Sunday, May 27, 2018

A Stupid Little Girl......

......has written a column for the H on S in which she lambastes the National Party for something which was never said.

Speaker Mallard says he heard it but 'it' can be found neither in Hansard nor on the parliamentary TV sound tracks.  (Do they still have radio broadcasts?)

I never cease to be amazed at the number of different ways telling the plain truth about someone or something can be found somehow to be 'unparliamentary.'

24 comments:

Psycho Milt said...

It was never said? Good luck proving that negative...

alwyn said...

Did you read the column Milt?
Ms HDPA says there
"We'll never know for sure. Parliament's microphones didn't pick up the comment clearly enough to prove or disprove the allegation."
Just how, if the comment was never said could she possibly expect to prove that? The most perfect microphones ever made are not going to prove that something was never said are they?
Did you consider asking her how she was going to PROVE that negative.

Allan said...

The truth hurts.!! The Fairy Princess is a stupid little girl, END OF STORY.

Anonymous said...

HDPAs husband was on the radio during the week saying he listened to the audio five times and never heard anything.

Typical Labour, just like their desired change to the rape laws, it's guilty until proven otherwise.

Anonymous said...

they have a stupid little girl in charge as a vote catcher, and they know it. Stupid little girl she is, the whole nation knows it! Truth hurts, indeed. Latest poll still backs National though, funny that...


Ron

Psycho Milt said...

Did you read the column Milt?

I did. However, my comment was directed at Adolf's rather bold claim that the statement under discussion "was never said." It's the same logical fallacy that leads people to claim David Bain was "found innocent."

HDPAs husband was on the radio during the week saying he listened to the audio five times and never heard anything.

I listened to it myself. There's a lot of barracking going on and the recording isn't clear enough to distinguish individual comments. That isn't the same thing as "never heard anything" - there's plenty to hear, in fact too much to hear.

Psycho Milt said...

The truth hurts.!! The Fairy Princess is a stupid little girl...

And:

Stupid little girl she is, the whole nation knows it! Truth hurts, indeed.

And yet, your MPs are claiming not a single one of them uttered this supposed truth. Are they afraid the truth really does hurt?

Johno said...

Milt, the only person who claims to have heard it is Mallard, on his admitted deaf side, amid a racket, no less.

Why would anyone give this story any credence? Not even fully hearing-enabled opposition heard it.

Andrei said...

Charles Manson heard all sorts of things nobody else heard in the Beatles song Helter Skelter

Adolf Fiinkensein said...



Charles Manson would make a better Speaker.

Psycho Milt said...

Why would anyone give this story any credence?

Several excellent reasons:

1. The idea that the Speaker just decides one day to make up the claim that he heard a non-existent interjection is implausible.

2. As demonstrated by commenters on this thread, the idea that a Nat MP made the interjection is all too plausible.

3. Bridges suddenly changed his story when it became clear there was no evidence of what actually happened. That's the mark of a lying weasel.

The Veteran said...

Very droll Andrei, very droll.

It matters not whether some commentators on this blog consider JA to be a 'stupid little girl'. What does matter is that the Speaker took it upon himself to brief the media on the 'alleged' comment (which no-one else appeared to have heard). Certainly no-one on the government side of the House did or they would have raised a point-of-order to complain.

Mallard, in doing what he did, has come close to forfeiting the confidence of the Opposition and, unless he pulls back from what many view as his quite partisan position there is the potential for the House to descend into chaos and that has to be avoided at all cost.

Anonymous said...

It seems the assessment conflated in Mallards subconscious and he was shocked into believing it came from somewhere near Bridges. I don't think it was a deliberate false accusation on his part.

Psycho Milt said...

I don't imagine any of Parliament's Speakers have been kept awake at night by the terrifying prospect of losing the confidence of the Opposition. In any case, Mallard's got a long way to go before he even approaches the level of partisan behaviour achieved by his predecessor, Carter.

The Veteran said...

Pm ... we agree to disagree re Carter although Smith was better You are wrong in your assertion that the Speaker need not be worried were he to lose the confidence of the opposition. There are myriad ways in which an opposition can frustrate government business to the point where no-ones the winner. It's in nobody's interest to see the House descend into the turmoil that characterised the period when Speaker Wilson presided over proceedings.

But my main point is that the Speaker should not have taken it upon himself to brief the media on an ascertain heard only by himself and not objected to by the Government who clearly did not hear it either. By doing that he played party politics ... the Speaker is supposed to be above that.

Hal said...

Beltway issue. However, I love the way the echo chamber have simultaneously claimed the words were never uttered by their side, while uttering them endlessly and approvingly. Losers much?

Psycho Milt said...

There are myriad ways in which an opposition can frustrate government business to the point where no-ones the winner.

Indeed, although I notice that such a dog-in-the-manger approach to Parliament is a feature of National oppositions rather than Labour one (against Wilson, as you mentioned, and now Mallard). Carter certainly gave the then-opposition parties plenty of justification for similar tactics, but I notice they didn't use them.

But my main point is that the Speaker should not have taken it upon himself to brief the media...

Mallard "briefing" the media:

Mallard has now confirmed to the Herald he did tell a journalist he had heard that comment. "I was asked by a journalist what the comment was. I answered."

Maybe he shouldn't have answered the question. But then, maybe Carter shouldn't have let Key say the opposition parties support rapists and then chuck out of the House all the women who got up to tell him why that was offensive to them as sexual abuse survivors. In the long run, it's all water under the bridge.

The Veteran said...

Milt ... thank you for you admission that Mallard should not have answered the question.
What Cater did or not do is not the point. Key made his point in the House and it is on the record for people to judge and respond. Mallard did what he did outside the Chamber in a partisan way and in doing so destroyed his credibility as an impartial defender of the rights and privileges of all members. It is not for the Speaker to brief the media on what he (and no-one else heard) thought he heard. He refused to elaborate in the House when asked to by Brownlie and, having done that, should have let the matter lie. He chose not to and by escalating the issue to an attack on the National Party with nothing to back his allegation he came close to forfeiting the confidence of the opposition.

Mallard is on notice.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Hal

It is a shame you can't tell the difference between winners and losers.

The fool Mallard handed the Gnats a win by shooting his mouth off outside the house, thereby opening the gate for the Gnats to storm right in and capitalise on his stupidity.

I call that winning.

Psycho Milt said...

Mallard did what he did outside the Chamber in a partisan way and in doing so destroyed his credibility as an impartial defender of the rights and privileges of all members.

Well, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but don't expect anyone outside National to care about it. Speakers doing things we don't like is par for the course.

It is a shame you can't tell the difference between winners and losers.

I don't think it's me who's confused. I haven't seen any Nats "storming in," just a lot of pathetic whining. They really need to come to terms with the fact they're the opposition now and nobody cares what they think. Sucks, but that's why politicians hate being in the opposition.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Milt, there you go projecting again.

It's Labour which has yet to come to terms with being in gummint. They simply do not know what to do or which way to turn.

The only strategy on their part thus far has been 'let's fuck everything up, so when we get around to trying to put it right. we can take credit for that.'

Hal said...

They don’t have to fuck anything up, the previous administration did an admirable job in that area (from M.Bovis to Middlemore and all stations in between). Fixing the fuck ups alone will get them a second term.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Some 'fuck up' eh Hal? All it took to fix was a bucket of hot water, some Janola and a mop.

DO you fools ever stop to think before you spew out 'talking points?'

Hal said...

It’s obvious that you fools never stop to think at all. This complete lack of self-reflection on your part is great. Keep it up.