The thing that is most poignant is that the very people Romney is discarding as irrelevant to his campaign are the very people who will vote for him regardless of what he says.
Satire highlights the medium but it is the people who suffer from the Romney policies who deserve better representation.
there must be an upper limit to improving equality
But they thought that in the 1600s, and the 1700s, and the 1800s, and the 1900s.
And we laugh at how foolish they were.
It's partly, as Craig says, about recognising just how hard the fight was for those people who changed the past.
It's partly about recognising that there is a hard fight still going on today.
But it's also about being open to the idea that the things I think are normal and right and fair today might just be shown to be ... well ... evil, someday in the future. What is really scary about that thought is that the future might be only a few years away. How will I adjust?
That may be a fanciful pointless thought exercise but it helps to understand the opposition to things like this so very obviously good bill.
bank made you get married before it would grant a mortgage
We happened to be married at the time but I distinctly remember thinking "so married people don't default on loans?"
In the interests of not pissing off the person who could stop us being able to buy a house I kept my thoughts to myself.
This bill, when it passes, will be a step closer to having a society where all people are treated equally.
But as an aside I find it interesting that equality is such an evolving issue. It is only as we deal with one inequality that we realise there is another to which we have all been blind. I wonder how future generations will view the things we simply take for granted and think of as normal, in the same way that past generations would have been shocked at the idea that having indentured servants was something wrong.
because they are over some of her
serious and nuanced
To be serious. The correct response to this problem is to come out and declare that your employer (The Herald) is failing to provide the resources to the the job properley. It would have been to correct to respond to the criticism by saying ...
"you are absolutely right, what I produced at APEC was below the standard expected of a journalist of my experience, unfortunately I was simply unable to do the job required of me by the New Zealand public because my employer failed"
Instead we got "bloggers are mean to me and it's not fair because my job is so hard ...."
So I will stand by my opinion that failing to accept and understand criticism is a fatal flaw and Armstrong should never have written the piece nor should it have been published.
The nuance is that understanding how to learn from criticism, even when it is poorly delivered (which this was not) is an essential skill if you wish to become good at whatever task you attempt.
The nuance is that the failure is almost certainly at the hands of The Herald which is not applying the journalistic resources necessary to do a good job, but I can hardly blame Armstrong for not highlighting that.
... have them out in Stadiums in the fresh air!
Heh, Queenstown in winter might be a bit of an ask.
And yes the conference is quite deliberately in ski season so we can attract overseas speakers.
everytime I travelled overseas, I came back with a chest infection.
Same here. Sitting in an air conditioned lecture theatres with people from everywhere in the world carrying every virus in circulation ... just don't tell Health and Safety or they'll ban conferences.
I wouldn’t describe it as a holiday, but as a life experience it beats 3 days in the office.
Yeah that's it exactly. The trips are hard work. And sometimes you don't perform as well as you'd like for various reasons (giving a good talk when your body is telling you it is 2 am and you should be asleep is non-trivial). But I wouldn't trade them for anything. So complaining that they are too hard and they mean my work isn't as good as it could or should be is not really going to wash with most folks.
I still don’t know any journalist on the way up who wouldn’t give their right arm to jump on that plane to Vladivostok, knowing how difficult it was.
Same is true in Science, travelling to conferences is tiring, sitting through boring seminars is ... but you get to goto another country and meet some amazing people and some boring ones and some who are both.
You can't really be taken seriously when you complain.
opens up a festering issue about bloggers and the relationship with mainstream media
Well to be fair it might be a subject for discussion around your table at tea time, but out here in the rest of New Zealand (and I'm going to use a royal we here) we don't really care that much if the news comes from a blogger or a "real journalist".
What I care about is news and analysis. I get that from a combination of sources that I trust to varying degrees. The level of trust is earned according to behaviour not as a result of being published on dead trees. If Edwards and Campbell have a strong following perhaps it is because they have earned the trust of their readers.