Posts by Christopher Dempsey
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Punk smunck. Well before my time.
What was in my time was Waltz Darling, and I'll forever remember the day my flatmate bought home this record and played it - it was great and thereafter was on the turntable often.
-
And Russell, while you're on yer bike, check out the new $3m cycleway built by NZTA directly adjacent to the NorthWestern motorway. This will be opened next Thursday where I get to ride into Steve 'holiday highway or hell' Joyce and mutter, whoopsie.
(not that I would, but ya know, sometimes Ministers deserve everything that the public is thinking, but not acting out)
You can I think get to it if you ride down Great North and up St Lukes Rd and get on the link just past the motorway overbridge.
This link eliminates some nasty short steep hills, providing the flat cruising experience designed for bikes. Bonus, NZTA have announced that they are extending this link all the way to the heart of the city itself, via Upper Queen St, and a bike path all the way down Grafton Gully to Wellesley St.
As for riding on-road, I find waving one's hands around alot in random movements tends to startle the natives and they slow right down. You want to give slightly the air of some crazed fellow who may veer off into their path so they think, what the heck?
Am at the mo sitting in the Mac's Neighbourhood Bar in Kingsland. What a view out the back!
-
I watched the video this afternoon, shortly after NO RIGHT TURN posted it on his website.
I was disturbed by it. To me the men were casual in their behaviour, almost to the point of ignoring a Black Apache heliocopter that was so obviously circling.
Which points to the clues that the men in fact were causual, ordinary, everyday men. The military were too blinded by war, by combat, to notice the subtle but telling clues.
It's clear that the USA Military lied. Why wouldn't they. It's also clear they've primed some journalists. I note that some big wig journalist in charge of some union of journalists has said war is ugly and this is ugly close up.
I posted this to my FB page. Do you think anyone bothered watching it? No.
Very disturbing.
-
<sticking my Elected Representative Hat on>
Thanks Russell for bringing this to our attention.
Here's my take.
ONLY PAY 25% OF RATES FOR THE 2011-2012 YEAR, and subsequent years.
From the 2011-2012 financial year forward, 75% of rates income will be handed over to these CCOs. The taxation angle confirms that indeed, they are corporate entities in all but name.
There is no compulsion for anyone to involuntarily fork out $$ to corporations. We pay willingly for various services, but if we don't agree, we are free to not purchase those services.
The CCO model essentially relies on the goodwill of the populace to pay their 'fees'. If you don't feel happy about this model, the solution is not to pay the 'fee'.
From my perspective, not paying this fee is a reasonably rational response to the government's intention.
<whipping off said hat>
-
That, more than anything, will shake things up and loosen his Pavlovian attachment to Key.
Well, I guess I don't need my Kiwibog aversion therapy this week. Getting all the off-putting condescending patronage of total strangers I need.
Thanks for the tip that kiwiblog might be used in wingnut aversion therapy.
And before you snap back, I should note that the aversion therapy thing goes both ways; blind adherance to some mythical left wing idea is just as bad as blind adherance to a money trader.
-
Talked to a member of the [UK Labour party] the other day. He's the product of a liberal school which encourages critical thinking and being comfortable with who you are..... I asked him whether he supported [military action in Iraq] and he earnestly told me that [Saddam had WMD's], [the UK] needed [to support the US no matter what] even if all the profits went offshore, and he was sure that once we knew 'all the facts' it would have widespread support. Not surprisingly he was a huge [Blair] fan and believed every word he said. I wonder, though, whether anything will ever shake his faith.
Nothing ever shakes the faith of that sort of person. You just have to work around them somehow.
Just wait til life throws them something that shakes that 'unshakeable' belief; someone close coming out GLBT, they have an accident and are made to jump hoops in ACC, they have to go on the dole, they go bankrupt etc.
That, more than anything, will shake things up and loosen his Pavlovian attachment to Key.
-
And I'm lovin' the new edgy-ness to Forest & Bird's website banners - one could say National's been soooo good for them.
-
@ Josh
Yes, sorry, 'Wellington' in both senses of the word is a noun. My mistake.
And first I've heard of metonym. Just wiki'ed it. Thanks.
-
@ Don
when resentment of Wellington's intentions towards us is already simmering
Look, I am quite happy to for Aucklanders to be deprived of the right to vote if it helps make that statement a reality. But until that happy day can I just say that most of the insane ideas politicians have thrown up since MMP have been very representative of the population north of the Bombay Hills.
The "intentions" are all in your court, Auckland. Sort it out.
I'm not sure if you are being obtuse or not, but you do realise that there are two meanings for the noun / verb "Wellington"?
The noun refers to the city itself, and it's delightful denizens, it's plentitude of eating and entertainment places, the wacky and large Te Papa and ( green with envy here ) that fabulous waterfront.
The verb refers to that dark hole in the middle of your fair city - parliament. Everybody up here refers to it not as 'parliament' or even as 'the government', but as 'Wellington'. Meaning whoever is running the political show now, and encapsulates at this point in time public service mandarins (interestingly, these weren't included in the 'Wellington' meaning under Helen's reign - because Wgton came to Auckland, lots).
(It should be noted that 'wackiness' is not a perserve of Auckland; take a bow Brownlee, Smith, Dunne, Carter, and others.)
So deciphering the sentence above to which you take (ironic?) offense, the writer means "... when resentment of [the government and senior public service mandarins] intentions towards us is already simmering..."
Please correct me if I am entirely wrong as to your offence...
-
Was he talking about CCOs generally, or specific CCOs in Auckland that don't yet exist? Because you seem to think the latter, but it reads like he's being sneaky and saying the former (possibly disingenuously, given that I don't know the question).
I don't think question needs to be answered.