Um... where exactly did I use any slang to describe anything about Act?
You know there was a reason Grant & Naylor named their insufferably sycophantic, delusionally aspirational character “Rimmer”?
Can you give a rough estimate of what proportion of the OIAs made to your school board were vexatious?
It should be very easy for Labour & Greens to find common ground in criticising National’s abuses of process (e.g. urgency), erosion of human rights (e.g. prisoner votes, passport revocation), and policies promoting unsustainable asset-stripping of NZ’s state assets (e.g. energy companies, state housing stock), environment (e.g. water quality), and international reputation (on human rights, fair trade, environment, etc).
I’ll even give them a combined slogan they can both use:
(Labour/Greens) OURS vs. (National/Key*) MINE!
e.g. just for starters – though I can think of at least six ways this could be expanded into other topic areas –
OURS ———————- ; ———————- MINE!
[image of native forest] vs. [open-cast pit]
* If National are going to market themselves on (and hide their policies behind) the image of Key, then the best strategy for a unified opposition is to take that as a weak point to be attacked. Hence the very deliberate plural vs. singular of this framing.
forms of manadrin
knock-off drugs, compared to the “original brand” Cantonese writing system. (The spoken language varieties are much less similar.)
The issue may not be so much with the increased use of Mandarin, as with the devalued status of Cantonese as a result (i.e., no longer an unchallenged standard language). There are some racist undertones to this – you wouldn’t have to look too far (on other sites) to find similarly reactionary attitudes to official use and support of te reo in NZ, though a closer (if less extreme) parallel as far as the writing systems go might be if NZ were to adopt American spellings as standard – but there’s also a (valid) fear of change, instability, and (especially) of losing control.
And who’s his “good and decent man” – the person lying to us all about needing new laws to stop terrorism being legal in NZ?
A position so transparently untenable he’s since had to back down to: needing new laws to make terrorism more easily prosecutable.
Because a speedier justice system, with more bias towards the prosecution, is always more just. Yeh, right.
Rizzo follows Septis,
Merkin joins a group,
just reminded me of the cadence of this little allegory:
The hilarious thing is that Roughan seems to think Te Harrumph! is an “independent news service” (as against his alternative of a press release regurgitator). One or both of those descriptions would seem inaccurate.
One swallow doesn’t make a commitment, as they say.
(Specifically, Tim Brooke-Taylor, on I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue.)
the others are probably evidence collection specialists or similar. Searches are what they do
nah, that's spies .