Lyndon Hood - armchair satirist, Wellington
Wednesday, September 04, 2013
From The Hood: Armchairs At Dawn
“Wastage!” – Granger spoke the word like a man who was settling the argument once and for all. Interesting because, far from arguing with him, I had hardly sat down and opened my newspaper. To tell the truth I hadn’t noticed he was awake. More>>
From Werewolf 42, an Aussie election special.
By the way the image there is something Gordon found on the Internet, and is no relation.
Also: come see me in The Young and the WITless 7: Small Town, Big Hearts. We're at the new Fringe Bar every Wednesday. Except for the one that's at Bats.
Labels: asset sales, nz politics, referendum, waste, werewolf
Anti-Smacking Lobby Gets "Thrashing", Still Refuses To Behave
Monday, August 24, 2009
Opponents of the smacking referendum have been left nursing their wounds after being seriously thrashed in the recent referendum. But despite this beating, they refuse to do what they're told - and continue to act just as lippy, if not more so.
No-vote Lobbyists have been left wondering how big a whipping it would take for these people to learn.
"We're looking for any other instruments we can use to induce compliance," said Larry Baldock, who organised the initial petition. "We'll kick a few ideas around. If the right tool comes to hand I'll give anything a bash."
Baldock has threatened Prime Minister John Key with a similarly heavy pounding at the next election if Key does not do as he's told. "We don't want to, but if Mr Key won't behave, we'll have no choice," said Baldock. "He needs to learn the consequences of his actions."
Mr Key is expected to make some sullen and half-hearted effort to distract Baldock's attention and then run away.
The child advocacy groups who supported the yes vote must surely be bruised, battered and bleeding after their crushing smack-down. But apparently they are used to being abused. This latest walloping - where they were figuratively thrown to the floor and kicked into unconsciousness - has not made them see reason.
But they also refused to admit they were wrong when threatened with a loaded question, so I guess they just won't learn.
The no-vote campaign argued for parents' right to impose discipline with a gentle, loving smack, that has no consequences for the smackee apart from a sense they have been kissed by a pink marshmallow. They agree that the next step must be to deal with New Zealand's serious problem of violence against children.
In related news, a shock agreement is expected between Larry Baldock - who believes a smacking defence can be restored by deleting parts of Section 59 - and Sue Bradford - who initially planned to remove any smacking defence by deleting Section 59.
Speculation that Larry Baldock has no idea what he's talking about is unconfirmed as of press time.
***
Labels: larry baldock, referendum, satire, section 59
Lyndon Hood - Gobsmacked, Wellington
Thursday, August 20, 2009
I'm just trying to work out if there's a live thread on the PA forum form complaining about Larry Baldock, because, I mean, really:
Now, firstly, I wouldn't think this was the moment for advocating the second-kitchen-drawer method of discipline.
But the main thing is - surely - if you amended the law as he suggests... much as I'm sure he thinks a periodic belting is part of "the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting"... if you deleted (2) and (3) I wouldn't have thought it would make the difference he wants it to: there would still be not actual defence for smacking.
[Mind you, I'm someone who thinks (1) does not allow punishment so much as actual prevention such as restraint or removal of the child. Which makes the law both more stringent and less confusing than I've heard it made out to be. OTOH, I wouldn't think (2) overrides any other defences for assault.]
But my main point was: Not Larry's most un-counter-productive interview, there.
He proposes simply deleting two clauses in the Bradford law - the key clause banning the use of force for correction, and another stating that the ban on correction prevails over a clause permitting force to prevent harmful, criminal, disruptive or offensive behaviour and to perform "the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting".
Mr Baldock said his proposal, unlike the Boscawen bill, would let parents hit their children with instruments such as a wooden spoon.
"I'm not opposed to the wooden spoon or ruler because you can control things with that better than you can with an open hand."
Now, firstly, I wouldn't think this was the moment for advocating the second-kitchen-drawer method of discipline.
But the main thing is - surely - if you amended the law as he suggests... much as I'm sure he thinks a periodic belting is part of "the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting"... if you deleted (2) and (3) I wouldn't have thought it would make the difference he wants it to: there would still be not actual defence for smacking.
[Mind you, I'm someone who thinks (1) does not allow punishment so much as actual prevention such as restraint or removal of the child. Which makes the law both more stringent and less confusing than I've heard it made out to be. OTOH, I wouldn't think (2) overrides any other defences for assault.]
But my main point was: Not Larry's most un-counter-productive interview, there.
Labels: larry baldock, referendum, section 59
Lyndon Hood - Crotchety Old Man, Wellington
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Make your own referendum question.
On a related note, the latest Werewolf is out. Lyndon Hood writes, "Whine whine quote whine quote quote quote."
I imagine I put the goalposts somewhere outside the stadium on this particular question. Feel free to pop over and prove me wrong.
Labels: culture jamming, elections, referendum, satire, section 59, werewolf
Referendum 2009: Decision-Making Flowchart
Friday, July 03, 2009
Today the Governor-General is due to "direct the Clerk of the Writs to proceed immediately to issue a writ to the Returning Officer for the holding of the indicative referendum".
This means that the proposer of the referendum now cannot take it back, even if they had their fingers crossed.
So the writ signals that the end of this acrimonious debate is near: the three-week voting period will begin in just 28 days, so there is a mere seven weeks of campaigning left to endure.
You probably already know what you think. But because of certain qualities of the question that may not be the same as knowing how to vote. To help you out, and to give you something to do during the dark evenings of the campaign period, Scoop has produced a handy decision-making flowchart which simplifies the process as much as is feasible.
Once voting is over, the decision for politicians will be a simpler one, revolving around the question, "Can I find an excuse not to touch this issue with a barge pole?" Perhaps the following will be of use to them, too:
Click for big version
PDF version
3-page PDF version (easier for printing)
SVG version (remixable!)
Made with Gliffy Online Diagram Software
Previously:
- "Anti-Shoving" Debate Nears Climax
- Mr Field Goes To Wellington
- Write Your Own Child Abuse Press Release
- Police Trial Vindicates s59 Amendment
Labels: child abuse, referendum, satire, section 59
Lyndon Hood - Charmed, Wellington
Monday, June 22, 2009
So when I heard the No Vote website had a cartoon page (AND clip art navigation!) I just had to go and look and I pretty much got what I expected.
Seems someone doesn't like Mike Moreu.
Hil-arious.
(Quick update: The cartoon appears to be from one Stan Blanch earlier in the year.
See this post on Moreu's blog. Particularly in the comments: "The one he drew in that family first cartoon was a much better likness. Actually, come to think of it, it looks like he just traced the face from the banner on your blog."
Moreu's summary of the business he was actually posting about at the end of the thread is also informative, and adds to the unhappy impression of Stan that you get from skimming his google results.)
This is the kind of thing that makes them look like the kind of people that the kind of people they think think like the person in the cartoon think they are.
I'm stealing their bandwidth, but I take some consolation that image loads by this blog's readership will, shall we say, not be significant.
And also, in this case, I don't care if they suffer.
Seems someone doesn't like Mike Moreu.
Hil-arious.
(Quick update: The cartoon appears to be from one Stan Blanch earlier in the year.
See this post on Moreu's blog. Particularly in the comments: "The one he drew in that family first cartoon was a much better likness. Actually, come to think of it, it looks like he just traced the face from the banner on your blog."
Moreu's summary of the business he was actually posting about at the end of the thread is also informative, and adds to the unhappy impression of Stan that you get from skimming his google results.)
This is the kind of thing that makes them look like the kind of people that the kind of people they think think like the person in the cartoon think they are.
I'm stealing their bandwidth, but I take some consolation that image loads by this blog's readership will, shall we say, not be significant.
And also, in this case, I don't care if they suffer.
Labels: cartoons, mike moreu, pseudo-mike moreu, referendum, section 59, stan blanch
