Hard News: The son that got away
144 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Oh, the Kiwiblog comments are way more angry than that (they're too fucking looney to be depressing).
What is depressing is that it's another example of a sensible original post degenerating into a free-range troll farm at Warp 9.
...hence my parting paragraph. I'm not trying to excuse Lhaws' actions by any stretch. Just I found the letter really interesting.
Sorry, didn't mean to give the impression that I thought you were being an enabler and the letter is interesting. I just mean to say that it was kind of a distraction from the central point that Laws scored an epic fail in Level 1 Acting Like An Adult. The really sad thing is that, as I said up-thread, this is an extremely mild example of how he reacts to disagreement.
-
As for his enablers down in the Kiwibog: they really do deserve a good hard dose of parental correction right up the shitter
And the award for PAS pithy insult of the year goes to......
-
I just mean to say that it was kind of a distraction from the central point that Laws scored an epic fail in Level 1 Acting Like An Adult.
Yeah, I understand. Actually, I figure there are enough people on Lhaws' case, and I'd like to extend some credit to Ngarui and her classmates. They've got me inspired to chase up on those maori lessons again.
-
Yeah, I understand. Actually, I figure there are enough people on Lhaws' case, and I'd like to extend some credit to Ngarui and her classmates. They've got me inspired to chase up on those maori lessons again.
You should check out the Te Karere report from last night. To say the kids emerge with more dignity than Laws is to virtually define the concept of "understatement".
-
I just mean to say that it was kind of a distraction from the central point that Laws scored an epic fail in Level 1 Acting Like An Adult.
It does make you wonder how many times he'll fail the course before he gets excluded. Good honest citizens are paying money for him to be mooching around year after year failing that 100-level paper.
-
You should check out the Te Karere report from last night.
That's a great clip, thanks! Complete with fighting words from Hekia Parata! "He needs to grow up".
-
Most popular story on the Herald today: 'Lynfield girls' brawl on YouTube' -- and yes, it has a link to to the violent video clip.
I didn't watch it and I'm not linking to it.
Will it be days or hours before a Herald editorial is published bitching about about people recording and watching such videos?
-
At this point I’m really struggling to understand the socio political landscape of Whanganui –
i) A gang problem so great that specific gang patch byelaws are required (dubious merit notwithstanding).
ii) A community that votes for Lhaws.
iii) Intelligent local debate run by 10 year olds ?Perhaps they would enjoy a bit of Andrew Williams ?
-
That's a great clip, thanks! Complete with fighting words from Hekia Parata! "He needs to grow up".
Is it just a spasm of latent heterosexuality, or does Scotty Morrison (a pretty tasty piece of eye-candy himself) totally flirt with her every time she's on?
Will it be days or hours before a Herald editorial is published bitching about about people recording and watching such videos?
I expect they're updating a well-used and particularly irony-free piece of hand-wringing about the moral degradation of teh interwebz as we speak...
-
Perhaps they would enjoy a bit of Andrew Williams ?
Wanganui isn't that bad.
-
LOL.
-
I'm gobsmacked at Lhaws' response, natch. The only motivation I can think of outside "overt racism" is grandstanding.
I doubt he'd view those as mutually exclusive motivations. And my one word to add is "eyeliner".
-
I doubt he'd view those as mutually exclusive motivations. And my one word to add is "eyeliner".
I'll see you that "eyeliner" and raise you a... aww, good call. I fold.
-
Back to the original story, congratulations on a great headline Russell.
-
Interestingly enough, whilst I was at the Three Kings mall, John Boscawen stopped me. He's having a meeting on Monday night because he's trying to get the Govt to listen to the referendum results. We had an interesting discussion - all very reasonable, really. He's putting through a private members bill to clarify what "smack" means. I agreed that if clarified it may be more useful, I agreed that there was no point having a law that, in the majority of cases, wasn't going to be enforced strictly (ie parent gives child light smack = breaking the law, even if no-one ever does anything about it). I agreed it may be a constitutional issue. And then I read the little thing he gave me. He mentioned, when speaking to me, that Larry Baldock was going to be speaking. That is not written on the flyer. And the guy from Family First is going to be speaking. And I was lost to John forever. And I went on my way.
-
Phuck the NZ Geographic Board. These parasites should get real jobs and leave NZ history alone.
Comedy gold.
That's even funnier than Cactus Kate's "Incidentally Keith, I have not finished with you yet" comment.
Both are classic, though.
-
I agreed that there was no point having a law that, in the majority of cases, wasn't going to be enforced strictly (ie parent gives child light smack = breaking the law, even if no-one ever does anything about it).
But consider the range and number of laws which are irregularly enforced, and yet no-one considers repealing. I can go give my boyfriend a light smack on the arm right now and I can guarantee you there will be no consequences, aside perhaps from the one where he smacks me back and demands to know what the hell I think I'm doing. And it'd still be assault, and still illegal. Do we need to change the law to deal with that non-enforcement? Or what about jaywalking? Illegal downloading - that's barely ever enforced against, shall we legalise it? The half-dozen general-purpose offences the police use at their discretion, like disturbing the peace?
-
I didn't get the impression he wanted to change it, Lucy, just to amend the wording. He may have been lying, because, you know, he's a politician. See, this is why I didn't vote in the bloody referendum. It's all tricky and grey, and tres difficile.
-
The half-dozen general-purpose offences the police use at their discretion, like disturbing the peace?
And there's certainly a serious argument to have about whether the application of Police and judicial discretion is, shall we say politely, somewhat uneven. But I don't really think Larry and Co. want to have that conversation, do you?
And, Russell, I finally watched this week's Media7 -- thank you for calling out the NO campaign on the media martyrdom of folks like Jimmy Mason. Can't say the slippery attempt at evasion and deflection from Baldock was surprising, but at least you made the point and didn't let him totally weasel out of it.
-
Illegal downloading - that's barely ever enforced against, shall we legalise it?
Well! Now you mention it...
More seriously, I think the idea that the law doesn't involve judgement calls by the police, by the courts, etc is rather naive. There are lots and lots of laws that aren't totally enforced, and yet nobody nuts off about them.
The thing is that Larry Baldock & so forth must hate the idea that they are breaking the law, because it goes against all the rule-following bones in their bodies. It isn't just that they dislike the idea that smacking should be illegal; it is also that they hate the idea that they should be criminals, because criminals are the Other, and how could they be the Other?
-
I didn't get the impression he wanted to change it, Lucy, just to amend the wording. He may have been lying, because, you know, he's a politician. See, this is why I didn't vote in the bloody referendum. It's all tricky and grey, and tres difficile.
Speaking of lying, here's this hoary old chestnut...
-
Do we need to change the law to deal with that non-enforcement? Or what about jaywalking?
And the example brought up before, argy bargy during most contact sports. Every little push and shove not covered by the rules of the game is technically an assult.
The thing is that Larry Baldock & so forth must hate the idea that they are breaking the law, because it goes against all the rule-following bones in their bodies. It isn't just that they dislike the idea that smacking should be illegal; it is also that they hate the idea that they should be criminals, because criminals are the Other, and how could they be the Other?
Good point, but I also think for some it just comes down to the perception that "nanny state" is being a busy body and telling people how to raise their children. I wonder what proportion of people who voted 'no' in the referendum would also support the baning of gang patches. Different issues I know, but both involve state interference in peoples lives.
-
The thing is that Larry Baldock & so forth must hate the idea that they are breaking the law, because it goes against all the rule-following bones in their bodies. It isn't just that they dislike the idea that smacking should be illegal; it is also that they hate the idea that they should be criminals, because criminals are the Other, and how could they be the Other?
I think you've got it there.
I didn't get the impression he wanted to change it, Lucy, just to amend the wording.
Yeah, but then you get into the whole "what is a light smack?" thing. And if you want messy....
-
Yeah, but then you get into the whole "what is a light smack?" thing. And if you want messy....
And also how "amending the wording" isn't changing it :)
-
Was I naive? I don't know. I'm normally healthily cynical, y'know. If they are going to have the law, I do think it needs clarifying.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.