill.

Several members of Ms Dowie’s electorate committee had resigned in recent months, their departures due to Ms Dowie’s behaviour and conduct.

”It doesn’t reflect the values of the National Party,” one source said.

The Otago Daily Times understands several members of Ms Dowie’s staff have also resigned. She is advertising for staff to work in her Wellington office.

Her political future looks bleak.

National have been let down badly twice now in Southland by new MPs, with Todd Barclay also crashing and burning in Clutha-Southland (his replacement has started promisingly though).

While the police complaint over the text could feasibly force Dowie out if she is charged and convicted I think this is unlikely, as the charge looks weak and motives behind it highly suspect, as does Ross’ claims around it.

But Dowie has more immediate problems to deal with. While she may be able to lay some of the blame on Ross and his dirty politics associates she also has to take responsibility for her actions and her predicament herself. Her position as an MP looks untenable to me.

 

Leave a comment

74 Comments

  1. Loki

     /  26th January 2019

    Farrar has surprisingly written a fair and reasonable post on this today.
    I say surprisingly because he clearly still lives in terror at what Slater may have lurking in his vault of emails and his post is fair and reasonable
    Yet again the scumbags have destroyed lives.
    I cannot believe the media are not asking the right questions about JLR, his maggot behaviour and the scum who are managing him.

    Reply
    • Duker

       /  26th January 2019

      Nothing to to with Slater.
      It was all down to Bridges mismanagement of his ‘wing man’ after he won the leadership bid.

      he promised much and failed to deliver to Ross.
      Historically revenge has played its part in national party leadership machinaations.
      Remember when Key ousted Brash – Brash thought , OK , Ill still be given a senior position. Instead he was banished from any resposibilities and knew he had to resign.
      Same went to Brashs chief whip at the time . Lindsay Tisch. He never again had any positions of responsibility in the part despite 9 years of government and retired last election.

      Ross didnt go quietly into the night after all the promises made by Bridges for his support were mostly welshed on.
      So it was and so it will be . When Bridges goes – as the caucus leaks continue- others will take their revenge on Bridges supporters

      Reply
      • Loki

         /  26th January 2019

        Cameron, Ross was a handsy, sleazy abuser.
        He was offered a chance to go and take some time out. But instead he threw a massive tantrum.
        He has blown up out of selfish spite.
        You people are the absolute worst.

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  26th January 2019

          So Loki – if you were a family man and had cheated yet had decided your behaviour was foolish and done your best to settle down (and if you did not have a father who modelled good behaviour) and if your leader was lacking integrity at the sane time that you were working hard to personally clean up your own act, and if you loved your political party …. then if the women from your sleazy past squeaked anonymously to the media and your leaders jumped on that as means to get rid of you (even though your motives were for the good of your party) and this was like a left hook and you still hadn’t decided whether or not you would ever confess to your wife…..would not that HURT you? Might you bite back? Might you make mistakes?

          Reply
      • Blazer

         /  26th January 2019

        dead right…Mr Bridges at least had the insight to file JLR along side…Maureen Pugh.

        Reply
      • Chwaga

         /  26th January 2019

        “He promised much but failed to deliver to Ross” surely that should read – Ross expected much and became bitter when his expectations were not fulfilled

        Reply
    • Ray

       /  26th January 2019

      The media know the names of the “other” women.
      Consequently they are not as yet asking awkward questions, other than of the female MP as it is all about protecting their own

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  26th January 2019

        Those other women won’t be asked awkward questions. We haven’t really embraced equality yet. Feminism as most people practise it wrecks equality.

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  26th January 2019

          I want men folk to speak up more. Take back your masculinity. The fact that you’re so harsh on Mr Ross yet tip toe around the wickedness of the women involved tells me that you have embraced feminism in its worst form.

          I want equality.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  26th January 2019

            Look, if the Bible is to be believed, sheilas have been getting blokes into trouble ever since this one tempted Adam

            It’s no good blaming men.

            Reply
            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              Oh but I do blame men Gezza. Especially men like yourself.

            • Gezza

               /  26th January 2019

              Well, there’s your problem in a nutshell, Mother. You have no justification for blaming me for any of this, or anything any other person does, and I think you need to do some serious self-examination about whether you think you have the right to judge other people when the faith & the Bible you profess to believe in reserves that right to God alone.

            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              Gezza, I was joking. I thought you may have got that. I won’t joke with you again.

              I took a guess and presumed you were tongue in cheek with your picture and comment. Sorry I misunderstood.

              Of course I don’t blame you for others’ actions.

              But when things go wrong in community, isn’t it natural to contemplate our individual and collective accountability?

            • Gezza

               /  26th January 2019

              But when things go wrong in community, isn’t it natural to contemplate our individual and collective accountability?

              Imo, this is not a situation where there is any collective accountability for the sexual & romantic relationship-antics of two individuals.

              We as individuals can choose not to indulge in such behaviour ourselves if we don’t approve of it, and not to vote for these individuals if we think there behaviour indicates they are bad candidates for office.

              Personally I feel sorry for their respective spouses as I do where anyone cheats on their partner (and kids) with a long-term secret affair, and would never vote for them because of it. To me it indicates dishonesty which I assume would extend into other areas of their lives including their political judgement and general trustworthiness.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th January 2019

              She was an adult, she must be presumed to have known what she was doing. She is ‘reaping what she sowed’.

              I am tired of men being blamed all the time as if women were simpletons and weaklings.

          • MaureenW

             /  26th January 2019

            @ Mother
            “I want equality”.
            What a stupid thing to say – like it might turn up in your letter-box?

            Equality occurs through actions, rather than childish demands. Makes you sound like a victim, are you?

            Reply
            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              I use my intellect to enhance equality between the sexes. Do you? Perhaps you are a woman hater.

              You know I was a victim. Why do you ask again? Are you silly?

            • MaureenW

               /  26th January 2019

              Am I a woman-hater? Am I a Jesus-hater?

              More stupid questions from you – meh- you’re probably better off preaching/screeching .. whichever it is.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  26th January 2019

            I took it to mean taking equal responsibilty and not crying ‘Me Too, I’m a victim’ when consenting relationships turn sour.

            We can never be equal if we are always the victims. The old idea that sex is done by men to women, not done by men with women is still around, alas.

            Reply
  2. Mother

     /  26th January 2019

    The word ‘narcissistic’ is bandied around a lot these days. So is ‘mental health’. Both are used as tools for hateful warfare. Sad and childish.

    Mr Ross’ mental health difficulties are weaponised (I doubt he is even on medication) yet hardly anyone was calling out the other women. What about their mental health? How much medication might they need in order to keep an equilibrium while they hide their dirty deeds?

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  26th January 2019

      judge not…lest ye be judged..too’

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  26th January 2019

        Did you know that the Christian is advised to judge all things? Test everything. Use your mind.

        Jesus was talking about harsh hypocritical judgements. Those kind hurt. True judgement is pleasant…..eventually.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  26th January 2019

          ‘physician…heal..thyself’!

          Reply
          • Mother

             /  26th January 2019

            I can’t decide whether you’re seriously respectful of scripture or if you’re being humorous Blazer😇

            Reply
            • Corky

               /  26th January 2019

              He’s a heathen..trust me. The second death will still his heathen tongue.

            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              Corky! Another person who knows the Bible😂

            • Corky

               /  26th January 2019

              Thankyou, [use proper name]. However, I cannot accept your compliment with good grace. I know only parts of the bible. And mercy be, I probably know more of the Koran than the bible. Please have me in your thoughts during evening reflections.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th January 2019

              How much of the Koran have you read ?

              Mother, I find it odd to call someone ‘mother’ who’s not my mother or a nun. Tell me to MYOB, but, er, Moth is a pretty name….

            • Corky

               /  26th January 2019

              Mother has been touched by the light. You don’t have to be a nun to be a mother.

              The India saint who allegedly never ate was called: ”The Bengali “Joy-Permeated” Mother.”

              As to how much of the Koran have I read…MYOB!

    • Amadeus

       /  26th January 2019

      Only a narcissist like JLR gets a doctor to write him a sick note saying he’s NOT a narcissist!

      Reply
  3. Gezza

     /  26th January 2019

    National have been let down badly twice now in Southland by new MPs, with Todd Barclay also crashing and burning in Clutha-Southland (his replacement has started promisingly though).

    There may have been too much in-breeding down that way or something. Possibly candidates for Southland would be best selected by committees from other electorates?

    Reply
  4. Gezza

     /  26th January 2019

    I must admit, I’ve gone right off Sarah now. 😐

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  26th January 2019

      That crude text would disgrace someone half her age. Her poor children.

      Reply
  5. Cookie

     /  26th January 2019

    Interesting that this article refers to infidelity, and then mentions Dowie and Barclay in thhe same sentence.

    Reply
    • It means nothing without any indication or evidence.

      It also mentions Graham Adams and Dowie in the same sentence.
      It also mentions Mike Houlahan and Dowie in the same sentence.
      It also mentions ‘several members of Ms Dowie’s electorate committee’ in the same sentence as Dowie.

      All this means is they are part of the story.

      Reply
  6. Gezza

     /  26th January 2019

    So, looking at Sarah’s self-congratulatory maiden (? :/ ) speech, and JLR’s naked (? :/ ) ambition & devious/ant behaviour, and Aaron Gilmore’s apparently appalling character – is there something about the National party that makes it particularly attractive to – and good at appointing – candidates who are arrogant swine?

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  26th January 2019

      If Mr Ross had spoken such words in his maiden speech, the harsh would now cry ‘narcissistic’!

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  26th January 2019

        Um … they already have. Lots. In fact even the not-so-harsh had begun to express that opinion. 😐

        Reply
      • Mother

         /  26th January 2019

        I think that any woman who fell for Mr Ross’ sexual wiles in that political setting can be described as foolish in personal choices and extremely cruel in social choices.

        I think that the women who cried to media anonymously showed way more narcissistic behaviour than Mr Ross.

        Again, who has apologised? Sure, apologies don’t raise a person’s immediate credibility but it is the only start to a brighter future.

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  26th January 2019

          Another thing that bugs me about the narrative of this saga is that people came down harshly on Mr Ross for bad behaviour toward women, yet there were no formal complaints. He was totally blindsided by the unfairness of their attack.

          When he immediately publicly apologised to those women, despite their unfairness toward him, he went up in my estimation.

          I am waiting for the women to behave equally. But I don’t hold my breath. And whose fault is it that women are not behaving as equals? I think it is largely the men’s fault. The harshness toward Mr Ross and the condescending acceptance (and sometimes accolades) for the women shows me this.

          I want equality and to have equality we need a strong male voice.

          Reply
        • “Again, who has apologised? ”

          I haven’t seen any genuine apology in this from anyone.

          Reply
        • Blazer

           /  26th January 2019

          you could be…’on the cusp of something…special’…[use proper name]

          Reply
        • Gezza

           /  26th January 2019

          My personal opinion – although it obviously one that is widely shared – is Mr Ross’s apology is as much likely to be an attempt to survive politically as it is to be contrition.

          Although we can only speculate on his motives – you, that he has had a Damascus moment; others, like me, that his track record and associates suggest he is calculating and still bent on vengeance – he’s a public figure, who got up to some dirty stuff, and is keeping himself and others in the public eye.

          If he and his wife have reconciled, good (hopefully) but the best thing for him to do if he really has turned over a new leaf is to leave Parliament (he doesn’t have a snowflake’s chance in hell of getting re-elected) and go do something else, if he can. His political career is over.

          So, by the look of things, might Ms Dowies’ be – so you should at least be able to console yourself with pleasure at that prospect, seeing you apparently want to see her subject to punishment as well.

          That will be up to her electorate. The stately matrons may not approve of her one little bit, but that might depend on what some of the stately matrons have been up to on the quiet as well.

          I watch Question Time a lot & used to notice her when she came into view in the background because I thought she was quite good-looking (hey, I’m single, I’m a bloke and I’m not dead yet) but she always seemed to me to be staring into space, or playing with her hair, and not really showing that much interest in what was going on, so remarks by some commentator(s) recently that she had been “promoted above her abilities” might be on the mark, perhaps. (Just an “Observation with Gezza”.)

          Reply
          • Mother

             /  26th January 2019

            I got this far reading your comment –

            “you, that he has had a Damascus moment”

            NO. I never said that! I don’t know him!

            Reply
            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              I’ll read it all later. I’m run off my feet just now.

            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              And a quick skim –

              “her subject to punishment as well.”

              Who said anything about punishment???

              Sigh.

            • Gezza

               /  26th January 2019

              Ok, sorry for misunderstanding & unintentionally misrepresenting your comments.

            • Gezza

               /  26th January 2019

              I will clarify what I meant by those things though:

              “Damascus moment”

              Ross has apologised for his behaviour and promised to try to be a better person in future – so did Saul/Paul – but Ross also used his long “apology” to, in the same facebook pleading, continue to make thinly-veiled attacks on Dowie, Bridges & Bennett (whether they are deserving of that or not – that doesn’t square with his “…didn’t get everything right. I am sorry. I will do better” spiel.

              “her subject to punishment as well.”
              Who said anything about punishment???
              Sigh.

              In my view the tenor of your criticism is that Dowie should have exposed herself to criticism and admitted wrongdoing – and that amounts to punishment. You certainly seem to be advocating vigorously on Ross’s behalf that despite “apologising” he is effectively being punished for his infedelity.

              Remembering that HE didn’t confess to it. She did, albeit “anonymously” via a tame female journo. I’m not sure what she thought would happen after that. Her name was being widely circulated among those with any interest within hours of the story. Possibly she is just rather dumb.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  26th January 2019

          I agree that narcissistic is misused it’s in danger of being watered down to mean conceited and arrogant, in the way that so many words are watered down.

          Our late friend’s second wife was/is genuinely narcissistic/sociopathic. The real thing is frightening, to say the least.

          Reply
          • Mother

             /  26th January 2019

            Gezza, I appreciate your time taken to clarify.

            I do not equate punishment with discipline. Those two situations, which we each are free to choose, are worlds’ apart.

            Whenever I have apologised to anyone, I have found it to be freeing and pleasant. This is a choice I make, and my Good Shepherd makes it relatively easy (although not easy of course) to choose that pathway – the one of loving discipline.

            Conversely, apologising because one’s attitude is that one needs to be punished, is paramount to behaving like a slave – like one doesn’t own oneself.

            I think that surely politicians should be intelligent and mature enough to be able to choose the free man’s way of discipline. This is why it never occurred to me that any of them, or any of their constituents, could consider the need for public apologies as punishment.

            I am shocked that SB, PB and Ms Dowie have not yet publicly apologised. This is not because I am a fantasising idealist. It’s because I expect well of politicians. I think those three are behaving very stupidly. By comparison, Mr Ross behaved wisely. If that is wisdom, then what a state NZ is in!

            You ask me to remember that Mr Ross was put on the spot publicly before he confessed publicly. Yet we don’t know what happened with him prior to that – whether or not he received internal or external counsel regarding his bad behaviour.

            It is worth considering that the moment he was exposed, he publicly confessed and apologised. He did that without pause (and amidst massively unfair emotionally fraught treatment by his leaders and ex lovers), meaning that he did the right thing spontaneously whilst under immense pressure. He could not have done that if some significant measure of a change in heart had not already occurred. Compare that with his ex leaders’ and lustful cohorts’ behaviour, and Mr Ross comes out with more integrity.

            “Mr Ross’ apology is as much likely to be an attempt to survive politically as it is to be contrition.”

            Only time can prove or disprove this. I have been disappointed since this saga began that people can not take an apology at face value then leave it to the waiting game. People in general seem to need a scapegoat. Sad. If there is any one thing which leads to mental illness and suicide, it is this.

            Also, I am keen to point out that women like to be treated as equals. It has been frustrating that we are not in this case, and the women involved use this anomaly to hide. Equal women are as brave as men. These women clearly are not. I don’t want women like that in Parliament.

            “….suggest he is calculating and still bent on vengeance – he’s a public figure, who got up to some dirty stuff, and is keeping himself and others in the public eye.”

            Again, I ask others to consider the other side of that – there are several things to consider (I think pertinent political issues most likely) and only Mr Ross knows his motives. This also is a waiting game for the public. Why should ‘revenge’ be equated with needing accountability from leaders for the good of all?

            I have commented on this site that Mr Ross should resign. However ‘should’, ‘could’ and ‘will’ are all worthy concepts. My preferred order for life is in the reverse order.

            “…he doesn’t have a snowflake’s chance in hell of getting re-elected”

            I hope you’re wrong! – not to be contrary but because it would show the younger generations a different way of doing ‘capitalist’ type politics (if Mr Ross truly is contrite).

            “The stately matrons may not approve of her one little bit, but that might depend on what some of the stately matrons have been up to on the quiet as well.”

            Exactly. If all the ‘stately matrons’ and co in NZ were worth their salt, we wouldn’t be in such a mess socially IMO. You already know how I feel about the church fellowships in general.

            As for comparing St Paul’s experience with anything to do with Mr Ross – St Paul was one in a zillion, chosen by God to be an incredibly unique first century apostle. Mr Ross was just another sleazeball. And in his vulnerable state of mind (because he is practising emotional transparency publicly (no mean feat!)) Mr Ross would have told us if he’d had an experience like St Paul. No, Mr Ross simply apologised and we all could allow him space to heal. If he chooses to continue exposing deceit in National’s leadership, that is his right. Just his presence will cause them discomfort and I think they deserve plenty of discomfort. They hurt a family. Indescribably evil. What else is going on, or will happen in the future if their discomfort does not lead to serious change?

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  27th January 2019

              A friend used to apologise just to keep the peace. Nobody should be pressured to do that.

  7. oldlaker

     /  26th January 2019

    I think it might have been Cameron Slater who said that Dowie’s abusive text was the result of her leaving her husband in the expectation that Ross would do the same but that he got cold feet and wouldn’t leave his wife thus sparking her fury.
    If that is true, it would mean that Dowie was willing to set up with a man who (she would later tell Newsroom) was misogynistic and brutal and narcissistic and only using her for his own ends. Such a scenario would mean she can’t really be viewed as a victim or sincere in her claims about how odious he was).
    I think this is something Newsroom could pursue (although I notice it has gone very quiet on the topic now… perhaps for the simple reason it was a hit-job orchestrated by Bridges and Bennett but Newsroom was willing to go along with it because it fitted the MeToo narrative that would make them look virtuous among some readers).

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  26th January 2019

      Newsroom’s behaviour annoyed me to say the least. They should front up. Their ill deeds affect youths’ thought processes.

      I would trust Mr Ross over SB and PB at this point. And that is clearly expressing how bad things are. This saga is a distraction for real issues such as the need to keep ourselves safe from Ch influence.

      Many distractions should be ignored. This one should be tackled head on.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  26th January 2019

        She’s an adult, ten years his senior, a lawyer…she can’t be that naive.

        An apology minus excuses and words like ‘mistake’ and ‘bad choices’ goes a long way.

        Reply
  8. Loki

     /  26th January 2019

    Treating anything our hero claims are truth adjacent has proven to be risky.
    Or, Dowie found out he was leaky/ an abuser and flipped out..
    You see what I did there?
    “Pulling a Slater” or taking a small sample of facts and spinning it into a big steaming pile of shite is what started this more than a decade ago.

    Things that don’t fit with your theory.
    When did Dowies marriage end?
    Is Dowie accused of being a sleazy abuser of staff and colleagues?
    Is she a leaker?
    Did she tape and attempt to entrap colleagues?
    Is she wholly a creature created by the big faker, his weird little Roger Stone wannabe mate from Havelock North and the fat controller?
    Did she go and buy a massive new house in her electorate with an enormous mortgage believing that Simon would gift her all the big paying jobs?

    This is a story of ambition exceeding ability, a deeply flawed human being with a penchant for abusing women, a massive mortgage and controllers who are monsters.

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  26th January 2019

      “Is Dowie accused of being a sleazy abuser of staff and colleagues?”

      Mr Ross is not accused of this.

      “Is she a leaker?”

      There’s no evidence that Mr Ross leaked.

      “Did she tape and attempt to entrap colleagues?”

      Mr Ross’ frustration led him to this error. And he openly shared his reasons for doing so. It appears he is now standing his ground. Standing firm amidst one’s human frailty is an indication of integrity – an indication that he’s willing to be proven wrong and not lose his head.

      “Is she wholly a creature created by the big faker, his weird little Roger Stone wannabe mate from Havelock North and the fat controller?”

      There’s no evidence of Mr Ross being manipulated by people with sub par intentions. If he did get sucked in, I hope he’s learnt his lesson.

      “Did she go and buy a massive new house in her electorate with an enormous mortgage believing that Simon would gift her (him) all the big paying jobs?”

      There’s evidence that Mr Ross enjoyed a close relationship with SB but no evidence that he believed such a thing. Again, if he did get sucked in, I hope he’s learnt his lesson.

      “This is a story of ambition exceeding ability, a deeply flawed human being with a penchant for abusing women, a massive mortgage and controllers who are monsters.”

      There’s no evidence of these accusations. I especially take umbrage re the abusing women. That is unfair.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  26th January 2019

        One can only be abused if one is abusable….being a woman does not of itself make someone that. The problem with the cry of ‘victim’ is that it makes the person seem weak and vulnerable.

        Reply
  9. Alan Wilkinson

     /  26th January 2019

    Simply the fact that these two had an affair and broke up badly means very little. Their futures will be determined by the other things they did. We know enough of Ross’s to know he has burned all his bridges. I know very little of Dowie’s and until I know more will regard speculation her political career is finished with some caution.

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  26th January 2019

      If Mr Ross’ motives are judged as getting too big for his boots, manipulation etc how else can Ms Dowie’s motives be judged? She was sexually one with him for months!

      Yes, go easy on the women if you want. But please treat us equally. Go easy on Mr Ross too. If you’re happy to allow Ms Dowie political leeway, allow that to Mr Ross too.

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  26th January 2019

        Ross blatantly tried to sandbag his leader and party. Forget the sex, it’s irrelevant.

        Reply
        • oldlaker

           /  26th January 2019

          Alan… I doubt the sex will be irrelevant to Dowie’s electorate committee in the Deep South or to conservative Nat supporters generally. Some conservative Christians I know don’t like the fact Jacinda Ardern is not married to her partner… Prolonged extramarital affairs will be way off the scale for them.

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  26th January 2019

            I am neither conservative, Christian nor particularly impressed by the views, opinions or wisdom of any combination of the afore mentioned.

            Reply
        • Mother

           /  26th January 2019

          Forget the sex?

          Sex is integral to everything on earth.

          Ross was desperately hurt by his party. That’s why he made the ‘mistake’ of sandblasting them.

          Mistake? It was a huge mistake for Ms Dowie to squeal to media. If she and the others had not been so self centred and easily manipulated by leaders, Mr Ross would possibly not have made his mistake.

          The fact that sex is the main part of the story seems to evade some people. In some situations, sex is everything. Note that Mr Ross stepped away from that intensity earlier on. I suppose he realised that in politics, sex is a trap.

          Reply
          • You seem to be forgetting that Ross squealed to media first and much more.

            Reply
            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              He squealed after the women anonymously attacked his family and after his leaders unfairly kept important information from him.

            • Mother

               /  26th January 2019

              All things considered, Mr Ross should not step down until his leaders and Ms Dowie step down.

              I think that it is highly probable that Mr Ross knows he has a job to do. I also think he has the mental and emotional stamina to last the distance.

              Best case scenario in my mind is that Mr Ross will step down after at least three others.

            • Ross doesn’t have any leaders. He is an independent electorate MP with no voter mandate.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th January 2019

              You are fantasizing, Mother. He’s been booted out of his party and will be stepped down involuntarily by his electorate at the first opportunity it gets.

    • oldlaker

       /  26th January 2019

      She’s obviously a very talented woman (if morally flawed) but is the post entirely neutral given its ending? “In 2017 when then National MP Todd Barclay’s political career came to an abrupt end Ross and Dowie travelled together to Queenstown to visit Barclay.” Seems almost mischievous to conjure an image of Ross, Barclay and Dowie together given the fact they each went on to become a huge liability for their party…

      Reply
    • Blazer

       /  26th January 2019

      all good..a DWTS candidate post…Parliament.

      Reply

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