Lyndon and Hamish - boys
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Twelve reasons not to vote for the Greens
Part four of a series of indeterminate length
1. Their platforms of a fair society and sustainable prosperity might be easier to stand if they weren't such hippies.
2. You had a traumatic childhood experience involving sustainable energy.
3. Now that a vote for the Greens is a vote for a Labour-Progressive-Greens coalition, it doesn't sound so wicked cool anymore.
4. Have you seen those old cartoons of the communist octopus reaching out to control the entire world? Have you seen Nandor with his hair down?
5. They haven't been the same since Kermit died.
6. Someone working for Sue Kedgley once fell for the Campaign to ban Di-Hydrogen-Monoxide.
7. Because Greens are something a bad kid is meant to have just three more mouthfuls of before he can leave the table and go back to his room to eat gobstoppers and look at stick books. Little snot.
8. Hoardings fetishist Aaron Bhatnawazzit has decried the Greens hoardings as terrible. "Too many words," cries Bhatnasomething. You'd do well to listen when a hoardings afficionado speaks.
9. Peter Dunne said that if Labour went into coalition with the Greens, then "pseudo methamphetamine" would be downgraded as a serious drug and Nandor would be Attorney-General. You believe everything that Peter Dunne says.
10. United Future finance spokesperson Gordon Copeland told the Business New Zealand Conference that he knew people who would leave the country if a Labour-Greens government was elected. You think we should keep any friends Gordon Copeland has where we can see them.
11. United Future have indicated they may be unwilling to work in a coalition agreement with the Greens. You're torn between moral rectitude on the one hand and an irrepresible desire to get high on the other.
12. Allowing the country to be turned into a toxic wasteland is vital to our future prosperity.
Part four of a series of indeterminate length
1. Their platforms of a fair society and sustainable prosperity might be easier to stand if they weren't such hippies.
2. You had a traumatic childhood experience involving sustainable energy.
3. Now that a vote for the Greens is a vote for a Labour-Progressive-Greens coalition, it doesn't sound so wicked cool anymore.
4. Have you seen those old cartoons of the communist octopus reaching out to control the entire world? Have you seen Nandor with his hair down?
5. They haven't been the same since Kermit died.
6. Someone working for Sue Kedgley once fell for the Campaign to ban Di-Hydrogen-Monoxide.
7. Because Greens are something a bad kid is meant to have just three more mouthfuls of before he can leave the table and go back to his room to eat gobstoppers and look at stick books. Little snot.
8. Hoardings fetishist Aaron Bhatnawazzit has decried the Greens hoardings as terrible. "Too many words," cries Bhatnasomething. You'd do well to listen when a hoardings afficionado speaks.
9. Peter Dunne said that if Labour went into coalition with the Greens, then "pseudo methamphetamine" would be downgraded as a serious drug and Nandor would be Attorney-General. You believe everything that Peter Dunne says.
10. United Future finance spokesperson Gordon Copeland told the Business New Zealand Conference that he knew people who would leave the country if a Labour-Greens government was elected. You think we should keep any friends Gordon Copeland has where we can see them.
11. United Future have indicated they may be unwilling to work in a coalition agreement with the Greens. You're torn between moral rectitude on the one hand and an irrepresible desire to get high on the other.
12. Allowing the country to be turned into a toxic wasteland is vital to our future prosperity.
Lyndon Hood - Hard Worker, Lower Hutt
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
ACT appears to be having a going out of business sale.
Funny. I wonder what happened to all their funding?
Update (7:22): Funny angle I missed - the headline auction item is a trip to Fiji. A place which holds many happy fraudulent-investment related holiday memories for at least on ACT stalwart.
Funny. I wonder what happened to all their funding?
Update (7:22): Funny angle I missed - the headline auction item is a trip to Fiji. A place which holds many happy fraudulent-investment related holiday memories for at least on ACT stalwart.
Lyndon Hood - Gawker, Lower Hutt
Monday, August 29, 2005
Earlier this evening I heard the sound of a new National policy screwup hitting the fan, as I it happened. It wasn't quite the four-car pile-up we've come to expect, but the climax of Don Brash's interview on Newstalk ZB the afternoon went, very approximately, like this:
And then there's somebody decided it was a good plan to leak a bunch of documents not inconsistent with the idea that the Business Roundtable bought the leadership of the National Party.
It's as if the far-right hand doesn't know what the centre-right hand is doing.
And it brings me to...
My First TheoryThe Kookiest One
So, y'know how Labour's got all lefty - spending money on people and cozying up to the Greens and so on?
D'you think maybe that might have been a gambit to draw National into the centre, thus highlighting their internal divisions and causing them to explode through infighting?
Cos it seems to be working.
Don: Well if Gerry Brownlee says abolishing the maori seats isn't a bottom line, then he's wrong.That's Gerry Brownlee his Maori Affairs Spokesperson, that Don's talking about just there. The person his party keeps as an expert on what their policy is.
And then there's somebody decided it was a good plan to leak a bunch of documents not inconsistent with the idea that the Business Roundtable bought the leadership of the National Party.
It's as if the far-right hand doesn't know what the centre-right hand is doing.
And it brings me to...
My First TheoryThe Kookiest One
So, y'know how Labour's got all lefty - spending money on people and cozying up to the Greens and so on?
D'you think maybe that might have been a gambit to draw National into the centre, thus highlighting their internal divisions and causing them to explode through infighting?
Cos it seems to be working.
Kelly Pendergrast - wastrel, Wellington
Tales from the Heartland
Intrepid traveler that I am, I took a trip last weekend to small-town New Zealand.
Well, Palmerston North*.
It was a sunny Sunday, so my family and I drove out to nearby Himatangi beach. Himatangi is a mecca for bogans who like driving on the beach, small children on motorbikes, and unleashed dogs.
We lunched at a cafe beside a table of leather-clad bikers and, scanning the menu wildly for a meal that didn't involve bacon or lambs-fry, I saw something I hadn't seen for a long time - COMIC SANS. Now, I know this probably comes as a shock, especially after the widely publicised campaign to BAN COMIC SANS, but arcane and outrageous fonts are alive and well in New Zealand's smaller centers. Not only Comic Sans, but also Curlz MT. Flicking to the beverages page, I was almost overwhelmed by the curlicues extending from every letter adding that fanciful and artistic touch to the page. Is this what separates us urban-dwellers from our provincial cousins? Font usage? Either Himatangi hasn't yet realised that Comic Sans and its ilk are wildly unfashionable, or they just don't care.
Here is a timeline I just wrote regarding Comic Sans usage:
1994 - Vincent Connaire designs Comic Sans for use in those comic style speech bubbles.
1995 - Comic Sans is bundled into Windows 95 as a system font, allowing its dissemination to millions and millions of unsuspecting computer users.
1995 (later that fateful year) - I write my entire form three science fair project using Comic Sans. And no, the experiment was not about the ability of humans to withstand ten pages of Comic Sans text, it was about the comparative amount of aluminium that different cooking pots leak into your food, giving you alzheimer's most probably. It was very good. I got a highly commended.
1996 - Serious designer types have realised by now that Comic Sans is not a good font for anything other than comic book speech bubbles and torturing font-snobs with. Everyone else remains wildly excited, using Comic Sans for power point presentations, billboards, newsletters, weddings, parties, anything.
1999 - Even your average home computer user starts to get a bit sick of Comic Sans.
2003-ish - The official Ban Comic Sans campaign is in full swing, trying to wipe Comic Sans off the face of the earth.
2005 - I go to Himatangi, and realise that Comic Sans is not only still present, but thriving.
And now, good people of the internet, I ask you this:
Isn't it time for a renaissance?
*Palmerston North has, in my opinion, THE best lower-North-Island op-shop. It is called the Hospice Op Shop. It is on Cuba Street (PN). Go there, and marvel at the cheap wonders.
Intrepid traveler that I am, I took a trip last weekend to small-town New Zealand.
Well, Palmerston North*.
It was a sunny Sunday, so my family and I drove out to nearby Himatangi beach. Himatangi is a mecca for bogans who like driving on the beach, small children on motorbikes, and unleashed dogs.
We lunched at a cafe beside a table of leather-clad bikers and, scanning the menu wildly for a meal that didn't involve bacon or lambs-fry, I saw something I hadn't seen for a long time - COMIC SANS. Now, I know this probably comes as a shock, especially after the widely publicised campaign to BAN COMIC SANS, but arcane and outrageous fonts are alive and well in New Zealand's smaller centers. Not only Comic Sans, but also Curlz MT. Flicking to the beverages page, I was almost overwhelmed by the curlicues extending from every letter adding that fanciful and artistic touch to the page. Is this what separates us urban-dwellers from our provincial cousins? Font usage? Either Himatangi hasn't yet realised that Comic Sans and its ilk are wildly unfashionable, or they just don't care.
Here is a timeline I just wrote regarding Comic Sans usage:
1994 - Vincent Connaire designs Comic Sans for use in those comic style speech bubbles.
1995 - Comic Sans is bundled into Windows 95 as a system font, allowing its dissemination to millions and millions of unsuspecting computer users.
1995 (later that fateful year) - I write my entire form three science fair project using Comic Sans. And no, the experiment was not about the ability of humans to withstand ten pages of Comic Sans text, it was about the comparative amount of aluminium that different cooking pots leak into your food, giving you alzheimer's most probably. It was very good. I got a highly commended.
1996 - Serious designer types have realised by now that Comic Sans is not a good font for anything other than comic book speech bubbles and torturing font-snobs with. Everyone else remains wildly excited, using Comic Sans for power point presentations, billboards, newsletters, weddings, parties, anything.
1999 - Even your average home computer user starts to get a bit sick of Comic Sans.
2003-ish - The official Ban Comic Sans campaign is in full swing, trying to wipe Comic Sans off the face of the earth.
2005 - I go to Himatangi, and realise that Comic Sans is not only still present, but thriving.
And now, good people of the internet, I ask you this:
Isn't it time for a renaissance?
*Palmerston North has, in my opinion, THE best lower-North-Island op-shop. It is called the Hospice Op Shop. It is on Cuba Street (PN). Go there, and marvel at the cheap wonders.
Lyndon Hood - Accordion criminal, Lower Hutt
Sunday, August 28, 2005
I started a post about National's proto-budget. I may finish it yet, but I only have so much weekend left, so in the meantime here are the highlights:
> Will not destroy world in immediate future. Debt is a worry but not a disaster (and the Nats point out that they haven't committed the PreFU money the way Labour has and that they plan to keep putting that rainy-day money in the super fund). Likely inflation is a problem but it's not like Cullen can complain.
> I have seen National's budget press pack, incidentally, and Keith Ng really does deserve a brickbat. He could at least have checked his tenuous Nats-plan-debt-blowout interpretation against their projected debt graph instead of giving people who think their overall plan might not be the best option a bad name.
> So the choice is not between a bad budget and a good budget. It's between less tax (or rather, a smaller decrease) and less spending on services (or rather, a smaller increase). And a bunch of other policies and two wrinkly leaders.
> Does Key have some kind of magic wand that allows him to find and eliminate 'wasteful spending'? Or does that just mean cutting a whole lot of programmes you don't like?
> Nobody seems to know how they're going to support any of their other promises that involve new spending. Such as transport, abolishing parole, work for the dole, bulk funding schools and so on. But given that they seem to be making a highly confused attempt to distance themselves from any policies they might have had, say, a year ago, who knows what might happen?
> National's habit of self-contradicting policy announcements has reached the point where it stops looking like negligence and starts looking like a really odd deliberate campaign style or, the option I favour, really serious infighting.
> There are other policies than finance. Oh, and some other political parties too, apparently.
> I still think Labour will get the most votes.
And now, what I really want to talk about ...
I just bought an old accordion for sixty-five bucks at the Lower Hutt antique fair.
Not one of those poncy Piano-Accordion things. One with buttons. What they used to call a melodeon (not the melodica, reed organ or barrel organ kind), made by the good people at Hohner. Just the job for cajun styles, apparently. Jambalaya, here I come.
I had no idea how to play it, but it turns out it's basically a like a souped-up harmonica, and I'm good for those.
Actually, it could be said that it is to a harmonica what a bagpipe is to a clarinet.
Now, I've only managed to free up two out of the four stops from the rust, and a few of the reeds aren't working properly, but at least it can now - theoretically - play a tune.
Still - sixty-five bucks.
I happen to think it has quite a nice tone.
And if you don't all vote left of centre, then I'll play it in public.
New Hood: Financial Briefs...National Tax Cut Visible From Space
Size Not Everything: Cullen
Matron Wants to Know Which Party John Key is Leader of
Brash Wows Voters With Hotel-Room Anecdotes
Read it all at Scoop
> Will not destroy world in immediate future. Debt is a worry but not a disaster (and the Nats point out that they haven't committed the PreFU money the way Labour has and that they plan to keep putting that rainy-day money in the super fund). Likely inflation is a problem but it's not like Cullen can complain.
> I have seen National's budget press pack, incidentally, and Keith Ng really does deserve a brickbat. He could at least have checked his tenuous Nats-plan-debt-blowout interpretation against their projected debt graph instead of giving people who think their overall plan might not be the best option a bad name.
> So the choice is not between a bad budget and a good budget. It's between less tax (or rather, a smaller decrease) and less spending on services (or rather, a smaller increase). And a bunch of other policies and two wrinkly leaders.
> Does Key have some kind of magic wand that allows him to find and eliminate 'wasteful spending'? Or does that just mean cutting a whole lot of programmes you don't like?
> Nobody seems to know how they're going to support any of their other promises that involve new spending. Such as transport, abolishing parole, work for the dole, bulk funding schools and so on. But given that they seem to be making a highly confused attempt to distance themselves from any policies they might have had, say, a year ago, who knows what might happen?
> National's habit of self-contradicting policy announcements has reached the point where it stops looking like negligence and starts looking like a really odd deliberate campaign style or, the option I favour, really serious infighting.
> There are other policies than finance. Oh, and some other political parties too, apparently.
> I still think Labour will get the most votes.
And now, what I really want to talk about ...
I just bought an old accordion for sixty-five bucks at the Lower Hutt antique fair.
Not one of those poncy Piano-Accordion things. One with buttons. What they used to call a melodeon (not the melodica, reed organ or barrel organ kind), made by the good people at Hohner. Just the job for cajun styles, apparently. Jambalaya, here I come.
I had no idea how to play it, but it turns out it's basically a like a souped-up harmonica, and I'm good for those.
Actually, it could be said that it is to a harmonica what a bagpipe is to a clarinet.
Now, I've only managed to free up two out of the four stops from the rust, and a few of the reeds aren't working properly, but at least it can now - theoretically - play a tune.
Still - sixty-five bucks.
I happen to think it has quite a nice tone.
And if you don't all vote left of centre, then I'll play it in public.
New Hood: Financial Briefs...National Tax Cut Visible From Space
Size Not Everything: Cullen
Matron Wants to Know Which Party John Key is Leader of
Brash Wows Voters With Hotel-Room Anecdotes
Read it all at Scoop
Lyndon Hood - Nobody's Patsy, Lower Hutt
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Unaphillyated. With a P-H.
Idiot/Savant, posting about Span's list of bloggers' political affiliations, has recognised the Fighting Talk as a "major" "blog" "on the left". Though for some reason we slipped his mind when he wrote this comment.
I would tend to include the young turks at keepleft, if only to further blur the line between a weblog and an ordinary website that gets updated a lot. I'm in favour of keepleft, though explaining why, in a way that the rest of the blogosphere would understand, requires more time than I have right now. For the purposes of this discussion, while they clearly are quite pro-Labour, that's only because they're utterly anti-National.
But is anyone other IndyLeftNZBlog actually enthusiastic about covering the election?
Anyhow, seeing as how we cast such a huge shadow on the independent e-lefty scene, I'll get our unaffiliations out in the open.
I have never been a attached to any political party, not even the yogic flying one. Hamish likes a good party, and Kelly nearly has the same name as the Mayor of Wellington.
And then there's our proud history ...
Matt Nippert claimed he once joined the National Party to destroy it from within. I recall he also did PR for the Greens as holiday work, but Matt does not live here any more and therefore does not count towards our score. Nor does Michael Appleton who, in an eerie coincidence, went on to become a Greens Press Secretary.
For all I know, Max Johns may currently be jobbing as an election hoarding.
Of course, Fightingbloggers have displayed an alarming tendency to be involved in the media, so we might best be considered an extension of Rupert Murdoch's famous left-wing conspiracy.
For example, another lapsed fTalker, Patrick Crewdson, had once, in his pre-blog days, written an editorial in a student magazine that said invading Iraq might not be a very good idea.
I myself was the designer of said magazine and will have laid out that editorial using Gill Sans for the headers. I like to think I was ahead of my time in that: Gill Sans is the new Helvetica. That said, the fact that it is National's campaign font will not be affecting my vote in any way.
I hope that makes things clear.
Idiot/Savant, posting about Span's list of bloggers' political affiliations, has recognised the Fighting Talk as a "major" "blog" "on the left". Though for some reason we slipped his mind when he wrote this comment.
I would tend to include the young turks at keepleft, if only to further blur the line between a weblog and an ordinary website that gets updated a lot. I'm in favour of keepleft, though explaining why, in a way that the rest of the blogosphere would understand, requires more time than I have right now. For the purposes of this discussion, while they clearly are quite pro-Labour, that's only because they're utterly anti-National.
But is anyone other IndyLeftNZBlog actually enthusiastic about covering the election?
Anyhow, seeing as how we cast such a huge shadow on the independent e-lefty scene, I'll get our unaffiliations out in the open.
I have never been a attached to any political party, not even the yogic flying one. Hamish likes a good party, and Kelly nearly has the same name as the Mayor of Wellington.
And then there's our proud history ...
Matt Nippert claimed he once joined the National Party to destroy it from within. I recall he also did PR for the Greens as holiday work, but Matt does not live here any more and therefore does not count towards our score. Nor does Michael Appleton who, in an eerie coincidence, went on to become a Greens Press Secretary.
For all I know, Max Johns may currently be jobbing as an election hoarding.
Of course, Fightingbloggers have displayed an alarming tendency to be involved in the media, so we might best be considered an extension of Rupert Murdoch's famous left-wing conspiracy.
For example, another lapsed fTalker, Patrick Crewdson, had once, in his pre-blog days, written an editorial in a student magazine that said invading Iraq might not be a very good idea.
I myself was the designer of said magazine and will have laid out that editorial using Gill Sans for the headers. I like to think I was ahead of my time in that: Gill Sans is the new Helvetica. That said, the fact that it is National's campaign font will not be affecting my vote in any way.
I hope that makes things clear.
Lyndon Hood - Alive Blogger, Lower Hutt
Friday, August 19, 2005
So anyway: egghead that I am, I listened to the Labour and National's opening addresses on the radio. RNZ staff had the consideration not to be on strike at the time.
And it was embarrassing to hear Helen Clark's final spiel on what image of New Zealand she projected to the world - they could have done without that last bit.
On the other hand, if I'm not mistaken Don Brash went 'Aeh' twice in the first sentence. And if he's that concerned about not wasting money, he could probably have saved it on that Jib Jab ripoff they're running the rest of the time (I've said it was like Terry Gilliam, and it is, but it's more like Jib Jab's stuff now I've seen it, and people still seem to need telling that it's hardly like South Park at all).
Anyhow, what I'm thinking is that, in an odd way, with Brash it's a bit like what some felt about John Kerry: sure, lots of people don't like Helen - but can you really imagine them all voting for Don?
Not that I would be voting for National anyway.
My cousin, and it must be said he's not the only one, is projecting a blithe (and as far as I can tell, not hugely supported) confidence that the government will change.
I won't offer a bottle of whiskey in favour of Helen just yet, but I'm calling it for her right this minute.
See what happens on Monday when Brash announces his tax cuts, keep an eye on the usually reliable Centrebet (Hide pays $1001!), and I'll get back to you.
Genuinely New Hood: Politicians attempt the sub-four-minute u-turn
And it was embarrassing to hear Helen Clark's final spiel on what image of New Zealand she projected to the world - they could have done without that last bit.
On the other hand, if I'm not mistaken Don Brash went 'Aeh' twice in the first sentence. And if he's that concerned about not wasting money, he could probably have saved it on that Jib Jab ripoff they're running the rest of the time (I've said it was like Terry Gilliam, and it is, but it's more like Jib Jab's stuff now I've seen it, and people still seem to need telling that it's hardly like South Park at all).
Anyhow, what I'm thinking is that, in an odd way, with Brash it's a bit like what some felt about John Kerry: sure, lots of people don't like Helen - but can you really imagine them all voting for Don?
Not that I would be voting for National anyway.
My cousin, and it must be said he's not the only one, is projecting a blithe (and as far as I can tell, not hugely supported) confidence that the government will change.
I won't offer a bottle of whiskey in favour of Helen just yet, but I'm calling it for her right this minute.
See what happens on Monday when Brash announces his tax cuts, keep an eye on the usually reliable Centrebet (Hide pays $1001!), and I'll get back to you.
Genuinely New Hood: Politicians attempt the sub-four-minute u-turn
Lyndon Hood - As-yet-unbribed, Lower Hutt
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Not Overly New, but Still Timely Hood: I'm trying to come up with a credible fiancee policy
It struck me after this was posted that the girl's nickname should have been "'Zild" rather than "Enzed". Have to save that revision until such time as Oxford University Press publishes my collected works, I guess.
It struck me after this was posted that the girl's nickname should have been "'Zild" rather than "Enzed". Have to save that revision until such time as Oxford University Press publishes my collected works, I guess.
Kelly Pendergrast - reticent blogger
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Yr head is a cock
It took me a minute to understand this subtle piece of graffiti which is currently showing midway down Cuba Street, but, well…
I guess simplified drawings of male genitalia are pretty much an international language, n’est pas?
Also: I am now officially allowed into America. As a student. For two years. As long as I don’t work too much. So it’s provisional entrance, but hell, I’m in.
My visit to the consulate was yesterday, and I was only there for twenty minutes. It was a bit of a breeze actually, at least as far as overly-officious-and-unhelpful bureaucratic processes can be a breeze. The building was easy to find, what with it being the only office building flying an American flag in, oh, about 8000 kilometers. There was an armed guy (who was, in fact, a New Zealander) and there was fingerprinting and a total lack of informative signage, but I think I’d built myself up for some multi-hour cavity-searching interrogative nightmare where the reality was just faceless and frustrating.
The only proper conversation I had in my time there (one which wasn’t composed entirely of me being given orders or asked questions) was with the uniformed New Zealander (Uncle Sam!) outside the main doors who took my bag, searched it, put it in a pile with other bags, and put me through the metal detector before I was allowed into the sanctified inner chamber of the consulate.
Like most of the consulate guys (and they were all guys) he wasn’t exactly verbose, but nevertheless this exchange took place:
Him: Have you got any knives, weapons, or cigarette lighters in here?
Me: No.
(he rifles through my bag for a while)
Me: How long do you think the wait will be? Can I take something in there with me to do?
Him: Like what?
Me: Well, I’ve got some crochet in my bag…
Him: (thinks for a second) No. No crochet needles.
Me: Um, it’s not really a needle. It’s called a hook. And it’s not sharp at all.
Him: No. No crochet.
Me: Okaaaaaay… why? What do you think I’m going to do? Poke out someone’s eye with it?
Him: Essentially, yes.
(He actually said “essentially, yes”. It was so great.)
So there you have it. They train ‘em staunch, and they train ‘em stupid. I tell you, there’s no point arguing with someone so obtuse. Which is why the system works so perfectly, and why I had absolutely no opportunity to stab someone in the eye with a crochet hook.
It took me a minute to understand this subtle piece of graffiti which is currently showing midway down Cuba Street, but, well…
I guess simplified drawings of male genitalia are pretty much an international language, n’est pas?
Also: I am now officially allowed into America. As a student. For two years. As long as I don’t work too much. So it’s provisional entrance, but hell, I’m in.
My visit to the consulate was yesterday, and I was only there for twenty minutes. It was a bit of a breeze actually, at least as far as overly-officious-and-unhelpful bureaucratic processes can be a breeze. The building was easy to find, what with it being the only office building flying an American flag in, oh, about 8000 kilometers. There was an armed guy (who was, in fact, a New Zealander) and there was fingerprinting and a total lack of informative signage, but I think I’d built myself up for some multi-hour cavity-searching interrogative nightmare where the reality was just faceless and frustrating.
The only proper conversation I had in my time there (one which wasn’t composed entirely of me being given orders or asked questions) was with the uniformed New Zealander (Uncle Sam!) outside the main doors who took my bag, searched it, put it in a pile with other bags, and put me through the metal detector before I was allowed into the sanctified inner chamber of the consulate.
Like most of the consulate guys (and they were all guys) he wasn’t exactly verbose, but nevertheless this exchange took place:
Him: Have you got any knives, weapons, or cigarette lighters in here?
Me: No.
(he rifles through my bag for a while)
Me: How long do you think the wait will be? Can I take something in there with me to do?
Him: Like what?
Me: Well, I’ve got some crochet in my bag…
Him: (thinks for a second) No. No crochet needles.
Me: Um, it’s not really a needle. It’s called a hook. And it’s not sharp at all.
Him: No. No crochet.
Me: Okaaaaaay… why? What do you think I’m going to do? Poke out someone’s eye with it?
Him: Essentially, yes.
(He actually said “essentially, yes”. It was so great.)
So there you have it. They train ‘em staunch, and they train ‘em stupid. I tell you, there’s no point arguing with someone so obtuse. Which is why the system works so perfectly, and why I had absolutely no opportunity to stab someone in the eye with a crochet hook.
Kelly Pendergrast - on the internet, Wellington
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
And that’s why they call it Bureaucrazy
I'm feeling pretty bitter right now...
Excitingly, but perhaps illogically, I’m leaving good-ol’-nuclear-free NZ soon to go hang out in the “Land of the Free” for a couple of years. As a reasonably benign grad student from a reasonably benign country with no WMDs (in fact, without much of a military to speak of), I thought it would be pretty straightforward.
I was wrong.
After filling out official forms and reading fine print till my eyes bled, I was recently informed that I have to fly to the other end of the country (well, Auckland) just attend a twenty minute interview at the American consulate, where I will be fingerprinted by dudes with guns. People don't really have guns in New Zealand. But hey, the consulate is officially American soil so I guess they can have guns and pledge allegiance and watch reruns of Everybody Loves Raymond to their hearts' content.
The final indignity, however, was the fact that I had to pay $3.49 a minute just to call the consulate and make my appointment. $3.49 a minute! I know America is all user pays and stuff, but hell, I can get phone sex for cheaper than that.
I'm feeling pretty bitter right now...
Excitingly, but perhaps illogically, I’m leaving good-ol’-nuclear-free NZ soon to go hang out in the “Land of the Free” for a couple of years. As a reasonably benign grad student from a reasonably benign country with no WMDs (in fact, without much of a military to speak of), I thought it would be pretty straightforward.
I was wrong.
After filling out official forms and reading fine print till my eyes bled, I was recently informed that I have to fly to the other end of the country (well, Auckland) just attend a twenty minute interview at the American consulate, where I will be fingerprinted by dudes with guns. People don't really have guns in New Zealand. But hey, the consulate is officially American soil so I guess they can have guns and pledge allegiance and watch reruns of Everybody Loves Raymond to their hearts' content.
The final indignity, however, was the fact that I had to pay $3.49 a minute just to call the consulate and make my appointment. $3.49 a minute! I know America is all user pays and stuff, but hell, I can get phone sex for cheaper than that.
Lyndon Hood - on the ball, Lower Hutt
Monday, August 08, 2005
Newer-than-normal Hood: I'm Very Much in Favour of that Nice Mr Peters' War on Intolerence
Lyndon Hood - oathbreaker, Lower Hutt
Saturday, August 06, 2005
So I take it this means National won't waste any money at all, then?
I know I implied I wouldn't be talking about specific issues, but screw that.
My basic reaction to the Taxathon pamphlet (and associated press release): I'm sure people who will be voting National anyway will just love it. To me, it seems kind of childish. As in, it might have been more persuasive with a more serious tone.
But then, I'm not representative of the general population.
Also, I wonder if this way it doesn't make the whole idea of over-taxing and wasteful spending look, well, kind of cute.
And (suprise suprise) I believe it is genuinely debatable whether New Zealand is overtaxed, and whether the quality of spending is all that bad, by world standards.
Oh, and one observation out of several: I know they don't actually explicitly say the money in the right-hand column is all waste, but that $239,000,000 is the entire annual spend on Te Wananga O Aotearoa, isn't it? Does that mean you do want to axe it, Mr English?
The pamplet is, however, somewhat resistant to parody. That is to say, point-by-point quibbling of the whole thing would make me feel like a lot more of as hack than I am.
And what with its done-in-my-office aesthetic, and what with the cuteness thing noted above, it's kind of already parodying itself.
Still, with Aaron so determined to supply the bits, it would be churlish not to a least have a nibble ...
Update (12:35AM, 7/8): Original contained appalling arithmetic. 2 billion divided by 4 million is not one half. This is, I hope fixed now.
Click for large version
I know I implied I wouldn't be talking about specific issues, but screw that.
My basic reaction to the Taxathon pamphlet (and associated press release): I'm sure people who will be voting National anyway will just love it. To me, it seems kind of childish. As in, it might have been more persuasive with a more serious tone.
But then, I'm not representative of the general population.
Also, I wonder if this way it doesn't make the whole idea of over-taxing and wasteful spending look, well, kind of cute.
And (suprise suprise) I believe it is genuinely debatable whether New Zealand is overtaxed, and whether the quality of spending is all that bad, by world standards.
Oh, and one observation out of several: I know they don't actually explicitly say the money in the right-hand column is all waste, but that $239,000,000 is the entire annual spend on Te Wananga O Aotearoa, isn't it? Does that mean you do want to axe it, Mr English?
The pamplet is, however, somewhat resistant to parody. That is to say, point-by-point quibbling of the whole thing would make me feel like a lot more of as hack than I am.
And what with its done-in-my-office aesthetic, and what with the cuteness thing noted above, it's kind of already parodying itself.
Still, with Aaron so determined to supply the bits, it would be churlish not to a least have a nibble ...
Update (12:35AM, 7/8): Original contained appalling arithmetic. 2 billion divided by 4 million is not one half. This is, I hope fixed now.
Click for large version
Lyndon Hood - welfarist, Lower Hutt
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Any policy yet? You know who I'm talking about. No?
Of course, there's stuff from Labour to come too. Word is, we can expect tears before final historical Treaty grievance deadline.
Still no policy? Okay then, lets generalise.
It seems Don Brash isn't actually having that much influence over National policy, which will probably annoy all those former ACT voters no end if he actually gets to be PM. But I still get the idea that the general stance is more radical - at the very least more like the last National government - than they're trying to make out.
Cards on the table. I was born in the mid-70s and a lot of my political opinions were formed over the late 80s and the 90s. I'm inclined to accept that some kind of Rogeresque reforms were necessary; I'm entirely happy they stopped where they did and I think they could probably do with a touch more rolling back.
There's some real political philosophy I want to get to one day. You'll often find my responses to particular issues on Scoop. And then there's this:
I don't like the tone of National, or at least of some of the supporting comment I've seen. Tax rebates are reward for work. In the circumstances, this translates to "you get what you grab". Similarly incentives for beneficiaries amounts to being stopping being nice, or in some cases being actively nasty, to beneficiaries.
Faced with that kind of attitude, I have this thought, inspired I suppose by John A Lee, via Mervyn Thompson:
What about the children of the poor?
It's not my only argument, or even my first choice. It's certainly not a blanket justification for everything the Labour-Progessive government has done. But it's a goodie.
What about the children of the poor?
The position they are in is self-evidently not their fault. They need to live. And if you deny them what little nourishment, care, health, society and culture went can get them, that is simply a waste.
If you find the idea of wasted human potential too flaky, think of it as a waste of economic productivity.
Opinions on how to deal with this, naturally, differ.
Speaking as a white guy with at least indirect access to a good income that's already paid its loan, the declared National policies that I object to will only actually harm me indirectly. For example, by screwing up society.
If you ask, National probably say the poor will be better off their way. Well, actually, Brash, who seems to sometimes become honest when cornered, doesn't think he has has much control over child poverty.
Thing is, I don't get the feeling they actually care.
New-ish Hood: Clark Announces Election - Hundreds Flee To Australia
Of course, there's stuff from Labour to come too. Word is, we can expect tears before final historical Treaty grievance deadline.
Still no policy? Okay then, lets generalise.
It seems Don Brash isn't actually having that much influence over National policy, which will probably annoy all those former ACT voters no end if he actually gets to be PM. But I still get the idea that the general stance is more radical - at the very least more like the last National government - than they're trying to make out.
Cards on the table. I was born in the mid-70s and a lot of my political opinions were formed over the late 80s and the 90s. I'm inclined to accept that some kind of Rogeresque reforms were necessary; I'm entirely happy they stopped where they did and I think they could probably do with a touch more rolling back.
There's some real political philosophy I want to get to one day. You'll often find my responses to particular issues on Scoop. And then there's this:
I don't like the tone of National, or at least of some of the supporting comment I've seen. Tax rebates are reward for work. In the circumstances, this translates to "you get what you grab". Similarly incentives for beneficiaries amounts to being stopping being nice, or in some cases being actively nasty, to beneficiaries.
Faced with that kind of attitude, I have this thought, inspired I suppose by John A Lee, via Mervyn Thompson:
What about the children of the poor?
It's not my only argument, or even my first choice. It's certainly not a blanket justification for everything the Labour-Progessive government has done. But it's a goodie.
What about the children of the poor?
The position they are in is self-evidently not their fault. They need to live. And if you deny them what little nourishment, care, health, society and culture went can get them, that is simply a waste.
If you find the idea of wasted human potential too flaky, think of it as a waste of economic productivity.
Opinions on how to deal with this, naturally, differ.
Speaking as a white guy with at least indirect access to a good income that's already paid its loan, the declared National policies that I object to will only actually harm me indirectly. For example, by screwing up society.
If you ask, National probably say the poor will be better off their way. Well, actually, Brash, who seems to sometimes become honest when cornered, doesn't think he has has much control over child poverty.
Thing is, I don't get the feeling they actually care.
New-ish Hood: Clark Announces Election - Hundreds Flee To Australia
