Up Front by Emma Hart

Read Post

Up Front: The Up-Front Guides: The Weasel Translator

481 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 20 Newer→ Last

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    It's not certain whether he'll still be an MP at the time of the vote(s)?

    There's a word for what I'm feeling right now. It's German.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4378 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Gee,

    I am aware that some people feel that marriage is between a man and a woman and I try to respect their feelings as well.

    Now, no disrespect to Ms. Wagner but that's a bit of Weasel-speak that gets on the nub of my last nerve. What the hell does that mean? "I'll smile and nod through that awful load of dingo-arse, then make a dent in the bottle of gin in my desk as soon as they leave" or "collapse into a puddle of goop like candy floss in a monsoon"?

    Somedays, I just want to slap MPs with a rolled up copy of Burke's famous speech to the electors of Bristol.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • Tim Michie,

    Banks, John ACT Party, Epsom UNDECIDED

    Trans. NO but I want to milk my supposedly mellowed image as much as possible and no one particularly notices when I revert to type.

    Edit: /snappy comments

    Auckward • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Emma Hart,

    There’s a word for what I’m feeling right now. It’s German.

    Currywurst? (It's vile but omnipresent in Berlin. Take from that what you will.)

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    What the hell does that mean?

    "And one of those people is me. And I like to respect my opinion. I mean, who else is going to?"

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4378 posts Report Reply

  • Gee, in reply to Emma Hart,

    I got a definite feeling (from the tumbleweed in 12 months of non-response) that this was the case -- by asking her to clarify, I'm not respecting the opinion of people who this does not in any way affect.

    Canada, eh • Since May 2011 • 75 posts Report Reply

  • Damian Christie, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    You made the same insinuation about Lockwood, Graeme. Is this because a) Lockwood will resign and b) Banks will get kicked out or c) You don't envisage the legislation will get to final reading until the next term of Parliament after which both a) and b) will be true anyway.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1130 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    First, a great post by Emma. My "shouting at TV" reaction, put into much better words. Thanks.

    Second, isn't it a sad reflection on MPs - on our system, or political culture? - that it takes a random ballot for something to (probably) become law, because most MPs (probably) will support it. So it could have been law before, only we didn't want to talk about it? Oh dear, now we have to. It seems that the toughest obstacle isn't finding a Parliamentary majority, it was a roulette wheel.

    That's not just a dig at National, incidentally. I haven't forgotten Shearer's uninspiring reaction when Obama "came out". Glad he's found a spine (or read a poll) since then.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 815 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Damian Christie,

    You made the same insinuation about Lockwood, Graeme. Is this because a) Lockwood will resign and b) Banks will get kicked out or c) You don’t envisage the legislation will get to final reading until the next term of Parliament after which both a) and b) will be true anyway.

    (a) Lockwood because "everyone knows" that he's going to be appointed High Commissioner to London sometime later this year, and will accordingly resign from Parliament, so while he may be around for the first reading, the chance of his become around for the second has to be low.
    (b) Not "kicked out" so much, but Banks may find the pressure a bit much and resign. Although this one was more of a joke, because I don't see him leaving before the end of the term, even if he ceases to be a minister, but welcome other views, as I don't totally rule it out - National would win the by-election, so overall numbers wouldn't change for more than a few weeks.
    (c) I suspect if there is a third reading, it will be during this parliament, unless the numbers don't hold post select committee so Wall decided to delay it until next term in hopes for a change.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3012 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Emma Hart,

    Well, he's a douche-free fix. (Ms. Wagner will be getting an invoice presently.)

    "Of course, this is a highly controversial issue, and I welcome a full range of views from my constituents"

    Because, you know... that's what representatives in a mature Parliamentary democracy are supposed to do -- listen to people they don't necessarily agree with or even don't particularly want in the room without a taser to hand. Or something.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to simon g,

    That’s not just a dig at National, incidentally. I haven’t forgotten Shearer’s uninspiring reaction when Obama “came out”. Glad he’s found a spine (or read a poll) since then.

    Here’s hoping, though I think it’s exceedingly unlikely he’d vote against a private member’s bill in the name of one of his own caucus. (Though watching the internet – and the Labour Party – goes up in flames if he did would be entertaining in a sick and awful way.)

    And much as I adore and respect Obama, watching his (atypically) ungainly "evolution” back to his position while running for the Illinois state senate in 1996 was… unedifying. Hell, it was like watching a weasel after it got into Walter White's stash.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • simon g, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    So basically, Biden opened his mouth, and pushed Obama, who pushed Key, then Shearer, then more and more MPs, and now nobody can stop the madness. It's The Gay Domino Theory.

    Joe Biden: officially worth more than "a pitcher of warm piss".

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 815 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Emma Hart,

    "We're going to be discussing that in caucus next week, and I'll talk to you afterwards" is a reasonable -- if infuriatingly commonplace -- response

    I will respectfully disagree that this is any kind of actual answer to the question "What's your view..."

    Pita Sharples was able to say what his view was AND indicate that it might differ from the The Party view. See that wasn't hard was it.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3472 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    The best I'm hoping for from Nicky Wagner, to be honest, is that she notices two things:
    1/ This is an issues people are 2 to 1 in favour of
    2/ She holds her electorate by the razorest-thin of majorities.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4378 posts Report Reply

  • Stewart,

    Can I just get clarification on something? This is a conscience vote, is it? Or is there a party whip & all the weaselly ones will be bound by a collective caucus position on it?

    If it is a conscience vote I just can't understand why these people don't know how they feel about it.

    FFS, if 2 people love one another enough to want to get married, they should be allowed to, regardless of gender. There's plenty of heterosexual couples that "bring marriage into disrepute" so we can't expect te gayz to fuck it up more!

    Te Ika A Maui - Waitakere… • Since Oct 2008 • 572 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Stewart,

    Can I just get clarification on something? This is a conscience vote, is it? Or is there a party whip & all the weaselly ones will be bound by a collective caucus position on it?

    It's a conscience vote. So far as I know, the Greens are the only party holding their MPs to a party position on it.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4378 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    I’m finding Phil Twyford a bit of a puzzle.

    His official line is that he wants to consult with his electorate before taking a public position – although on a conscience vote you’d think the more logical thing would be to explain to voters where one’s conscience leads one. He’s taking a pasting for it it on Twitter and Facebook and, I presume, his official email account.

    As Tau Henare (who will vote for the bill) pointed out to him on Twitter last night: this is an electorate that repeatedly elected Chris Carter. Do you need to know anything else?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 19116 posts Report Reply

  • Stewart,

    So some of these fools don't even know what their own position on gay marriage is?

    OK, I'm not that naive and I appreciate that most of them want to see which way the wind is blowing before cautiously indicating which way they might vote (the old 'hate to be seen to have backed the losing side' angst which a lot of voters seem to adopt every 3 years).
    And to think these morons have their lips sucking on the public teat... Is it any wonder that cynicism abounds?

    Te Ika A Maui - Waitakere… • Since Oct 2008 • 572 posts Report Reply

  • kowhai montgomery, in reply to Phil Lyth,

    I am tearing up just reading that. When this goes through I am going to bawl.

    wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 485 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    Somebody tell me if this is too simple:

    1) You're an MP, in a party vote system. So you don't get to make many individual voting decisions.

    2) There is a ballot for private members' bills. Most are uncontroversial, or dull ... they are not likely to attract media questions.

    3) You know which ones might attract such questions. It's obvious. You know when the ballot is held. So you understand when and why you might be asked about the result of the ballot.

    4) Therefore ... you might have some idea of your answer? Like, beforehand?

    Never mind their "principles", it's the basic intelligence of our MPs that astounds.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 815 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie, in reply to Phil Lyth,

    I am filled with hope, as yet unrequited, that Act On Campus will bring their MP to his senses.

    In their own strange fashion, whatever that may be.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 3628 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    The notion of conscience might be foreign to some of our MPs, judging by their relaxed response to current revelations about the relaxed ethics of Mr Banks and his boss.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16996 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    I've certainly been proud of the Young Nats recently

    That is interesting isn't it. There's been enough internal pressure that they've stirred up and political cover from the wider public to make it look like it might pass. Perfect year to have your members bill plucked out of the ballot, does anyone know if both possible bills were put in with the knowledge of what young nats were working on?

    Like many here I'm damn stoked that 1. this has been pulled out of the ballot, and 2. prospects look good. I remember a blog post that Emma wrote not horrendously long ago along the lines of "time for this now dammit!" No doubt the debate will get more unpleasant, but tonight I'll consume a beer or two for making society a little bit better.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6227 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Russell Brown,

    He’s taking a pasting for it it on Twitter and Facebook

    Yup - and I decided to forgo the pleasure because, yet again, "what the fucking fuck you stupid fuck" is as uncivil as it is repetitive.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • Ben McNicoll,

    I think given most of the probable “NO, but I’m not going to say it out loud” pollies are at least feeling embarrassed enough by their positions to dissemble and equivocate, we may have won the argument, but perhaps not until a few more of this lot have trotte(re)d off into retirement.

    ETA: by which I mean, I suspect it will get through the first reading, but that a few crucial votes might find some semantic reason why they can't vote for it in it's current form once it comes back from committee.

    I hope to be proved wrong.

    Grey Lynn • Since May 2007 • 110 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 20 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.