Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: 2014: The Meth Election

234 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 10 Newer→ Last

  • richard,

    Don't bogart that election, Russell.

    Not looking for New Engla… • Since Nov 2006 • 268 posts Report Reply

  • WaterDragon,

    Oh yes. So right on

    Behind you • Since Jul 2011 • 76 posts Report Reply

  • SteveH, in reply to Euan Mason,

    If JK can't form a governing coalition after the election then the corporate backers will drop him and find another, less tarnished face to sell their low wage/low tax/low regulation/state asset sale/socialize pollution costs agenda.

    My pick is that Key won't last long whether he wins or not. If National can form a government I predict English will take over around 12 months in.

    Since Sep 2009 • 444 posts Report Reply

  • andin,

    The only happy crew are the gang that used to run things.

    Yep once they’ve rode out the hysteria they’ll knock off the Faceman.
    He’s gettin’ to be a dead bird round their necks anyway…
    OO snap!

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1882 posts Report Reply

  • Rich Lock,

    We were somewhere around Waiouru on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold. I remember saying something like "I feel a bit lightheaded; maybe you should drive..." And suddenly there was a terrible roar all around us and the sky was full of what looked like huge bats, all swooping and screeching and diving around the car, which was going about a hundred miles an hour with the top down to RotoVegas. And a voice was screaming: "Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?"

    back in the mother countr… • Since Feb 2007 • 2728 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow, in reply to Kevin McCready,

    "Psychopaths" Kevin? Having treatment for your highly-inflated hater disposition? How else does this mammoth dose of vitriol racing through your veins manifest itself Kevin?
    On brief reflection, please keep that information to yourself. Got a feeling we don't wanna know Kevin.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow,

    Any other inspired predictions you feel inclined to share SteveH. Racehorses? sports events? etc. Please pass them on so that I can place bets on every other outcome rather than the ones you predict.
    That will at least increase my chances of a collect or two.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • SteveH, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    I predict you won't be here long if you keep up that attitude.

    Since Sep 2009 • 444 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow, in reply to SteveH,

    Oh please Kevin. I ask you! How can you seriously contend that a chap who as leader, brought the National Party their worst election result ever. Paula Bennett will be the next Nats leader. It's locked in.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • SteveH, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    My name's not Kevin. And I'm not interested in discussing it with you. If I wanted a debate about it I can find plenty of Nat supporters who can make a point without being a dick. Thanks all the same.

    Since Sep 2009 • 444 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    anag. 4,7
    A Straw Joker...
    struts & preens
    here to correct us
    slurs & demeans
    bile duct erectus

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7892 posts Report Reply

  • Pete,

    "Oh Mr Roberts, I wish there was a way I could vote for you a hundred times!"
    "Matter of fact, ma'am, there is"

    No-one's polled me and as far as I'm concerned there is one opinion poll and it happens every 4 years

    Since Apr 2008 • 106 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    On brief reflection, please keep that information to yourself. Got a feeling we don’t wanna know Kevin.

    Look, it’s fairly clear you’re a commenter I’ve previously banned, but I’ve been inclined to give you yet another shot.

    You need to get better at arguing, and the basis of that is showing some respect to the other people here. If you can’t, I’ll just ban you for a third time.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22756 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Russell Brown,

    You need to get better at arguing, and the basis of that is showing some respect to the other people here. If you can’t, I’ll just ban you for a third time.

    You know you want to ;-)

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2930 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Look, it’s fairly clear you’re a commenter I’ve previously banned, but I’ve been inclined to give you yet another shot.

    Who's the sock-puppeteer previously gone as? I have a hunch who.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5420 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Kumara Republic,

    Who’s the sock-puppeteer previously gone as? I have a hunch who

    Started on the Chch thread as Jeremy Botham - banned, came back as a "friend" of Botham, Sam Bryant - banned, and is now masquerading as Jake Starrow.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2930 posts Report Reply

  • Isaac Freeman,

    Trying to do "Let's make a story about how the Greens could work with National, people will fall for that" as "Let's nick the neighbour's poppies and make our own opium – how hard can it be?", but it's not gelling.

    The fact is, I don't know enough about drugs.

    Christchurch • Since Feb 2007 • 134 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow, in reply to Russell Brown,

    I appreciate you granting me a stay of execution. But please answer me this.
    Is it really a matter of me arguing better and/or showing more respect. Or is it that I obviously tout opinions not in line with the overwhelming majority of your commenters.
    I ask that as a genuine question. Because when the National Government Is referred to as "psychopaths" and me as a "sock puppeteer" as just two examples of the vitriol that permeates many a comment on your site, is it surprising that I take up the challenge of responding in kind on occasion.
    I'm happy to join debate and put aside the ad hominem stuff if I gleaned a whiff of impression that my admiration for Key was taken as an opinion and not a reason to ridicule.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow,

    Please insert question marks where missing and make that "an impression......"
    Thank-you.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Isaac Freeman,

    Farmer subsidies for growing idealistic produce, in an idealistic way? The ideal deal would need to be horse manure, but smell all roses for the six o’clock news.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4327 posts Report Reply

  • Danielle, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    "Sock puppeteer" isn't an example of "vitriol": it's just a description of what you were doing, which is coming back under another name and pretending you were someone else with the same opinions. That's an example of the problem: you don't seem to be very good at making your points without almost immediately going into the drama-flounce death spiral. "YOU GUYS ARE MEAN AND YOU SUCK!" isn't actually an argument, y'know?

    Charo World. Cuchi-cuchi!… • Since Nov 2006 • 3828 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford,

    I’m happy to join debate and put aside the ad hominem stuff if I gleaned a whiff of impression that my admiration for Key was taken as an opinion and not a reason to ridicule.

    I'm listening, what do you find admirable about John Key?

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4327 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow, in reply to Danielle,

    Nor is calling the National Government “psychopaths” much of an argument Danielle.
    Being selective in you judgement never promotes credibility.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • Jake Starrow, in reply to steven crawford,

    In a hurry to get kids to sport Steven. I'll answer that soonish. Thanks.

    Since Sep 2014 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • Danielle, in reply to Jake Starrow,

    But calling the National government "psychopaths" isn't actually vitriol directed at YOU. (Unless you're Jason Ede, finally out of hiding! That would be awesome.) So it seems a bit excessive to get all huffy about that descriptor, no matter how ill-advised it is. I mean, I could write your rebuttal for you ("I don't think using mental health slurs is an appropriate way to describe the actions of the National government; on the contrary, they have been completely justified in all of their actions and here is why I think so"), but, well, I *don't* think they're justified. I think they're corrupt and awful. So the making of the argument is on YOU, paid-up member of the John Key Fan Club. Have at it!

    Charo World. Cuchi-cuchi!… • Since Nov 2006 • 3828 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 10 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.