Sharing photos of John Banks being humiliated is kicking a dog when it’s down – too much schadenfruede for me. Banks is being punished in the manner which damages him most, the belittling and dismantling of his reputation. Throwing faeces on him and laughing at his misfortune should be beneath us.
I loath Banks as much as the next educated person, but there is no need to humiliate him.
Kudos to Labour candidate Michael Wood for not needing to stoop to using the incident for political muck raking proposes and focused only on the Court event itself…
John Banks spectacle shows it is time to end the Epsom rort
With the spectacle of ACT MP for Epsom John Banks standing trial today, the newly selected Labour candidate for Epsom Michael Wood is vowing to end the ACT Party rort in Epsom.
“The ACT Party is a political corpse. It survives only through a distasteful manipulation of the electoral system and a sweetheart deal to gift them the parliamentary seat of Epsom. ACT has turned Epsom into New Zealand’s ‘rotten borough’ and this needs to end” says Michael Wood.
“Epsom residents have been humiliated by the incompetent and boorish antics of ACT time and again. Mr Banks’ trial for electoral fraud is a new low, but is not an isolated incident; from Rodney Hide getting busted for his use of perks, to the new ACT leader making bizarre philosophical statements about brothers and sisters loving each other in a whole new way”
“For a party that favours a hard-nosed, no hand-outs, free market approach, it is utter hypocrisy that they expect to get away with this behaviour, and then be gifted Epsom.”
“Epsom people deserve better. This election is the opportunity for Epsom people to vote to end the farce and the embarrassment of representation by ACT. That is the only way we will achieve dignified and honourable representation for Epsom”
“I look forward to campaigning for the Labour Party vote in Epsom and to ending ACT’s rort of the system. The Banks trial should be the nail in the coffin of a party whose dignity died long ago”, says Michael Wood.
…if Wood and Julie Anne Genter can show unity to compete only for the Epsom Party vote and allow Epsom Labour and Green voters to cast their vote strategically by electorally voting for the National candidate, ACT could be locked out of power forever. Achieving that should be our collective focus, not partaking in a public square shit pelting at the stocks.
We should be better than that.
I want to agree with you. I so do. But one reaps what one sows, and it isn’t so much laughing at him when he’s down as being glad that at least he got some sort of comeuppance for his behaviour.
I hear the bucket of crap had to have a shower to wash john banks of itself
I disagree with this. I have personal grudge against Banks. A few years a go he was responsible for having an NBR reporter stalk my Aunt around while she was doing per personal business and then report it in their tory rag.
Anyone who throws sh*t at this prick is A.O.K in my books!
I can’t be as big and generous as you in this, Martyn. I have to admit to feeling a certain amount of glee when I saw this happen. Let’s be honest here…this is just a sign of the frustration people are feeling without any other way to vent it. I say he got off lightly considering the pent up anger that is directed towards him.
Karma.
Anyway, one has reason to believe Schadenfreude comprises much of the sense of happiness of characters such as Banks.
One detestable character held to account, many more to keep in check.
John Banks was humiliated on tv when questioned about the Dot Com helicopter business in the first place. As expected he brazened off those possum-in-the-headlights appearances. He was like the little boy, chocolate covered fingers and face denying he’d been at the chocolate cake. Specsavers would not have had a hope of helping his defenders.
The reference to kicking a dog is apt since John Banks would not have anyone kick any dog, down or not.
Would he kick any person who was down? Would he kick them to down in the first place? Damn right he would. He who plays hardball expects soft ball to be played back?
The man can’t be totally rotten to the core as he has a soft heart for animals and has stood up and spoken out for their rights.
A Peter Singer he is not, but credit where credit is due.
http://underthenameofreason.blogspot.co.nz/2009/07/summary-of-peter-singers-all-animals.html
I recall a certain dictator was said to be kind to children?
…and Hitler loved his German Shepherd dog!
The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life.
– Adolph Hitler, My New World Order
Proclamation to the German Nation at Berlin, February 1, 1933
lol…credit for liking animals? I hope you are being ironic
Yogibare – loving animals is about Banks’ only redeeming feature I think!
I wonder how the animals feel about him.
End the strategic rort by………..strategic voting.
Surely I am not alone in feeling some sympathy for Banks – who among us has not fiddled their expenses? manipulated their taxes?
I bet most politicians have utilised the anonymous clause to conceal donors. The difference here is that Kim Dotcom has entered the situation with his nasty, vindictive, publicity-loving character.
He is more deserving of the bucketful of s…
He has been bludging off the taxpayer for far too long. He was Police minister 24 years ago. … Ive got as much sympathy for him as I would for a Tape worm. As was said in a previous comment, you reap what you sow
Mud sticks!
Bugger him. How many people have suffered because of Banks as Minister of Police and Mayor of Auckland? How many Maori and Pasifika have been harassed by poaka because Banks says they climb through Epsom windows?
One bucket of dirt by a guy who seems to have suffered personal loss is far less than he deserves.
And as for Labour in Epsom – it was only their traitorous actions in 1984 that gave birth to ACT anyway. Until they apologise for those, they bear the stain as much as Banks does.
Most people could waterboard Banks and still hold the moral high ground.
Nobody is forcing anyone to kick Banks while he’s down, but I’m quite happy to go for his nuts while he’s scrambling on the ground.
Banks to the wall, anything less and you’re helping him. He’s pure scum
Enjoy, but don’t be seen to enjoy.
Allow not the creature that is Banks to grasp even a straw of the moral high ground .
He could just tell the truth, and then apologise.
If you have a look at the footage of the film showing Banks walking into court, he was his usual arrogant, smart arse self, cockily saying “good morning” to the protesters outside. However, the appropriate bucket of manure soon put paid to that. Something he wasn’t quite anticipating.
To John Banks I say, you play in shit, expect to get covered in it eventually! Now for John Key!
Give the guy with the bucket a medal!
John Banks has enjoyed denigrating people who disagreed with him over many years of politics. I can’t forget his sheer maliciousness when he taunted Jim Anderton after the death of his daughter. Perhaps the chickens are coming home to roost now. However throwing mud over him is a stupid thing to do because it might create a backlash of sympathy for him and we don’t want that to happen.
I agree with Bomber here . It makes me feel uncomfortable to see others , even those ‘ guilty ‘ suffer once they’re caught out . It’s a bit of a clue to what’s wrong with the criminal justice system actually . Torturing the prisoner isn’t going to fix the victims and it’s not going to rehabilitate the criminal . All it dose is provide a bit of a thrill for the onlooker and that’s a bit weird if you ask me .
Banks is a jerk . He’s always been a shifty little shit and he’s just one of many . Paradoxically , good on the guy for throwing the shit . At least it shows there’s still a little spirit left in some .
Next please ?
I am just bummed I did not know there was a whip round for the guy!
I would have made a large donation to the bucket!
After the initial “thrill” of seeing Banks and Karma meet face-to-face, I realised a few things…
The bucket of mud/manure was not Karma. His appearance in Court is.
If throwing a bucket of mud/manure at Banks is justified because of “X, Y, Z” – then is Cameron Slater justified in his “buckets” of sleaze thrown at folks such a POAL worker, and a deceased passenger in a crashed car?
Or are we forever doomed to throw buckets at each other in a tit-for-tat-for-tit pattern of repetitive behaviour.
I felt an unease at what had befallen Banks and I think the action was wrong for two reasons.
1. Kiwis generally tend to sympathise with the under-dog. The last thing we want is for ACT to win the “sympathy” vote in September.
2. We condemn our American cuzzies for drone attacks as extra-judicial killings; water-boarding as outright torture; and Guantanamo Bay as a violation of everything we in the West pretend to oppose. But the American continue to do it, regardless. For them, it is all karma/utu for the atrocity of 9/11.
I guess we might feel justified in throwing shit at Banks for all the vile right wing nuttery he and his cronies have imposed on us, and this country.
Just as the Americans justify their actions.
I guess Banks deserved it, right?
So… why do I still feel so uneasy at what happened? Why do I feel that it achieved nothing? Why – after that initial exhilaration of Banks meeting Karma in the form of a bucket of crap – do I feel let down?
Then I realised why. It was wrong.
Just my gut feeling in this, and not meant to address anyone’s beliefs that happen to run counter.
I concur …let’s leave the shit throwing for verbal attacks in the court room.
I agree with Bomber and Frank. For playing fast and loose with rules relating to donations, JB should have to resign from parliament because that’s what the law provides. As somebody above said, “the guy is a jerk”, but that doesn’t make him the devil incarnate.
Watching segments from the trial yesterday on the TV news, when prosecution witness Kim Dotcom was giving evidence, judging by the barbed shots being fired at him by Banks’ lawyer, it seemed it was KD on trial instead of Banks!
Call me an old cynic, but it makes me wonder if this trial is going to be used as a tool in an attempt to discredit Dotcom, prior to his own hearing later in the year.
Speaking of which, why was Dotcom’s extradition hearing moved from July to November? Who directed this move and was this action taken to take the heat of Key, so close to the election, when there is likely to be some revelations about him and his involvement in the authorization of the raid of Dotcom’s home?
On the subject of the Epsom rort. The coat-tail aspect of MMP is certainly the worst part of our current system. As I remember it was done to ensure that smaller parties which might have had considerable regional support or support amongst certain groups, eg. Maori, were not swamped by the national organizations of the big two – Labour and National. But things evolve over time and the coat-tail provision has now become a bargaining chip between parties with the voters in the affected electorates being treated merely as cannon fodder. I believe it would have been better to abolish the coat tail provision and simultaneously reduce the 5% threshold down to 4%. Given what we have seen in Epsom the bargaining and manipulation has become very sordid and this is damaging what is otherwise a good electoral system. Let us be clear, it is not illegal, although it is ethically questionable. One of the reasons National is doing this is actually to smear the image of MMP, make it so distasteful that they can call for another referendum in a few years time and hope the voters will want to switch back to FPP. Labour probably wouldn’t mind either. Neither of them really want MMP, they have just had to live with it.
Charming, upstanding, nurturing, thoughtful. That’s our Banks.
Comments are closed.