Countering the ignorant swill spouted by gibbering fools, dishonest bloggers, media personalities, politicians, religious swine, conspiracy theorists and by all those who try make a buck peddling ignorance.
Rants, observations and opinions on politics, science, religion, the media and current affairs from a moderate contrarian misanthrope.
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
John Banks on Kim Dotcom: I did not have sexual relations with that man
It was a little over a week ago that I speculated on John Banks’ mental health regarding his genuine belief that he could lead ACT to
electability in 2014. If this week’s Kim
Dotcom row is anything to go by, it looks like I was right on the money.
Because we’ve all seen the news, I’ll sum it up
Banks took a few helicopter rides – which he now seems to
have forgotten – to visit Kim Dotcom and help with his application to buy land
through the Overseas Investment Office (OIO); have dinner with Mr and Mrs
Dotcom; and enjoy a fireworks show.
Somewhere along the line Dotcom donated $50,000 toward Banks’ mayoral
bid, which Banks asked be split into $25,000 cheques so as to be claimed as
anonymous donations. Banks then phoned
to thank Dotcom for the donations. Banks
denies any knowledge of asking for the donations to be split, or of the
Which brings us, in a nutshell, to where we are now.
Now, you’ll excuse any omissions in this breakdown because
I’m not trying to focus on this issue – despite it being a serious one. Rather, I’m more concerned with John Banks’
mental wellbeing and his ability to care for himself.
The general reaction of someone at the centre of a breaking
scandal is to avoid media scrum and any situation where there are tough
questions to answer. So it was rather
baffling to see Banks – resplendent in his much-loved velvet jacket – appearing
with Labour MP David Parker to debate the Budget on TVNZ’s ‘Q+A’ programme on
Within five minutes the interviewer predictably turned to
Banks and started questioning him over the Dotcom scandal. Banks appeared surprised, and stated that he
was only there to discuss the Budget.
While David Parker looked positively gleeful, Banks insisted he had
“nothing to hide” – and then refused to answer any questions, opting instead to
either stare at his shoes or look wistfully off into the distance while
muttering about Cabbage Boats.
Whose idea was it to wheel a baffled and confused John Banks
into an interview, with an Opposition MP, on TVNZ’s finest political
programming when he was on the cusp of a scandal involving a fat German facing
extradition to the US?
Surely everyone could see that this was a bad idea from the
outset, so who let Banks out of the house?
His demeanour was one of bewilderment – as though he’d been discovered
wandering outside TVNZ in his bathrobe, flung into make-up, and then hauled in
front of the camera … when all he was looking for was his Sunday morning
If that weren’t bad enough, he then committed himself to an
interview on Radio Live Monday. During
this, he mistook a question about his business relationship with Kim Dotcom for
an insinuation that he was involved in a homoerotic relationship with a fat
German. As such, he flipped his lid and
exclaimed, “But he’s married!”
He has now, at a press gathering in the halls of Parliament,
answered “No” when asked if he knew of the Dotcom donation. But this was not “No” with the roar of
innocence but, rather, with the misty distraction of a cataract patient
pretending to see friends and family where only a fridge and hat-stand are
John Banks’ behaviour has gone from sycophantic and
doddering to downright bizarre, and we can only imagine where it will go next. Are we going to see him marching into
Parliament, half shaven, in his wife’s pink terrycloth robe demanding a cure
for pancakes? Or will the men in white coats toss him into a home for the
bewildered where he can spend his days making things out of papier-mâché and
wearing mittens all year round?
Only one man can make that call. John Key
Key faces a tough choice. Does he keep this Banks around in
all his insane glory or does he stand him down from his ministerial post and
feed him to the public? When Winston Peters was caught in a similar embroilment
over his forgetfulness regarding
a donation from Owen Glenn, Key lead a very vocal charge to have Helen Clarke
step him down stating unequivocally, "Helen Clark must stand Mr Peters down as a minister. That is what I would do if I were prime minister."
Now that Banks is charged with a similar ‘crime’ Key needs to
remain consistent.If he doesn’t his
credibility takes a hit and his carefully prepared 2008 claim that he would run
his government by “the
highestethicalstandards” look hypocritical and disingenuous. It’s a
tough time to be Prime Minister, particularly when your one seat majority is
held by a bumbling Mr Magoo impersonator.