Posts by Andrew Smith
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
And so we go on...yet another beat up by Nicky Hagar. Is it unusual again that Hagar trys to wow us with the 'secret' theme again. Is it a coincidence that Fairfax put an advert on the same web page as Hagar's piece about his upcoming film 'The Hollow Men'. I'm sorry, but Fairfax is beating this up. The state of their editorials these days is appalling and sometimes mendacious. What about some adverts for Wisharts no 1 book on Fairfax media? But I hear your cries of derision already. And yes, I had a bad weekend.
-
I want to post something...but my words are weirdly failing me. I think I'll just go and give my 9 year old girl a hug.
-
Perhaps then Andrew you would be so kind as to suggest a figure that would be appropriate for the Govt to appropriate from folks income.
Good question and it would make for a lively debate. But I sense it would come back to philosophical leanings. However, lets start with getting rid of the socialist traversty called Working for Families.
-
(for a party allegedly in the clammy grip of the gay mafia, Labour has been very bloody generous to the breeders in the past four years).
This is just the sort of attiude that makes you and I very different people Russell. Aside from the 'gay mafia' jibe, it urks me when we are supposed to be grateful for someone returning our own money to us! I'm a breeder (5 and finished), and I gladly take Working for Families payments to help out, but it's already my money 'cause the government took it out of my pay packet (I got the figures to prove it...weekly)
-
I find the 'sexing up of our children' (phrase taken from an article by Miranda Devine see http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/05/21/1211182891875.html) to be abhorent. I honestly think that we need to be far more pro-active in condemning the ideas in our society that allow this attitude to exist. I worry about my girls, but I worry more about their kids. Where's the politicians on these issues? Put 'standard of living' concerns aside for once and start talking about what we want for our kids.
-
Matthew, yes that is the story I was told about. I heard that the developer had basically been let off. But the kind of justice meted out to him does seem just and what is a good example of Judges using wise discretion.
-
No, that happened before Laws. I don't think he can take credit for the main street clean up, the museum, the art gallery, Ucol or even the Rutland Arms.
All I have seen from Laws are sneering attempts to dismantle any "vibrancy".
Yes, in thinking about that issue I was a little hasty in attributing much at all of Wanganui's recent vibrancy to Laws. The advent of UCOL there saw the influx of youthful creativity which was lacking without such an instituion. Like many youth before this, one had to leave Wanganui to pursue education options.
And Matthew, I don't think it was the same case. I'll delve into my brain archives and get back to you.
-
I'm an ex-Wanganui lad. It's my old patch. I haven't lived there for 25 years, but Laws appears to have done a reasonable job making that city vibrant again. But I lack good sources here!
I hate tagging and I simply don't understand the reasons why people do it. But Laws' article seems to appeal to destructive forces (racism) to make his point. But that's his brief and that's what the media want from him to sell papers and what he provides to make an income. It's his market.
Justice should never be based solely on race. Judges can't provide justice on a simplistic basis of giving everyone the same sentence for the same crime. Their rulings should be based on all the factors around an offence. But they make mistakes. I'm reminded of a land developer who willfully cut down ancient Puhutukawas and had no penalty. Is what he did less destructive than the actions of a tagger from Northcote?
-
"This simply isn't true. The science is clear, if complex. So are the economics. The facts are out there and have been for nearly 20 years (when did Bill Clinton first agree to cut emissions to 1991 levels? Answer, 1993).
The only people muddying the waters are self interest groups such as the Heartland folks."
Don, you've done it again. The science is not clear. I can't see how you can be so confident in this issue. The Scientists aren't even clear. Here's a few of the latest facts:
1. Last week a German study stated that the world will cool till 2015.
2. The NOAA states that the Eurasian land mass had the greatest snow cover in January ever recorded.
3. Tropical troposphere temperatures dropping to their lowest in 30 years
...and so it could go on...and no doubt from the warming side as well.Muddying of the waters is unfortunate, but let's not call the waters settled.
-
Worse? Well, I think not, but I guess we don't want to go down the road of inerterpreting what we think these people may be saying.
Again, we could argue ad finitum about the funding and idealogy and conspiratorial nature of leftist and conservative groups. No doubt, they have agendas that we can only guess at. This all makes for good lively (and weird) debate, but the facts get left in the dust. I wonder of a society that cannot have debate on facts because they don’t know how and resort to trashing each other instead. This may be partly caused by dumbed down education or they fear their peers and the possibility of being isolated from their relational communities (pub friends/work colleagues) because of their contra views. Ah well, back to work.