blogging it real

God, so many potentially funny titles to go with. "Gone by lunchtime?" is tempting. So the wingers' spin on this is that Labour departed from all conventions by all-but-bringing-the-issue-to-public-attention through interjections in the House. That Labour stepped into the gutter - way, way down into the gutter in fact - to distract attention from the pledge card issue.

Take it with a large grain of salt.

1/ If Labour had wanted to publicize this story, it could have done so before the last election - like, when it was seriously in danger of losing. By August 05 I knew about Brash's affair, Bennyasena knew about Brash's affair, Yamis knew about Brash's affair, our respective parents knew about Brash's affair ... so it's fair to say that every Labour MP and candidate knew about it too. And yet they said nothing, even when at serious risk of losing the Treasury benches.

2/ The media didn't bite on Mallard's interjections last week. It was Brian Connell - the cat abuser from Rakaia - who brought the issue to public attention. Quite why is anyone's guess - the guy makes Phillip Field look like an asset to his party.

3/ If you don't want an affair to come to light, don't have one. Simple as that.

4/ Maybe, just maybe, after all the years (24 or so by my count!) of some right-wingers, including some National MPs, taunting Helen Clark about her marriage, and her sexuality, and after so many members of National trying to paint themselves as the saviours of marriage during the Civil Unions Bill debate, there's the issue of hypocrisy here. As there was when Bill Clinton got his blowjob after years of harping on about family values, and criticizing lone mothers. My own view is that if you're going to run on "family values" (which I don't think you should - it's 99.7% bullshit) you'd better make sure your own side is squeeky fucking clean. And of course it never is. I'd wager most people have done plenty of stupid, regrettable things in their lives, and politicians are no better or worse.

I include Clinton in point 4 above to emphasize it's not a left/right issue. Peter Dunne and Don Brash are the two New Zealand party leaders I can think of who have, from time to time, tried to make their marriages political assets, or at least politically relevant. A risky path unless you have absolutely nothing to hide, I would have thought.

Meant to say: I do think it is irrelevant who the other party in the alleged affair is. Whether she's Gladys the tealady from Te Awamutu or the CEO of a major international corporation makes no difference from my perspective (contrary to Trotter last night on TV3). It would only be publicly relevant if there was some corruption involved (e.g., if Gladys was given her job as tealady because Don had called her boss, and threatened to make his life impossible under any future National-led government if he didn't).