Posts by dc_red
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Descending into the world's gutters one All Black at a time.
The only time I've ended up in the gutter is when I drank too much.
It's the same for almost every one else I know.
-
Exactly. Another headline for a report on the same data might read: "1 in 25 NZers try cocaine at some point in lifetime."
To which my reaction would be, "Meh".
But this kind of b/s makes me tempted to go out on a Hunter S. Thompson style binge, and try and nudge the national average that much higher to 100% on every count.
I'll start with an Amstel Light to cover the alcohol thing.
-
Holly, and here's another from the Herald of 28 June 2008: "PM's blocking of disabled carpark 'unacceptable', says pensioner." Did the PM block a carpark? No. Was the PM aware of what her security detail were doing with the cars outside the venue? No. Does the PM drive herself? No. Did the police apologies? Yes. Does the headline imply the the PM has little regard for the little people, like crippled pensioners? Yes. Is this quality journalism? Over to you.
Yes, that was particularly disgraceful. By Monday the headline had changed to: "PM shocked at claim motorcade blocked disabled parks". But the damage was done I expect.
Now, if it had been Key and his security detail ... "Hero Key no match for feckless pensioners"? ;-)
-
Well, Caleb, I've never heard anyone hankering to take the great leap backwards to reintroducing the property qualification or genuinely disenfranchising women.
Well, there is one ex-pat conservative blog I can think of where such ideas go down well.
I'm also rather keen on getting rid of the 'political consensus' that New Zealand's head of state has to meet a religious qualification imposed by the British parliament over three hundred years ago.
Indeed. You can add to that sexual discrimination (sons prioritized over daughters in line of succession) which would presumably be illegal under domestic NZ law, as well as being morally offensive.
Not to mention the bizarre form of discrimination which is inherent in 'choosing' your Head of State from within a single aristocratic family (which, bizarrely, lives literally on the other side of the world). Might as well be the dark side of the moon.
-
Seriously, the fallout from this kind of cavalier, arrogant, disenfranchisement will be massive.
I'm certainly not disenfranchised by being on the general roll. I don't see how it would be any different for New Zealanders of other ethnic backgrounds.
If memory serves, there's a decent proportion of Maori on the general roll already.
This is an area in which National has actually been transparent, and consistently advocated a relatively unambiguous policy based on a clear principle (recent waffling about "probably before 2014" notwithstanding). I fail to see how this is either cavalier or arrogant.
It might not be a principle you agree with, but to cry disefranchisement seems foolhardy.
-
Err, who's this "Street" person? Not Maryan Street, Minister of Housing, surely? I'm lost.
-
How much would National pay me to tell them: "do nothing. say nothing. promise platitudes when pressed."
-
Paul - agreed, the start of the story was a more-or-less blatant dog-whistle. But as it went on, the sheer "good news factor" of it all, tempered the perspective.
A quick note to the effect that a couple of hundred million isn't that much for a group waiting over a century for the return of some valuable property might have helped?
Craig - it "would help ordinary, hard-working New Zealanders" (TM).
I didn't know the esteemed US Senators had weighed in on the issue of NZ's GST though, interesting! ;-)
-
Raymond - there's the interesting (but seldom asked) question of what National would do differently that would assist those struggling to keep metaphorical heads above allegedly-rising economic waters.
So far they haven't even backed a populist move like removing GST from petrol excise.
I wouldn't trust McCully et al. not to apply a firm boot to the top of a few heads, myself.
-
intractable drunks, the mentally ill, the mentally handicapped
Meh, let's just give everyone "three free smacks a year", to be dished out as they see fit to anyone annoying them or in need of discipline for any reason. They could perhaps be accumulated to a maximum of nine smacks.
I intend to use mine immediately however. Mssrs Ryall, Williamson and McCully better watch out.