Monday, 11 September 2006

Hodgson attacks. Libz leader gummed.

Labour's chief veterinarian Pete Hodgson is still trying to make Labour's very sick puppies look better by pouring scorn elsewhere. In a press release today the squirming strategist and master of flatulent irrelevance had this to say:
Pete Hodgson has also raised questions about the financial support behind the Libertarianz pledge card case as it emerged over the weekend that high-priced QC Tony Molloy will be arguing the case."I'd be very surprised to learn that the Libertarianz have the financial means to pay Mr Molloy's fees. This raises significant questions about who is actually backing this case and what their motives."
Let me say just a few things to Mr Hodgson:
  1. You're a tosser.
  2. Even if the devil himself were financially backing the case, it wouldn't alter in any way that you've been caught with your hands in the till. That's the only issue that matters here.
  3. The devil is not backing the case. I believe he is on your side, Mr Hodgson. As for us, please see in your encyclopaedia: "Angels, on the side of."
  4. Is this really the best you've got in your Libertarianz dirt file? Sheesh. If you'd wanted headlines for your jibes I could have pointed to several people who could have done much better than this.
  5. I think it's clear to everyone watching that if you and your party had a defence to the charges of misappropration of taxpayers' money, Mr Hodgson, we would have seen them by now. That we have seen smear instead of substance suggests ... well, you're a smart man. You and eighty-one percent of the New Zealand public already know exactly what it suggests.
  6. I know the names of all the people "actually backing the case," and for the price of an enormous voluntary donation to the Darnton V Clark campaign fund and an all-expenses-paid trip to Runnymede and to the birthplace of John Locke for myself and twenty-four close friends I'd be very happy to divulge them.
  7. You do know what happened at Runnymede, don't you Mr Hodgson? And you do know about John Locke? If you don't then I suggest you brush up since it's the Bill of Rights he wrote under which you're being dragged into court.
I expect that Bernard Darnton will respond with his own press release at some stage this afternoon, and I'd be surprised if it didn't look something like what he said on his blog this morning in response to Helen Clark's frankly pathetic attack this morning. To repeat what I quoted of his response here earlier today:
Of course, the question is not how we have the money to hire QCs (thanks again to all the donors, by the way). The question is how the Prime Minister got the money to pay for her pledge cards. Our money has been given freely. Hers was stolen from the public purse.
Couldn't have said it better myself. I think Labour really need their vet to have a good look at their attack dogs. They need some decent teeth.

UPDATE: See, I told you. Here's Bernard Darnton's response now:

Libertarianz Asks Nicely. Labour Steals.

Labour "strategist" Pete Hodgson has been wondering out loud how Libertarianz can afford to take their lawsuit against the Labour Party to the High Court.

Libertarianz leader Bernard Darnton responds, "We have been running a fundraising campaign since the case was launched in June. I'm very pleased with the response and Labour shouldn't be worried that we can't pay our bills. Pete Hodgson is trying to deflect attention from the real question: Where did Labour get the money to pay for their pledge cards? All of our money has come from freely given donations. Labour's pledge card money was pillaged from the public coffers. That's the significant point here – Libertarianz asks nicely, Labour steals."
Read on here.

UPDATE 2: By the way, I've been asked by an officially registered, fully paid-up member of the Vast Right Wing ConspiracyTM to issue an official "no comment" on their behalf to rumours that Owen Glenn, who funded Labour in the last elections, is one of the people contributing to the court case via an anonymous trust ...

LINKS: Nonsense from Pete Hodgson - Scoop
Prime Minister in a spin - Bernard Darnton, Darnton v Clark blog
Donations - Darnton V Clark
Helengrad, 1688 - Not PC (Peter Cresswell)

RELATED: Politics-NZ, Politics-Labour, Darnton V Clark


  1. If someone doesn't get a muzzle on Hodgson sooner rather than later, we run a real risk of the taxpayer getting stiffed with his legal bills as well.

  2. Peter, can you I say that your commentaries surrounding Bernard's case are brilliant. Bloody good work!! :-)

  3. Love it. Well done guys. Keep it they say.

  4. Thanks for your support everyone. And thanks for your comment on my commentaries, Julian. If the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy that we're tapped into can organise it properly -- you know: hotels, caviar, running hot and cold women and the like -- I can always blog live from the court case.

    That could be fun. :-)


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.