Posts by Idiot Savant
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Limping Onwards, in reply to Jan Farr,
I think I'm trying to point out that the voter has some responsibility here.
Quick! Dissolve the people! Elect another!
Blaming the voters may make you feel better. But its the last refuge of the politically incompetent, and comes across as terminally arrogant. Yes, we get the government we deserve. But ultimately, if a party can't convince people to vote for it, whose fault is that?
-
Hard News: Limping Onwards, in reply to Paul Williams,
Labour had three terms Sacha, first time ever.
Ahem. First Labour Government?
-
Hard News: Limping Onwards, in reply to Lew Stoddart,
So my preference, since the election is a foregone conclusion, is for the party to roll Goff and King and risk a crushing electoral defeat, demonstrating that at least they've got a pair; rather than cling on to the dull certainty of a soft defeat.
But that too would require virtu. And I don't think Goff is the only senior Labour person lacking in it.
-
Hard News: Limping Onwards, in reply to David Herkt,
You want to be the most disliked woman on Parliament, go ahead, Judith…
Might be worth $160,000
-
I feel filthy for supporting this sort of spin doctoring.
Then don't. Make then stand up and explain their policies and convince us. Anything less is undemocratic, and makes those policies illegitimate.
-
And to follow up on yesterday's thought: there's no difference between taking money out of the economy through cuts, and taking it out through permanent tax rises. Again, its just a question of distribution. And one of those solutions is unquestionably fairer, distributionally speaking, than the other.
The government has screwed up its books and created a permanent structural deficit by giving away tax cuts to the rich. Its time they were reversed.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to Steve Parks,
Any failure to resolve a crime? Really? That's a bit naive.
Its called "high expectations", and I have them when it comes to public servants. You should too.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to Matthew Poole,
You mean like the solid evidence they found implicating Arthur Allan Thomas?
No. Like the evidence other people have talked about being potentially available in a case like this. This is not a locked room murder mystery we're talking about here. For a start, there's at least one witness - the victim.
The police investigate crimes. Its their job. Any failure to resolve a crime, to identify who is responsible and bring a case against them is, by definition, a failure on their part. And they think this too - that's why they use resolution rates as their basic metric of success.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to Matthew Poole,
Or there's insufficient solid evidence to support prosecution. Which speaks not at all to the competence of the investigator(s)
I expect the police to find that solid evidence. It is, to put it bluntly, their fucking job.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to Matthew Poole,
Demanding prosecutions is prejudging the outcome of the investigation as determining who committed the assault with sufficient certainty to support such a prosecution. Which is a dangerous leap to make, since it leads one to conclude that the only possible explanation for there being no forthcoming prosecution is the Police covering for their own.
Or that they're incompetant. Neither is acceptable.