Daily Review 27/01/2017

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, January 27th, 2017 - 23 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

23 comments on “Daily Review 27/01/2017”

  1. A multitude of reasons tell me English is– left holding the baby–. love to see a cartoon depicting this,please.

  2. billmurray 2

    What has happened to Colonial Viper?
    Anybody know?
    He is a savvy commentator.

    • Muttonbird 2.1

      Says the guy who doesn’t know the difference between residency and citizenship.

      CV’s been banned for a month for lying. You might be next.

      • billmurray 2.1.1

        Muttonbird: there is no real difference between residency and citizenship, I understand that both status gives them the right to vote. It would probably be easier to deport a residency status.
        Sorry to hear about CV, in my opinion he would be an asset to Labours head office.

        • Anne 2.1.1.1

          Tell ‘head office’ that but first… put some ear plugs in your ears. 😀

          • billmurray 2.1.1.1.1

            Anne,
            Thanks for the advice re; ear plugs. I had contact, about 6-9 months ago, with a Labour organiser who had worked for Andrew Little in the New Plymouth election(s). I asked him to keep a eye on CV. I got a negative response. I believe CV would be of good value for Labour, but only in a decision making role and not under the hammer working for someone. He would have to agree to the norms of collective responsibility of course but IMO he has good insight and wisdom about how Labour can attract people to them.
            Well done with the smiley face.

            • Muttonbird 2.1.1.1.1.1

              CV proposes doubling the price of petrol overnight. This is his answer to climate change.

              What other anarchic ramblings of his do you agree with?

              • billmurray

                Muttonbird,
                well if you are going to be serious about a matter of such importance as climate change, then you have be serious, that’s not anarchic.
                I did not support TPP and I was sickened by Labours bob each-way ie ‘we do not support TPP but if we are elected we shall retain TPP’ in other words vote for us as Labour and if elected we will revert to be National and retain TPP’.
                Labours cheap housing for Auckland’s was to be$600.000 plus, poor Aucklander’s would not have got into house at those prices, a defined poor person, under vetted criteria, would get a $200.000 hand-up to purchase their first home. (CV did not spell out this out but was right when he condemned Labour for their housing policies.
                I also generally supported his criticism of Labour for being timid in approach, not radical, not showing the banner, not being or showing any real points of difference between themselves and National.

                • Muttonbird

                  Hey, you were the one who called for CV to be promoted to the Labour strategy team. I only pointed out just one of his insane, anarchic ideas.

                  I think you are full of shit, btw. You are a conservative voter, not very bright, and thoroughly anti-Labour. These are the conditions which define you and no amount of bad forumming by you, and pretending to be progressive and ultra-left, is going to change that.

                  You still haven’t had the courage to let me know your handle on PR. This is another thing which defines you.

                  [people have a right to manage their pseudonyms how they see fit, please don’t harass people on this site over that. – weka]

                  • weka

                    Can you please let me know that you have seen both moderations on this page? Thanks.

                  • Muttonbird

                    Weka, I’ve seen them.

                    This guy billmurray has hinted that he knows my handle from another forum. He brought it up some weeks ago but then you must have missed that…

                    I’m just asking him to fess up his other pseudonym on another forum, if he says he knows me – but he refuses to. This was a conversation which he brought to this forum, not me. This is something which you as a moderator have failed to recognise.

                    The second was just a bit of humour – nothing nasty in it.

                    [I assumed there was background, but the principle remains. People have a right to manage their ID how they need to and not be hassled for it. – weka]

                    • Muttonbird

                      So it’s alright for billmurray to call me on my handle? If you are so keen on this why didn’t you reprimand him for the same some weeks ago?

                      I’d appreciate it if you did so now.

                  • adam

                    What is the constant use of anarchic as an attack, I thought this was a forum where people actually understood political definitions? If you can’t get you head around Anarchism Muttonbird, I’m sure there are enough people here to give you some counselling.

              • millsy

                CV has a lot of good points, though it seems that he thinks the only way to combat climate change is to revert to an 1860’s steampunk style situation. It is a view that I am somewhat uncomfortable with. Nothing wrong with powering down, but I dont think we really want or need to go back to draught horses, traction engines and washboards.

                • RedLogix

                  The problem was entirely political. We could have transitioned to some kind of powered down eco-technic future if we had been allowed to by the political establishment.

                  But now all the easy options are off the table; it’s going to be a long bumpy ride down towards collapse unless we are especially lucky. There are two forces at work, the older carbon based order visibly thrashing about in it’s death throes, another nascent one still not yet taken a sustainable shape.

                  The long-term outcome is clear; the path to get there is not.

  3. Pat 3

    Zero carbon by 2040….what odds?

    “Why does this matter? Well it means that we have about a decade less time to act on climate change if we are going to avoid the most serious consequences. It means we simply have no time to waste, and no room for error. It also means that even if we take action right now, there will be consequences. That said, it is better in the long run to act now than to wait. The people denying or delaying action are costing us, and our future generation much in terms of financial, social, and human capital.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jan/26/we-may-be-closer-than-we-thought-to-dangerous-climate-thresholds

  4. billmurray 4

    I see the “Trump” who was a draft dodger has taken to giving salutes.
    Unnerving, farcical, and a insult to veterans, serving men and woman alike.

  5. billmurray 5

    Bit slow at the moment:
    Why did the dog cross the road?.

    Because it was the chickens day off.

  6. billmurray 6

    Why did the cat cross the road?

    Because his owner didn’t want him to.

  7. Muttonbird 7

    [deleted]

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/323254/wellington-mayor-able-to-walk-away-after-serious-crash

    [deleted]

    [extremely bad taste. Time to tone down the nasty across your comments – weka]

Recent Comments

Recent Posts