The responses from online apologists this morning are revealing. Faced with the choice of reading and digesting the evidence -- that is, the transcript of Key's interview with Audrey Young about which he chose to lie (and which she posted online yesterday) -- or of evading the evidence, shooting the messenger and maintaining their illusions about their hero, most either plumped for the latter (Whale Oil, No Minister), or like John Boy Armstrong and DPF they've tried to cover up the lie by calling it something less damaging -- "confusion" in DPF's case, "a muddle" in Armstrong's, which pretty much describes his own dissembling on his hero's behalf.
For once you have to agree with Helen Clark: "I think this guy [Mr Key] has got a problem with the truth: BP [David Benson-Pope] swung for less." And it's true, isn't it, as those howling loudly last week about DBP's lies are all too aware.
It's clear enough now that for Key supporters their problem with the Clark Government is not that they lie, but that they're Labour. Draw your own conclusions about the value of honesty for these supporters, and for any future Key-led Government.
(For those who haven't kept up, Audrey Young's sanitised account this morning of Key's dissembling is online here. Her "bloody angry" blog post is here.)
3 comments:
Sorry, PC, Clark is full of shit - and I'm remarkably uninpressed by every player in this whole farce. I know you're no supporter of the actual Bill behind this, but you're at least capable of saying so. I think Clark and Key are more interested in who can fuck the other hardest, and that's just not good enough as far as I'm concerned.
Galloping gazelles, this makes two posts you've written that I agree with. Sure there's all that other stuff, but your take on this is refreshingly honest.
I'm with Craig. But it's not just this particular issue.
Clark, Key, Peters, King, Chadwick et al ... what a national embarrassment they all are. Just when I think they can't disgust me further, they do.
Post a Comment