Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Not quite ready to get up-and-organising yet, but David made two comments:
- Nothing too visually busy or jarring. There's enough noise as it is.
- Don't just think about the walls. People in rehab spend a lot of time on their backs too.
Personally, I think there's real scope for involving local Flickr communities -- postcards from outside those four walls would surely be great. Does anyone have an in on photographical enlargements?
Sofie, I have a more ambitious idea, but I'll email you about it in a day or two
-
Russell: Please pretend that imputations of bad faith (and callous indifference towards children/the elderly/Maori/women/puppies etc.) aren't a standard -- and distasteful -- trope in political rhetoric.
I was meaning to make a joke, but, seriously, what Key trotted out three times yesterday was much more egregious than the usual Parliamentary trash-talking.
It was really vile. Could you not just acknowledge that?
-
Well, Matthew, you've got a fair point as far as it goes. But if the Speaker got in the habit of naming anyone who engaged in rhetorical Helen Lovejoy-ism, I suspect the House would be permanently inquorate.
Oh, god, please don't draw me into an everyone-is-equally-culpable argument now that I've actually stopped pissing blood ...
-
Well okay, but as long as there's porn and pictures of grammatically-adorable cats, I'm not sure he's going to believe you.
There is also cat porn. I checked.
-
Family First has a list of about 30 cases that they claim show the law isn't working well. Some may fall within your parameters.
I note that on the figures they provide there has been one prosecution for "smacking", which I assume to be the Masterton case I've noted before. None for the much-discussed "light smacking" though. There is zero chance of a law change to permit the other behaviours described.
I do suspect that given this organisation's track record of enabling and misrepresentation, many or even all the cases they list will turn out to be other than they've described them. Call the "ear flick" rule ...
But one constant theme in this material appears to be that children are to blame for what happens to them.
-
Which is ancestry, not ethnicity. And if that's the data Stats want then that's what they should ask.
I still can't perceive the offence. The census is an exercise in gathering data to guide policy, not a statement of feelings. Race and ethnicity have important implications in, to take one example, public health policy.
Back when Tze Ming made her stand I think my question was whether you could have no ethnicity. I still think that's a valid option.
Isn't that a bit like saying "I don't speak with an accent -- everyone else does"?
-
I have a deep sense of ethics! In a box, just over here.
I keep mine in a compartment.
-
Interclue told me I didn't want to click on that ...
Product placement!
-
This would be what's behind that warning.
Cripes.
But I did like this bit:
I will delete any comments which seek to blame the victim.
New policy, then ...
-
Though meditation might just help.
I have found recently that medication is better.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 … 2279 Older→ First