Posts by linger
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: The United States of Surveillance?, in reply to BenWilson,
Or they could have their contest on a hill, overseen by Konnie Huq.
( Screenwipe S05E04, from around 25:00. NB: Some nudity, so the YouTube of the exact section is age-restricted.) -
Hard News: Not good enough, Eden Park, in reply to Matthew Poole,
John “gay red shirt” Key
He’s no longer called a “big swinging dick” then?
who might carry sufficient weight to make a public slapping stick.
Ah. My mistake.
More seriously: WTF, Eden Park? Just who are they trying to attract to games? Or is it only about not losing what they fondly imagine as being their traditional supporter?
-
Up Front: It's Complicated, in reply to BenWilson,
It’s pretty scary that intentional self-harm kills more people than motor vehicle accidents.
Not so much. At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious:
It’s impossible to get either figure down to zero.
But it’s a lot easier to limit the latter by making and enforcing legislation.
It’s a lot harder to limit the former, which would involve such acts as changing the social environment, & actually funding a decent support system.
So you're comparing a mostly uncontrolled cause of death with a mostly controlled cause of death here. -
Speaker: Generation Zero: Let's Grow Up, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
or just maybe that for some Aucklanders, getting a home with parking space means you don’t have money left over for a car?
(Full disclosure: I have family members who fit the “5 non-mobile car” description, though none also with mobile homes.)
-
OnPoint: What Andrew Geddis Said, But…, in reply to andin,
... or a casino? or an events centre? or a stadium?
helluva priority set they have ... -
OnPoint: What Andrew Geddis Said, But…, in reply to Kumara Republic,
though the legislation itself is described in the Herald article (para 2) merely as
Legislation which allowed people who cared for disabled family members to get paid by Government
which gives prominence to [the Government’s] spin regarding what the bill accomplishes (and what its opponents oppose),
and which, regardless of intent, is likely to misdirect public attention
(bearing in mind the solid research showing that contradictory details buried past the third paragraph of a story either don’t get read or aren’t retained by readers). -
Legal Beagle: On Consensus, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
My error. I thought Labour had reached out further than just to the Greens, both in the use of urgency, and for the content of the bill.
-
Where was the consensus when Labour passed a law electing Harry Duynhoven to Parliament?
Actually, that was one case where opposition support was sought and obtained.
-
never eat cake, or Lego bricks, again
Ah – hence the phrase “shit a brick"…
-
Hard News: Media3: Parliament Live, in reply to The Ruminator,
So how has it affected the conduct of the House and the behaviour of MPs?
Now they expect us to know who they are?