Brian Edwards Media

Shock! Horror! Wife defends husband!!!!

 

 

In recent posts I’ve made some fairly trenchant comments about David Cunliffe, primarily about his media performance. Others, including some of his Caucus colleagues, have gone even further. The now resigned Leader of the Opposition has been under sustained and often vitriolic attack from friend and foe alike since Labour’s catastrophic showing in the General Election just over a fortnight ago. The media have feasted on his downfall.

Political survival and the retention of one’s self-respect require stoic denial from a political leader in these circumstances. To reveal hurt will  be taken as a sign of weakness. The response to Helen Clark’s tears at Waitangi in 1998 when Titewhai Harawira angrily challenged her right to speak on the marae is evidence enough of that.

But no politician can be totally indifferent to personal attack. David Cunliffe has admitted to being ‘close to tears’ following the 7-hour Caucus bloodletting after the election. That admission took courage and  should be admired rather than derided. A politician without feelings would be a dangerous creature indeed.

But what of the politician’s family, whose hurt or rage can be aired only in private, who must literally suffer in silence. For such  is the convention. So it was for Ruth Kirk and Thea Muldoon who kept just such a dignified silence in the face of the abuse, rumours and scuttlebutt that attended their husbands’ public and private lives. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. Tough call!     

On a couple of occasions male colleagues have criticised me to or in front of Judy. They will no doubt remember those occasions. Taking me to task is regarded by my wife as her prerogative. And no-one else’s! The gentlemen concerned were fortunate to depart with their genitals still attached.

I know Karen Price reasonably well. She is, in my submission, an absolutely marvellous woman. TV3 viewers got a glimpse of her qualities when John Campbell visited the Cunliffes at their Herne Bay home. (It’s not ‘a mansion’ by the way.) Not to put too fine a point on it, Karen stole the show.

I suspect that she’d rather not be the wife of a politician. But the wife of a politician she is and he happens to be the newly resigned Leader of the Opposition and his party and much of the country has turned its face against him. And much of what is being said about Karen Price’s husband really isn’t very nice. Tough call!

Well, her method of attacking those who were attacking her husband might not have been well-advised and might have been lacking in Machiavellian subtlety, but you really have to admire it. “Good on you, Karen!” I say. “Well done!” “No apology required.” Those people are assholes anyway.

And a footnote: One of our regular walks takes us past the Cunliffes’ drive. I increase my stride a little as we go past and not just because David almost killed me reversing at speed over the footpath some years ago. Suffice to say that I’m less fearful today of a repeat performance from the Member for New Lynn, than from his wife, quite possibly armed with a meat cleaver.

Now that’s my kind of woman!

(I’m off to play a few Helen Reddy tracks now. )

, , ,

88 Comments:

  1. This isn’t really a comment on your post, Brian, but on your blogroll. You’re a man of integrity, taste and sensitivity. Do you really have to provide a link to the odious blogger who names himself after a blubber byproduct?

    • Well, I’ve always believed that it was better for bad ideas to be exposed to the light than allowed to hide in the dark.

      • I’d have to agree with Trevor. By including that blogroll link you’re donating “Google juice” to the odious one’s site and adding link credibility he really doesn’t deserve. You’re telling Google that you endorse his site. Is that really your intention Brian?

        • “You’re telling Google that you endorse his site. Is that really your intention Brian?” I’m doing no such thing. To my mind, the more people who read Slater’s site the better. You have to read what he writes to fully understand his sociopathic personality. “Dirty Politics” reveals him as someone who takes considerable delight in setting out to destroy other people and their reputations. I think we should know about that. You’re clearly a believer in the value of censorship of unpalatable ideas. I’m not.

          • So you’d be happy adding a few kiddie porn sites to your blogroll? Just to show people how truly awful they are?

            I’m not suggested censorship; just good old common sense. The way Google works is by looking at credible sites which link to a target site. This site rates a very credible 5 (out of 10), and part of that Google goodness passes on to each site that you link to — including the oily one.

            On Russell Brown’s Public Address there’s an unspoken rule that the oily site should not be linked to. It’s discussed often enough, but never linked. It’s your call if you want to promote the odious one, but having read Dirty Politics, I know that I wouldn’t.

            • I’ve just re-read your comment and take strong exception to the suggestion that I would “be happy to add a few kiddy porn sites” to my blog roll. Your analogy is both preposterous and utterly offensive. You might try thinking before you put pen to paper again. Or find another blog.

              • 1.1.1.1.1.1.1

                I’m sorry that you seem to have missed the point here Brian. Of course I wasn’t suggesting that you add porn sites to your blogroll, though personally I don’t rate Slater’s blog any higher up the internet food chain. If you’re comfortable continuing to promote his vile content, that’s entirely your call. However you might consider re-reading Trevor’s inital comment which echoes exactly the same sentiment, albeit more diplomatically than my own.

                • 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1

                  Um, even though BE is perfectly capable of speaking for himself, Alfie, nonetheless I’ll put in my two cents worth.

                  You say “However you might consider re-reading Trevor’s inital comment which echoes exactly the same sentiment, albeit more diplomatically than my own.”

                  Have you considered re-reading Brian’s first two responses to you? Seems his point is perfectly reasonable and well-argued, your attempts to obfuscate over your request for censorship notwithstanding.

  2. Couldn’t agree more. Not the ideal thing to do, but understandable, and hopefully we all have the charity to see past it.

  3. Yes agree Brian. How many of us can say we wouldn’t do the same ourselves.

    I have had a gutsful of the vilification of Cunliffe. Truly I have.

    I have also had a gutsful of the msm telling me Cunliffe must resign (Armstrong) and Gower’s “its all over for Cunliffe” or words to that effect.

    I am dammed if I am going to let these hacks decide who we should elect as a Labour Leader.

    Vote Cunliffe and be dammed! He is the politician with the most fortitude by far!

  4. Brian, I’ve shared your post on my Facebook page with the comment that I’d probably do the same thing myself, in fact I did many years ago when the only repost was a letter to the editor of the local rag! I doubt Karen Price will see my comment, but I simply said ‘you go girl’. I’d give her a big hug if I bumped in to her.

    I had a wee laugh when the 3 News piece about it got off to a false start and I reckon that Paddy Gower was relatively restrained – at least I wasn’t looking for something to hurl at the TV as was the case last night.

  5. I love your humanity – its much appreciated as I sit here fuming at the sight of Clayton Cosgrove on TV 3 taking some moral high ground and trying to make political capital from these messages. Any other politician in a Party as benighted as Labour is at the moment would have some understanding or maturity and hold their tongue.

    • Pat W – I may well have sprung to reply before I saw Clayton Cosgrove on 3 News – oh dear, he didn’t even get his beloved Waimakariri electorate back after he lost it in 2008. He should just, in the vernacular of blog speak STFU.

    • Yes, Cosgrove’s performance on TV tonight entitles him to the title “Asshole of the Year”.

  6. Agree, politician’s families will be affected and its totally understandable when comments are made but the difference between the 1970’s and the present day is that people attempt, rather naively, to express their opinions anonymously via the internet.

  7. Now if it had been a right-wing blogger abusing anonymously we can imagine the vitriolic condemnation. A professional lawyer doing it for a husband or not is an equally tragic sight. That it is against supposed colleagues almost reduces that tragedy to farce.

    As I’ve observed before, no-one does hatred like the Left. For much of the election campaign that was all they did and most of it directed at Key. Didn’t see his wife losing the plot in response. Now they’ve turned on each other. Thank heavens they’re not running the country.

    • Yes, how dare Karen publicly defend her husband, doesn’t she know a woman’s place. And how did she get to be a lawyer, must have slept with someone to achieve that eh!?

      Do agree with you though Wilkie, there is a case for Labour to pull the curtains just like National do when they engage in back stabbing. No one does subterfuge like the right.

      • Roll on 2017!

        Or is that 2020?

        Just asking :)

        • Why don’t you ask one of the 15% floaters of the forty eight percenters?

          • Ah, that’s now the 47.04 percenters.

            • …and Labour now over 25%.

              Has anyone advised Grant Robertson to revise the figure he is repeating at every opportunity? If I didn’t know any better I’d suspect a right-wing smear campaign of dancing-cossack proportions. :)

      • Oh please, save on the indignation. I’m an intelligent independent woman and I agree with Wilkie. She, Tarn, showed utter lack of class in the way she used a ‘secret name’ to respond. Either show some gumption and do it upfront or quit complaining. Im sure she is a bright intelligent strong woman, lawyer or not but her current behaviours show otherwise. And before you respond , I’m a Labour supporter. Through this action she had shown the behaviour of those she despises is of the same level as her own. As a woman, I am disappointed in her. She has shown she is not ready to be a co leader of this country, because in a time of stress it’s the calm level headed responses that we need, not knee jerk reactions like this.Underhandedness like is is what makes dirty politics, if she had owned her own opinions I’d have full respect for her.

        • A ‘secret name’ like “Kat2″…..your originality is less than overwhelming, although imitation is often the sincerest form of flattery.

    • ‘No one does hatred like the left’ is scarcely borne out by history. And you rather sem to have missed the point that defending a besieged spouse is at worst understandable and at best praiseworthy. The irony is that your own argument is essentially right-wing tribal. Had Bronagh Key stood up for her husband in similar circumstances, I would have praised her actions.

      • 7.2.1

        I think it is well borne out by history from the French and Russian revolutions through all the communist countries to the hatred that has been directed at Key in the media column and blog comments for the past year.

        I don’t disagree that the spousal response is understandable though as I said it is tragic coming from a professional lawyer, farcical when directed at your supposed colleagues, and is also disastrous politically for the cause it is intended to support.

        The emotion is understandable but the judgement is deplorable.

        • i think the subject is NZ political history, especially recent history

          if you can find anyone behaving as repugnantly as WO then you might just have the start of a complaint re: the left being worse

          without that your painting yourself as overly dramatic and poorly informed

          • 7.2.1.1.1

            I don’t recall WO chanting F DC or singing about raping his daughter. And I think the Lefty hate blogs outnumber WO by at least 5:1, probably more.

            • Now, now, Alan.

              As mpledger pointed out below, “The song was about wanting to have sex with JK’s daughter, it wasn’t about raping her.”

              So that’s alright, then…and let’s just ignore the “Kill the PM” lyrics, that have absolutely NOTHING with setting a context.

        • Any hatred directed towards Key has been more than matched if not surpassed by the vitriol and negativity directed towards Cunliffe. That is not to condone it, but just to set the record straight. Until the emergence of the information revealed by Hager, Key had a pretty easy run from media and commentators alike. The fact that any ensuing negativity towards him had little effect, shows to my mind that the hate campaigns against Cunliffe have been far worse.

          • 7.2.1.2.1

            Really?

            “That’s why I’m going to kill the Prime Minister. I’m going to kill the Prime Minister, because we are down and suffering and the motherfucker ain’t doing nothing. Going to kill the Prime Minister.

            One of these days I’m going to fuck your daughter. This poor boy going to make his seed, going to wake up in your girl – well hello Miss Key.”

            Where has the Right said anything anywhere near as vile about Cunliffe?

            What they have said is that he is untrustworthy since he tells every different audience what he thinks they want to hear so no- one knows what he really stands for. And that he based his election to the job on extremist left policies to buy support from party and union ideologues since his caucus dislikes him.

            Simple truths, not vitriol.

            • 7.2.1.2.1.1

              I’m sure your collection of hip hop records is extensive and your knowledge of the the idioms of the genre is especially deep.

              • 7.2.1.2.1.1.1

                Thankfully not, Lee. Happily there are plenty of good people in the world so I can and do avoid the vile. My commiserations if you do not. I guess that contributes to the Left’s ghastly and poisonous bitterness.

                • 7.2.1.2.1.1.1.1

                  Doesn’t it bother you only having one functioning eye, Alan? Makes it harder to change the record…

                • 7.2.1.2.1.1.1.2

                  @Nell, no, I am an equal opportunity critic – happy to call out nonsense wherever I find it.

                  You?

                • 7.2.1.2.1.1.1.3

                  the Left’s ghastly and poisonous bitterness.

                  Old man yells at cloud.

                • 7.2.1.2.1.1.1.4

                  @Lee, Lefty tries to defend the indefensible. Gives up and runs interference. Not a good look for a philosopher.

  8. Well said Brian, absolutely agree. On the way home tonight as were listening to RNZ talking about Karen Price, my husband turned to me and said “She reminds me of someone I know”. Couldn’t have had a better compliment.

  9. To defend your spouse is admirable.

    To do so by attacking the character of others is debatable.

    To do so under the cloak of anonymity is ethically suspect.

    To get caught doing so is unfortunate.

    To cause damage to his re-election chances is incompetent.

    I don’t make the rules. I just report them.

    • And, who are you Kimbo?

      • Neither a combatent nor closely alligned to any in the current Labour blood-letting.

        But I will confess to sitting back in a big comfy chair with a jumbo-sized bucket of popcorn, comfortable in the knowledge that my vote for Team Key helped ensure competent and united Government for the next 3 years.

        • 9.1.1.1

          Ahh, Kimbo, thought so.

          • But having taken the time to peruse your efforts here, and your Facebook page (you mentioned it), it confirms my decision of long-standing to retain my anonymity when engaging in political debate on web as long as I am not directly tied to any politician or campaign. If and when that changes, I’ll willingly put my name forward, rather than hiding in the shadows as Karen Price did.

            Nothing personal, Jill, but there are some people on the internet who strike me as lacking much capacity for objectivity let alone a modicum of healthy humour, if not rather unhinged, and possessing a capacity for vindictiveness I’d rather not be on the receiving end of at some point in the future.

            If you don’t like the answer, don’t ask the question. Or is that observation also likely to inspire another “Sign the Petition!”?

    • “I don’t make the rules, I just report them.” Pretentious? Toi?

      • In my case, almost certainly!

        But I think you will concur with rule No. 1 in politics: –

        If you lack collective and personal discipline in public then you won’t be elected into Government. Ever. And no amount of expert TV interview coaching will paper over the cracks.

        Good to hear Judy is well-recovered, btw.

  10. During the last election campaign we had hundreds of students at Internet Mana rallies chanting F…John Key. Did we hear anything in response from Bronagh Key? No. We had musicians releasing a single, with words talking about raping the prime minister’s daughter. Did Bronagh Key react? No. The absolute character assassination that John Key had to endure during the campaign was evident for all to see. Did Bronagh Key react? No. Their dignity under 6 weeks of prolonged attack was impressive. Guess that is why John Key is Prime Minister and David( you’ve had your turn now John) Cunliffe isn’t.

    • Absent any evidence to the contrary we can presume Bronagh hasn’t reacted in social media (up until the last few days I would have presumed Karen wouldn’t have either), but we can’t be sure.

      Perhaps Bronagh is smart enough not to use @BronBitch2 as an anonymous identity. However she may be smarter still and stay well away from social media.

      And…I can think of much smarter ways of sticking up for her husband than attacking his colleagues without telling him anything about it.

      Cunliffe claims he “couldn’t have known” about the Twitter account. He could easily have known, if his wife had spoken to him about it. Cunliffe was at home while this was happening.

      Secret attacks on one’s husband’s colleagues kept secret from one’s husband is not my kind of woman.

    • of course not, they just paid WO to do the job

    • The song was about wanting to have sex with JK’s daughter, it wasn’t about raping her. Didn’t JK make comments along the same lines on the radio about some model?

      And it wasn’t character assassination, if was character suicide – he ruined his own character by changing his story over and over again and giving lame excuses about forgetting.

      • 10.3.1

        “If you’re thinking he didn’t say he was going to rape her, you’re missing the point. Here’s the rape culture involved:

        1. The most obviously rapey bit is that whatever interest or distinct lack of interest Stephanie Key might have in letting this ambulatory excrement within touching distance of her apparently isn’t relevant from his point of view.

        2. The less obvious, but far worse, rapey bit is the matter of why this turd-on-legs wants to fuck Stephanie Key – not because of her appearance, her personality or any of the other, mundane, trivial reasons two people might fuck. No, the reason he wants to fuck her is he thinks squirting semen in her would be a suitable gesture of contempt for her father. That’s rape culture right there, folks. Attitudes to sex and to women don’t get much more poisonous than this – quite an achievement for a self-proclaimed Green voter…”

        – Psycho Milt at No Minister

        • Number 1 was the same for Key when he talked about a model being worthy of his sexual interest. The only difference was the crudity about how the thought was expressed.

          A musician wanting to have sex with a women because it might hurt her father is identical to a women wanting to have sex with someone inappropriate in order to hurt her father. We don’t say it’s “rape culture” for a women to make that choice.

          • 10.3.1.1.1

            Utter drivel. Classic Lefty fatuous, brain dead nonsense.

            Key actually said this:

            “I like Liz Hurley, actually. I reckon she is hot.”

            He also listed Jessica Alba on his ‘hot’ list, along with Angelina Jolie.

            Only an unscrupulous, manipulative Lefty can misrepresent a compliment into a rape threat. I find that dishonesty repulsive and disgusting.

    • 10.4

      Oh please. If you think that’s bad, you should have heard what students used to chant about Lockwood Smith when he was minister of tertiary education.

      And in another first, a rapper posted a somewhat sexist rant abusing an authority figure.

      Quite what these isolated incidents have to do with the Labour Party is beyond me.

      The absolute character assassination that John Key had to endure during the campaign was evident for all to see.

      Really? I don’t recall every single Key error (+some wholly imaginary ones) being endlessly repeated in the media. Nor do I recall reading about Labour plotting media hits against John Key in Nicky Hager’s book.

      One wonders what planet you customarily reside upon.

      • Um, Lee

        If you don’t think that the continual coverage of Nicky Hager, Whale Oil and Judith Collins and KDC culminating in his ill-fated “Moment of Truth” throughout the campaign didn’t turn the election into a referendum with John Key’s character and competence as the primary issue

        …how do you account for the result?

        • 10.4.1.1

          Yes I can see how a couple of weeks of weak questions in response to evidence of political corruption and dirty tricks is the same as almost a year’s worth of silly hit pieces, personal attacks and accusations with no real foundation (such as the imaginary bottle of wine). As they say: one of these things is not like the other.

          This is an old playbook. I saw Karl Rove do it to John Kerry when I was living overseas. It’s not hard to spot if you’ve seen it before, but I’d never seen it here.

          • OK, Lee.

            Thanks for the response. Don’t agree, but fair enough. My take on it is that Paddy Gower and Tova O’Brien on TV3 in particular are equal-opportunity muck-rackers.

            But just out interest, from which end of the political spectrum do you think the media “hit” jobs on Cunliffe in the 12 days since the election have come from?

            • 10.4.1.1.1.1

              I honestly couldn’t say. I watched the news somewhat regularly up until the election, but have since returned to my habit of avoiding NZ media almost entirely, so I’ve missed most of the goings on.

              In any case, the West’s latest farcical war is more interesting than Labour or milk prices. The Hager sanction is a bit of a worry though.

  11. 11

    In keeping with the Labour Party’s ethos of turning on each other by back-stabbing through white-anting innuendo and rumour, Karen Price waves the flag with unabashed gusto. Besides, hubby needed her to fight his battle by spousal proxy, even if it was by way of attempted anonymity.

    Any guy who becomes teary-eyed by announcing to a gathering of feminists that he’s “sorry for being a man”, you would have question his capacity to take on any adversary, head-on. He becomes emboldened with his wife by his side, not to unlike a psychological crutch.

    All it proves, conclusively, is that the Labour Party is not a credible opposition party, let alone, fit enough to govern. They are so embittered; enfeebled by endemic division and fractiousness, that ‘Dysfunctional’ has become etched in their psyche. The party is beyond hopeless.

    • “Any guy who becomes teary-eyed by announcing to a gathering of feminists that he’s “sorry for being a man”, ”

      cunliffe didnt do this

      • Quite right – he didn’t.
        Speaking at a Women’s refuge , and facing the ugly truth of what some men do to women and children he said:
        “I don’t say this very often, but I’m sorry for being a man right now”.

        Now I think any man with an ounce of decency would in the same circumstances feel similarly shamed and contaminated .

        The statement and the emotion behind it was genuine and principled, but the expression of it was inadvisable.

        And that says a fair bit about where we are now. 30 years of putting personal advancement and self-gratification ahead of ethics, means that someone like Cunliffe whose moral grounding pre-dates neoliberalism is vilified for ‘preaching’ or ‘telling me what to think’. This is a huge problem for the left and why getting the middle to vote in favour of poverty alleviation is so hard.

        And incidentally, I recently told friends what Cunliffe actually said and in what context, and they said ‘oh that’s quite different’. Guess what – they’d got their perception of him from the tv news.

        • 11.1.1.1

          My understanding from the media was that the statement was made in his speech not as a spontaneous interjection. Is that correct? If so I think the criticisms stand.

          No, I don’t believe any decent man would feel shamed and contaminated by the vile thugs too many women choose to mate and breed with any more than they would feel shamed by the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot or Rolf Harris.

          • I don’t see that it makes much difference if it was scripted or impromptu. Both reflect a genuine response.

            Your second point is wrong. Most of the men concerned will not be vile thugs. Commonly I believe many are ordinary men who sometimes behave vilely. Some will be respectable middle-class men with good jobs and reputations. In other words not so hugely different from you and me.
            You imply they are ‘other’ – bad guys as opposed to good guys like you. Irredeemable like Pol Pot. This is the technique you use to slide away from any sense of collective responsibility. It is cringe-worthy.

            In any case moral imperatives are felt, not reasoned, and if you don’t feel this no one can argue you into feeling it.

            And lastly I really don’t like the insinuation that the women concerned are somehow responsible for choosing to breed with vile thugs. As if somehow when people are forming relationships all the information about someone is available and you can predict how they will act in the future.

            • 11.1.1.1.1.1

              Do you realise how ridiculous your premise is? Tacit wholesale extrapolation across an entire gender? FFS!!

              Why you’re at it: have every Cambodian apologise for Pol Pot; every German for Hitler’s legacy; have Troy Flavell stand up and apologise for being a Maori; have all the aunties in the world apologise, because Aunty Gertrude was mean to me when I was young.

              You must have been part of the crowd, giving the solemn righteous affirmative nod-of-the-head, when Cunliffe was debasing himself.

              • That’s not my premise at all.
                He was not claiming to be personally or legally responsible for any individual act of violence or abuse. He was not extrapolating guilt on the basis of gender.
                In my reading of it he was expressing an emotion, that it is sometimes not comfortable being a man standing in front of a group of women who have been harmed by men.
                You have such literal and unsubtle notions of responsibility it is like talking to a wall.
                And by the way, how many Germans do you know? The ones I know, even the young,have a sort of historically displaced shame about Nazism and the holocaust – that their forebears could do such a thing.

            • 11.1.1.1.1.2

              You have an amazing ability to believe self- contradictory rubbish. Supposedly these vile thugs who beat up their women and children are not really vile thugs yet I am supposed to feel guilty that I am the same sex as them.

              In the next breath you claim it was not obvious they were vile thugs when these women decided to mate with them.

              Tosh from start to finish. And those women have much more cause for shame than I do. It wasn’t me who chose those men and probably perpetuated the cycle of violence by breeding from them.

              Just as it wasn’t me who voted for programmes that reward and support bed-hopping, irresponsible, welfare dependency.

              I’ll let you into one secret though. Anyone who beats up their women and children IS hugely different from me. Are they hugely different from you?

              • 11.1.1.1.1.2.1

                You also failed mention AB’s dubious assertion, “In any case moral imperatives are felt, not reasoned, and if you don’t feel this no one can argue you into feeling it”.

                A good case of a false dichotomy I would have thought. Why CAN’T moral imperatives be BOTH felt AND reasoned?! Indeed, I’d argue that is usually how moral imperatives are determioned – along with the inculcation of societal norms.

              • You are a straw man specialist, because that is not what I said.
                I am not suggesting that you should feel personal guilt or responsibility due to being the same gender.
                I am suggesting that you manage feel nothing at all because you pretend that the men who do this are completely ‘other’ and nothing to do with you, like another species. And I am suggesting this is a bit of an evasion and a form of emotional deadness common to angry Tories.
                And no I have never hit a woman, have sometimes smacked my children (not hard) and generally felt terrible and inadequate about 5 secs later.

                • 11.1.1.1.1.2.2.1

                  You said “any man with an ounce of decency would in the same circumstances feel similarly shamed and contaminated”.

                  Now you have the gall to claim that is not a suggestion I should feel guilt.

                  Trying to weasel out of it you shift the goal posts to claiming I feel nothing at all. Wrong. I detest and despise anyone who victimises and bullies those weaker than themselves and I deplore people who bring children into a life of brutality, pig ignorance and dependency.

                  Neither am I an angry Tory but in the interests of producing a better country with happier people it is important to deflate stupid beliefs and ideologies. I am in fact a very happy classic liberal, not a Tory at all.

  12. The right wing who think the Nats suffered character assasination! Oh dear god. If one of their precious ilk ever suffered what DC has been through…

    • 12.1

      As far as I know, Mr Cunliffe has not been subjected to crowds of drunken yobbos, incited by a convicted German fraudster, chanting “Fuck David Cunliffe”; a taxpayer-funded rapper talking of raping one of his children; or having a picture of his face placed on a burning effigy. Mrs Cunliffe’s actions may or may not be understandable, but either way, she would have been better advised to respond to criticism of her husband with the quiet dignity displayed by Mrs Key in the face of these vile attacks on her husband and children.

  13. @SeaPlus Bologna
    If you were a sensitive man and did not feel threatened,
    you would be able to say sometimes that you were sorry to be a man.
    Unfortunately if you are ignorant you are unable to know that.

  14. Edwards. Price made an idiot of herself, full stop. And interesting to see who you call assholes. Your party is collapsing daily, and you help, Keep up the good work.
    And as for your garbage that your wife could castrate your foes, what a dreamer joke, what drivel. Women do not have the safety or right to attack people without taking the consequences old man .

    • I’m not quite sure who you mean by ‘your party’. Just for the record, I did not vote Labour this year and I have had no connection with the Labour Party or its leaders. It will surprise you too to learn that I did not literally mean that my wife would castrate people who attack me. That’s hyperbole. Too many syllables for you, I expect. And I am not, thank god, your ‘old man’. Now why don’t you have the guts to resend your comment with your name attached. That’s what I do when I write a post. I don’t hide in the shadows behind a pseudonym. I won’t hold my breath.

  15. Getting back to the subject: I do whatever is necessary to defend my wife. I probably defend her even more vigorously than I defend myself. She does the same for me. It’s called loyalty. That’s what marriage is about.
    No apology is necessary for Karen Price’s actions.

    • 15.1

      Except they were entirely counter-productive and self-destructive. Mind you that is par for the course for the Left.

      • 15.1.1

        They were only counter-productive and self-destructive to the selfish right who know nothing of loyalty.

  16. Defending your spouse is quite acceptable.The method she chose is less so.Everyone makes mistakes ,its correcting the error and learning from it is whats important.These people may be “assoles”but subjecting them to a poorly conceived attack wont change that.All this poorly directed rage should be put aside and the task of dethroning John Key should be uppermost in their minds.Forget the petty(and they are petty )squabbles and get on with it!.Take a leaf out of the green party’s approach ,who have the best team approach of them all. John Key and Bill English quite often contradict each other.

  17. It is an enormous shame that the English Poet Alexander Pope [1688 – 1744] is not around to tweet. Pope was not a great fan of privilege and twaddle and once used a dog collar to ‘tweak’ most effectively

    In 1736, Alexander gave Frederick the Prince of Wales, who was then resident at his palace in Kew, London, a puppy whelped by his well-esteemed bitch Bounce. On the collar, for the benefit of obsequious courtiers, he had inscribed the words:

    ‘I am his Highness’ Dog at Kew

    Pray tell me Sir whose Dog are you?’