NZ’s Most Despicable Politician 2010 Award

Well, even with such a large field to select from, its still pretty easy. First of all, it had to be based on an event from 2010. That eliminates many. Jim Anderton, Peter Dunne, well, they’re just generally despicable, but haven’t done anything this year to make themselves any more so.

The Maori Party are all despicable in the same way. I can’t give any of them an award because we don’t expect anything from them. Self serving racists, separatists, bludgers, and the like, its what they are, so we don’t ever expect any level of behaviour above that of despicable.

Same with the Watermelons. Today’s version of the Third Reich, they demand subservience to their cause with the same zealotry that established the Nazi party, and just as the Nazi party did, they infiltrate our schools and use them as a means to disseminate their disgusting political propaganda to unsuspecting and gullible and easily manipulated youth. For this contemptible political cowardice, they are another group who are naturally long term despicable, and therefore cannot qualify for any annual award.

Nobody in Labour qualifies. Sure they’re despicable, but only to the extent that all politicians are despicable. They haven’t done anything actually, to earn any kind of award. Same with ACT. If there was an award for the most piteous collection of losers, I guess they might qualify, but there isn’t, so they miss out. I’m told that Rod Hide got them all together over Christmas and informed them their objective for 2011 was to achieve a public approval rating at least one half of NZ First’s. Good luck with that guys. Hope you make it.

Nope, it has to be someone from National. A bunch of contemptible losers who have en masse casually betrayed every principle they claim their party stands for. So from that bunch, we have to narrow it down and that’s where it gets a little tricky. There are more then two or three in National who could make the cut. In the end though, it boils down to two. John Key or Nick Smith. Key is included because he is leader, and anyone who is leader of any such group of shambling incompetent incoherent cowardly charlatans naturally should be held up as most responsible for that condition. Key also makes the cut for being what he is himself. That being a politically useless poseur without a clue as to how to fix NZ’s appallingly bad and rapidly worsening socialist condition. Promising hope but bringing a vacuum of continuing despair beneath a smiling facade of competence that is a serious betrayal in itself.

Nick Smith calls himself a Blue Green, vacuously unaware of what a contradiction in terms it is to be a Conservative Progressive. He has long been a stain on the right in NZ, and should have been drummed out of the party so many years ago. That this despicable little scammer holds the powerful position he does today is a measure of how low the Nats have fallen. Smith gets the award for being stand out despicable among a collection of the utterly despicable, and he earns it by way of his forcing the ETS upon the country.

The other day I heard Smith on NewstalkZB arguing for the ETS. Chameleon like, he has turned against everything he ever said opposing the ETS when Labour was in power. Who could possible make such wild changes in their position without being absolutely bereft of principle? This post is too long already. I am going to supplement it in the future with a collection of statements from Nick Smith that show him to be an utterly unrepentant two faced hypocrite. Such staggering displays of duplicity, it is amazing that the rest of his party tolerates it. This tolerance I guess is partly the result of John Key’s leadership, for his own position on the ETS is hardly much better than Nick Smith’s.

Here’s just one small example of Smith’s rank disgusting hypocrisy. Today he is flat out making unsubstantiated claims about how many ET schemes are in existence. In fact they’re only being applied in the European Union, and Australian and the US still don’t have one. Smith claims 75% of the developed world has them. Of course this is a play on the word “developed”, a ploy typical of the duplicitous Smith, but even if one accepts that word, there are about 45-50 countries accepted as meeting the vague definition of developed (Wikipedia). The 27 or so compelled to comply with the European Union edict hardly comes close to the 75% Smith claims.

Still even while the Europeans are the only ones with such a scheme, Smith heralds that today as why we should have one even when the US and Australia do not. Here’s what he said in opposition back in 2006, arguing against Labour’s proposed ETS-

“The New Zealand economy has far more in common with the economies of Australia and the United States than it has with the heavily subsidised agricultural economies of Europe. ”

More on this astonishing charlatan’s complete turnaround from his former position later. Today, with that simple statement alone, I think I have shown that Smith has done more than enough to win the award of the Most Despicable Politician for 2010, so I rest my case for this year. If that’s not enough for you right now, then you can always, until my fuller post, contemplate this later utterance-

” New Zealand’s emissions amount to less than 0.5 percent internationally, and per head of population our emissions are about half that of Australia’s and the United States’ emissions. So why are we going to impose costs, and impose controls, and impose red tape on New Zealanders when countries like China, India, Singapore, Australia, the United States, and Canada do not have restrictions on them? ”

23 thoughts on “NZ’s Most Despicable Politician 2010 Award

  1. These self-serving scum bags never believe in anything. Sadly, the National party is full of people like Nick Smith. Their only interest is power. To tell us how to live and how to think.

    Here’s another example of Smith’s hypocrisy:

    In 2004 Nick Smith lodged a petition to Parliament “requesting that the House retain Crown title on the beaches, seabed and foreshore” – haven’t heard anything of him since National took power.


  2. “I can’t think of a more deserving recipient.”

    I can think of one equally deserving – Chris Finlayson.


  3. “I can think of one equally deserving – Chris Finlayson.”

    Maybe Chuck, but has he been guilty of the same level of utterly brazen hypocrisy as Smith?

    Here is another example. Smith expresses concern with running a deficit and having an ETS- back in 2006. Today, with an even more threatening deficit, where is that concern?

    “[when] there are no prospects of any of Government’s policy getting New Zealand out of a substantial deficit position, is the Minister telling the people of New Zealand that they will need to send a $1 billion cheque to either the Russian or the Ukraine Government to meet the commitment that it has made under the Kyoto Protocol? “


  4. Yeah, I’ll second the motion. Chameleons like Smith are the very worst kind of scum! And Shonkey would have to be a close second, with Finlayson right on his coattails.

    Labour-lite? – these guys are every bit as bad as Labour. At least Labour were up front about their objectives.


  5. Totally agree with your award and your analysis.

    What a bunch of self-serving, stealing, lying, cowardly assholes (and that’s just labour!).

    The problem I have with my National friends and families when I point out the betrayals is that they nearly all think I have lost the plot. All think the sun shines out of Mr Smile and Wave’s ass. When he sits down it’s nighttime in Kiwiland. Anyone else have similar experiences?

    I haven’t lost the plot. Look what Washington was prepared to do for his country! I know we are being sold down the Swannee River by those cunts. Coincidentally I have the best university education of all of them (most don’t have a degree) being a ‘Master of Commerce in Accounting’ from Auckland University 1984. I’ve worked in audit in both NZ and Australia as well as for the Auditors General of both countries – so I understand the inner workings of government pretty bloody well and it’s not a pretty site.

    Happy new year Rodbeater. And thanks for a great blog.

    God bless,

    Mr Scumsucker


  6. I quite agree Ratbaiter, but how, oh how, do you deal with the inevitable ‘but at least they aren’t as bad as labour/greens’ retort?


  7. By voting on that basis, they are giving Labour/ Watermelons encouragement to get even worse. (as they do)

    We need to develop a counter narrative to the current leftist controlled narrative, and that will never happen whilst people vote National on the basis that they are the lesser of two evils. Just gives all parties National especially, licence for more evil.

    However I get your point regarding the political naivety of your average NZ citizen. That’s why perhaps economic and social collapse is the only way out.


  8. No, Key deserves it more, because he has betrayed the country big time, and as the leader and boss of National, could have pulled Nick Smith into line. Shonkey is completley unprincipled, and it’s only the end of his first term. He is scary, behind that smile, I sense a wolf. Greedy, self-satisfying, power-mad, has to be seen to be in the limelight, 24/7. What does this tell us? What a sellout.


  9. Lion Lady you are the most astute blog commenter of 2010.

    I might call that prick ‘the wolf’ rather than ‘Mr Smile and Wave’.


  10. I think there are 4 finalists: Smith (for the reasons Red has so clearly and eloquently stated), Key (as Red said, for being the leader of such a brazenly corrupt pack), Finlayson (the massive conflict of interest and level of corruption over the Foreshore & Seabed are mind-boggling) and FIGJAM Power (a failed Manawatu conveyancer and big-government control freak who has managed to rise above the level of his incompetence). Smith is the clear winner (or loser?), even in this company.


  11. Yes, well said GG. I agree completely with your hypothesis. I could have made more of choosing between the various candidates in National, but in blogging, one has to be brief if one can.

    The reason I chose Smith was because of his blatant turnaround. Whilst Finlayson and Power are as equally odious for what they have done or are planning to do, they have yet to reach the same giddy heights of hypocrisy that Smith has.


  12. in blogging, one has to be brief if one can.

    something which I still need to learn *grin*.

    Of course you chose the correct scumbag. Of a bad bunch, Smith is undoubtedly the worst. The sooner he is expelled from the National Party, the less bad it will be (less bad, not “good”).


  13. The other thing about Smith and Key is that they have completely failed to defend the corner they chose while they were in opposition. As soon as they were in government, they did a complete turnabout. Caved in completely. No fight at all.

    A few days ago, I watched a video of Smith answering questions from that smug arrogant communist bastard Russell Norman, and Smith was sickening in his spineless deference to the premises of Norman’s questions.


  14. I’ve been shocked how many of these watermelons are in power in Aussie, writing editorials, etc…

    Greetings from Perth, keep up the great work…


  15. Hi Jeremy. Yes, Bob Brown, probably the most dangerous politician in Australia, has a large collection of slavish half educated well indoctrinated followers.


  16. Great site Red and an awesome post too. So good to have a site that speaks the truth and doesn’t suffer left-wing fools.


Comments are closed.