Open mike 27/01/2013

63 comments on “Open mike 27/01/2013 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. xtasy 1

   27 January 2013 at 7:29 am

   Today is da day, so to say, the day of cutting the air and future focus.

   I hate those last two words, sorry, they send a chill down my spine, as that was Bennett’s recipe to deal to us WINZ “bludgers”, was it not???

   Anyway, today is SHEARER DAY, it is the day of make or break again, once again. We had one late November last year, where all was good, until the Cunliffe slashing took place, but, aye, it was the hyped up housing speech.

   Now I am looking forward now, I want to hear and smile, to learn and yearn, to love and hate, whatever, I want to hear bloody Shearer speak the speech for the nation.

   This is going to be it, to be interesting, that stuff late last year was so staged and over-exercised, I want to hear and see what our great friend Mike Smith has been telling us. Shearer is all good, a real success, will win 2014, and he is a HOT shot of sorts.

   I am waiting and hearing and listening. Let us wait and see and discuss later today. I had a night through, unusual, but I get this, to work on real BIG projects I cannot divulge on. It is done, in the pipeline, I will watch the space, and once something comes of it, I may share it here, at least in bits.

   Do not fall for all this hype crap and stay real and honest, folks, we are all in it together, even with JK bastard. We are “humane”, and even the wrongdoers will not be thrown off the life boats here. I wonder if they would treat us the same. Good night, good morning or good day, whatever. Take care and enjoy!
   • Colonial Weka 1.1

     27 January 2013 at 10:27 am

     Nah, today is Turei Day 😉

     http://thestandard.org.nz/green-party-im-in-for-the-future/
     • bad12 1.1.1

       27 January 2013 at 12:02 pm

       LOLZ, the sun is shining bright in it’s sky and everything looks so GREEN…
   • James 1.2

     27 January 2013 at 1:36 pm

     I tried to find on the Labour website anything to do with Shearer making his speech at Wainuiomata today given all the Labour emails go to Spam in my inbox, but I couldn’t find anything on their website. I wanted to know what time, where etc. It’s probably in my emails, but if I were someone who didn’t receive emails and heard Shearer was giving a speech in Wainuiomata and wanted to see if Cpt Mumblefuck really mumbles fuck, I’d like to know where to go…

     Another example of the “closed shop” that is the once great New Zealand Labour Party.

     btw: When going into their website it’s got “Nationals Departure Lounge” right at the top in much bigger font than the Labour logo, wtf? Bad web design and editing principles.
     • veutoviper 1.2.1

       27 January 2013 at 1:42 pm

       Sherarer’s speech is happening right now presumably as it was scheduled for 1.30pm in the Summer School programme.
2. Dv 2

   27 January 2013 at 7:47 am

   This is not good.

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8228299/World-asks-is-NZ-milk-safe-to-drink

   The Washington Post, running a story from the Bloomberg wire service, said Fonterra and the Government were facing a “milk scare”.

   That panic was sparked by a Wall Street Journal article which labelled DCD a “toxic” substance that could cause damage to New Zealand’s $10 billion dairy industry. Farmers apply DCD to pastures to prevent the fertiliser byproduct nitrate from getting into rivers and lakes.

   On Friday, dairy company Fonterra announced that it had found low levels of the fertiliser aid dicyandiamide (DCD) in dairy products. The tests were undertaken in September, two months before the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) was alerted.

   That delay has caused Labour’s trade spokesman, Clayton Cosgrove, to question whether such a decision could cause more widespread damage.
   • Colonial Weka 2.1

     27 January 2013 at 10:32 am

     This is good. Industrial dairy is not only not sustainable, it is causing massive damage to the land in NZ. Bout time the spotlight was on those destructive practices.

     It is possible for us to make a living without fucking the environment we are part of and are dependent on.
     • rosy 2.1.1

       27 January 2013 at 10:41 am

       Industrial dairy is not only not sustainable, it is causing massive damage to the land in NZ.

       And is set to do more damage with the massive government input into irrigation and water storage schemes
       From a press release from Forest & Bird :

       Forest & Bird says the private industrial irrigation schemes that the Government plans to spend $400 million of taxpayer’s money on over the next four years will leave this country worse off, not better.

       The Government announced this week that a new Crown-owned company will allocate the first $80m in this year’s budget, as part of its plan to subsidise large scale irrigation schemes.

       “If these private schemes really make financial sense, then the agricultural sector would not need such significant taxpayer subsidies,” says Forest & Bird Advocacy Manager Kevin Hackwell.

       “As taxpayers are already paying huge amounts for cleaning up waterways that have been degraded by poorly managed agricultural intensification, New Zealanders will not want to subsidise any new schemes, which will spoil even more rivers.
       • Rosie 2.1.1.1

         27 January 2013 at 11:25 am

         Hi Rosy and Hi Colonial Weka. I see the discussion around the recent National Govt irrigation funding announcement is going on today as well. I have copied my reply to you at yesterdays Open Mike, here:

         “It’s all a bit cloak and dagger to me. It’s also rolling over the conutry’s democracy, if it’s Canterbury”.

         Exactly. The sacking of the elected representatives of ECAN was a breath taking act of tyranny, with the intention of blocking attempts from concerned parties who wish to take the matter of irrigation to the environment court. The documents obtained by The Press under the OIA spell out clearly the intention of the govt to “suspend democracy” in favour of economic growth for the Canterbury region: (And for whose benefit really?)

         http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/7874996/Race-to-irrigate-behind-ECan-move

         John Minto’s view:

         http://www.converge.org.nz/watchdog/24/07.htm

         So water storage plans aside for Hawke’s Bay, Wellington and Nelson Tasman (thanks for actually reading the pdf’s on the nat site!) One of the big issues around the announcemment of the $80 million funding for irrigation is the removal of the democratic process. It’s just not any old irrigation scheme.
         Secondly, as you mentioned, is the issue of the environment. The expansion of dairying in Canterbury surely can’t be a sustainable move and one that the environment won’t be able to support long term. Climate change experts predict that dry regions of NZ (eg Canterbury) will continue to get drier and experience more droughts where as wetter areas (eg, west coast) will continue to get wetter and experience more floods. We had an example of this over Xmas/NY with floods in the west coast and ultra hot dry and windy conditions over the other side of the alps that contributed to scrub fires… And of course I agree with you in regard to the issue of industrial farming and it’s intensification. Just how much can you force out of an animal and out of the land that supports that animal?
         The burden on the environment will be too much.
         Oh for a govt with a vision!
     • Foreign Waka 2.1.2

       27 January 2013 at 11:30 am

       Comment from the article: It is not melamine, its not as poisonous. Hallelujah!
   • David H 2.2

     27 January 2013 at 4:51 pm

     Now Key will shit bricks if his beloved farming sector starts to slow down. There goes his fictitious surplus even further out of reach
3. RH 3

   27 January 2013 at 8:29 am

   Even water is toxic taken in large amounts…
   • Dv 3.1

     27 January 2013 at 9:05 am

     Obviously, but it is still not a good look.
     • McFlock 3.1.1

       27 January 2013 at 4:36 pm

       not even watering down milk
4. kiwicommie 4

   27 January 2013 at 8:43 am

   This NZ Herald article was malicious and disgusting: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10861651
   “So, why should we attempt to “cure” child poverty, given that the disease does not really exist and even if it did, we do not care? Perhaps we should abolish the Children’s Commission.”
   The last time I visit their site, Grant should get a room with Ann Coulter. I’d rather a better sleep, than read the herald. Maybe the families in poverty can sue for libel, he claims they don’t exist.
5. KJT 5

   27 January 2013 at 10:08 am

   Just for Jenny.

   http://www.greens.org.nz/speeches/state-planet-speech-2013

   One of a Green co-leaders major speeches.

   Ignoring AGW?
   • Jenny 5.1

     27 January 2013 at 10:30 am

     Just for Jenny.

     KJT

     Thank you for the compliment.

     I will continue to hold their feet to the fire until they stop trying to play down climate change and agree to make it an election issue in 2014.

     Let us not see a repeat of the shameful US presidential election in this country where all sides have an unspoken gentleman’s agreement not to discuss this issue.
     • QoT 5.1.1

       27 January 2013 at 12:13 pm

       I will continue to hold their feet to the fire

       Yes, I’m sure it’s your constant dominating of Standard Open Mike threads that’s forced Turei to mention climate change despite the will of her political masters. 🙄
       • Jenny 5.1.1.1

         27 January 2013 at 1:38 pm

         Turei is is a political leader in her own right. Responsible for her own decisions and policy statements. Good, or ill.

         She (hopefully) is not beholden to the male political masters you cynically allude to.

         I will do my, admitted little, best to ask her and other Green leaders to take on board my reservations about their political direction. (Even despite threats from you to expunge my comments.)
6. geoff 6

   27 January 2013 at 10:29 am

   This looks interesting:
   http://lhp.org.nz/?p=542
7. ak 7

   27 January 2013 at 10:42 am

   XSector 868873 year of glorious Viper report from Madam Luicheng in all briefness: Operation D&C~DC proceeding in lagging measure to neutralise opposition to standard infiltration and acquisiton of bounteous resource. DC target resisted temptation and to be replaced with other willing tool Deluded Independent Commentators. Proceeding. Sub-operation DCD early release in current season.
   Sector Summary: D&C most absolute effectiveness measure in progressive fields over all time, to continue. DC D&C role vacancy filled easily by standard DICs as DCD plan devalues target. Key snake figurehead held firmly in position by own propaganda units. Largest socialist resource operation now corporatised and open to normal acquisitions. Year of Viper Snake’s Grass acquisition target progressing to plan.
8. Jenny 8

   27 January 2013 at 11:05 am

   ‘

   The history of the Nobel prize in economics has been revealed.

   In recognition of this auspicious event. Along with the New Years Honours list I think we should create a high profile New Zealand version. By which this country can identify the recipients and accord them the proper recognition they deserve.

   In no particular order, I would like to forward my list of innaugral nominees, they are: Roger Douglas, Don Brash, Ruth Richardson, Bill English, Steven Joyce, David Parker.
   • uke 8.1

     27 January 2013 at 7:55 pm

     Good article – thanks.
9. PlanetOrphan 9

   27 January 2013 at 11:37 am

   Individual Employment Contracts and the impact on company formations over the last 20 years.
   (A really hard figure to calculate, because of the “Self-Employed-Contractor”)
   Do individual employment contracts really help Aoteoroa ?
   • James 9.1

     27 January 2013 at 1:40 pm

     Self Employed Contractor won’t be Employment contracts. They’re contractual matters.

     Individual employment contracts are the worst thing given the “requirement” to not “discuss your pay level with your colleagues”

     I’d rather see group contracts for departments/divisions of MNCs and other large corporations. So somewhere like the Warehouse will have “Stockroom employment agreements” and “front of house employment agreements” “supervisor employment agreements” that are standard and contain the paybands in writing in the agreement to show what people on that agreement can earn up to.

     But given the militant attitude of employers against unions, unlikely to happen unless legislated.
     • PlanetOrphan 9.1.1

       28 January 2013 at 5:23 pm

       At the cost of job security, seems to be one of the missing pieces of policies at the moment.

       School leavers need the support of collective bargaining let alone the rest of the work force.
10. rosy 10

    27 January 2013 at 12:14 pm

    Lesson for today… Know your place, and it’s not in the boardrooms or the bars.

    Davos – apparently the elite of the elite companies that attend would rather send only four male delegates rather than the five executives that they’re entitled to send if that fifth person must be a female executive.

    And in other news – women are being blamed for their own rapes again. This time by the Absolutely Fabulous Joanna Lumley. Sure, people behave badly, but hey women don’t rape themselves.
    • QoT 10.1

      27 January 2013 at 1:27 pm

      A great comment I saw on Facebook today: the big framing problem* with approaching rape prevention in terms of “here’s what you, as a woman, should do to avoid being raped” is that it all boils down to “make sure someone else gets raped instead of you.”

      *The other big problems falling under the “also this approach has never actually addressed the realities of rape and relies on stranger-in-a-dark-alley myths” heading
      • Colonial Weka 10.1.1

        27 January 2013 at 9:04 pm

        QFT. Although the people that think that women cause rape by how they dress etc, presumably also believe that the man wouldn’t have raped at all if he hadn’t been made to at that time (eg by being exposed to a woman in a short skirt).
        • rosy 10.1.1.1

          27 January 2013 at 10:36 pm

          presumably also believe that the man wouldn’t have raped at all if he hadn’t been made to at that time

          The trouble with that line is all the kids, old ladies and housewives cleaning windows* that get raped.

          *Years a go a woman was at home cleaning the windows one morning. A man spotted her, found the door unlocked and went in and raped her. The police were reported as saying women should protect themselves by locking their doors when home alone. Really made me think about where the blame was being laid, that one.
          • Colonial Weka 10.1.1.1.1

            27 January 2013 at 10:40 pm

            Ah, but those women get raped by real rapists, unlike women in short skirts, who provoke otherwise decent men into raping them by showing too much leg. Or something.

            I guess the point I am trying to make is that people will believe whatever, if it means they don’t have to think about the men they know and care about being rapists.
            • rosy 10.1.1.1.1.1

              27 January 2013 at 10:56 pm

              Like you don’t want to think about that if you want to prevent rape, best to keep the men at home with the door locked (as long as you haven’t left any old ladies, or kids with them) and go out yourself kind of thing?

              At this point I’d like to express my appreciation for all the caring, kind and thoughtful men I know who would never treat women badly.
              • Colonial Viper …

                27 January 2013 at 11:22 pm

                Every human being needs to maintain adequate self protection skills. This includes the ability to assess, mitigate, and use strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.

                Maintaining appropriate situational awareness at all times is crucial in being able to perform these tasks adequately, especially in environments where you may have relatively low degrees of control or initiative. The last thing you want to do is find yourself in a situation with low situational awareness combined with low degrees of control combined with an inability to assert the initiative.

                Whatever other cultural, moral or philosophical overlays may be placed in the frame, these are the very basics for maximising self protection and survival. “Blame”, “judgement” etc. are exercises for the idle commentariat and media in their leisure time, but completely irrelevant in the critical moments which actually count.
                • rosy …

                  27 January 2013 at 11:33 pm

                  Yes, you have to protect yourself. But why? Does a shopkeeper get robbed because there is no protection against just anyone walking through the door? It’s the thief’s fault, not the shopkeepers. Same process for most opportunistic crime imo.

                  The situation I described with the window-cleaning rape was not and ‘exercises for the idle commentariat and media in their leisure time’ it was totally relevant being, at the time, a stay at home young mother with the kids at kindergarten. It made me think very much about my situational awareness. And then get angry that I might have to change my innocent behaviour to take into account some very nasty behaviour of others. That’s not a good way for society to be.
                  • Colonial Viper …

                    27 January 2013 at 11:41 pm

                    Yeah agree its not a good way for society to be. A pervasive sense of insecurity and fear is destructive to communities.

                    Does a shopkeeper get robbed because there is no protection against just anyone walking through the door?

                    Shopkeepers tend to minimise how much cash they have on hand, ensure that they don’t hold cash on the premises over weekends and over nights, can install security cameras and alarms, and the better ones ensure that their staff are trained in how to handle situations like robberies etc. to minimise the risk of harm.

                    It’s the thief’s fault, not the shopkeepers. Same process for most opportunistic crime imo.

                    As I suggested, blame can get assigned any time after the critical moments have been appropriately handled.
                    • rosy …

                      28 January 2013 at 12:04 am

                      You’re heading toward making QoT’s point that what you’re doing is protecting yourself, so the opportunist will pick on someone not as ‘situationally aware’.

                      Like maybe an old lady living alone who forgot to lock up properly and with a few dollars on the sideboard. Situational awareness doesn’t prevent the crime, just diverts it. Changing the situations, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of potential criminals prevents crime.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      28 January 2013 at 12:18 am

                      The problem is that you and I don’t have all that much control over other peoples beliefs, attitudes and behaviours, but we have a fair bit over our own.
                    • rosy …

                      28 January 2013 at 12:29 am

                      “The problem is that you and I don’t have all that much control over other peoples beliefs, attitudes and behaviours…”

                      No we don’t, not in an individual sense, but in a societal sense it’s possible to reduce the risk. Hence a strong belief in social justice, poverty reduction and all of those other things that lefties fight for.

                      I think the main difference in our opinions on personal safety is that you’re talking from a position of someone who has a strong belief in your own ability to protect yourself from crime – and I’m pleased that you do have that confidence.

                      I’m coming from a position where I think I cannot protect myself from crime and my personal safety is often at some risk… unless I provide some sort of physical or virtual barricade (like the way I dress, not being visibly alone, the times I travel or am out on the street etc, etc.), which is not something I’m happy to do – not even close.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      28 January 2013 at 12:39 am

                      Your points are good ones rosy. Self belief is not always that easy to cultivate or keep on hand, and I understand that I can’t speak to the particular environments and situations around your own locality and day to day life.
                    • rosy …

                      28 January 2013 at 1:28 am

                      “Your points are good ones rosy.”
                      Thanks CV

                      “I understand that I can’t speak to the particular environments and situations around your own locality and day to day life.”

                      I guess it’s not particular environments and situations, it’s any environment where the onus is on innocent person to keep safe rather than on people generally not to do bad stuff and creating a society that understands that personal freedom doesn’t mean infringing against someone else.
                    • locus …

                      28 January 2013 at 2:26 am

                      Yes CV you’re right ….. goes without saying that risk awareness is essential, but is it reasonable to expect children, elderly, people under the influence of alcohol, etc. to be fully risk aware, and then also have the ability to deal with “critical moments”?

                      Managing risk… well you can do this by:
                      1 – Removing the risk. This is the right way to go, and IMO a good way to ‘remove’ the risk is for society as a whole to challenge every type of justification or excuse for men exploiting their power over others to satisfy their sexual appetite. In other words, repudiate any argument that suggests the rape victim was in part responsible for the crime. Alternatively you could lock up every would-be rapist… which is plain nonsense.

                      2 – Avoiding the risk. For example by not being visible if you’re a vulnerable person (e.g child, woman alone, elderly person), by always locking doors, or only going out if you have a ‘protector’ with you. All clearly unacceptable strategies in a civilised society.

                      3 – Reducing the likelihood by tackling the immediate conditions which make it easier for a rapist to get away with it. So more street lights, Police, cameras, Big Brother? Not the kind of society I want to live in.

                      4 – Mitigating the risk e.g. by everyone being able to “maintain adequate self protection skills” and “assert the initiative.” In a world with more criminals and criminality, your advice CV seems to make sense. But is it realistic to expect the vulnerable to hold their own in those ‘critical moments’.

                      So let’s not focus on risk mitigation as this may seriously distract attention from the critical job, which is to tackle the societal causes of crime.

                      ‘Fighting for survival’ must be more about destroying neoliberal, individualistic and randian ideologies, than teaching our children to constantly look over their shoulders.
11. benghazi 11

    27 January 2013 at 12:25 pm

    I wonder what the women’s caucus thinks of the likely demotion of both Nanaia Mahuta and Maryan Street from the front bench?

    Vernon Small’s piece in the Sunday Star Times today sets out some ideas for the reshuffled front bench. As Vernon is usually spoonfed his intelligence from the Leader’s Office, this reflects their current thinking.

    Word is that Shane Jones will come through the A-G report fine just in time to be appointed Economic Development spokesperson.
12. Beanie 12

    27 January 2013 at 1:10 pm

    Milk = overseas earnings = money for taxes = money to fund health and education and benefits

    Mining = taxes = ?

    mmmmm
    • CV - Real Labour 12.1

      27 January 2013 at 1:34 pm

      If we sold off your grandmother to the Russians, it’d have the same effect.
13. Logie97 13

    27 January 2013 at 1:30 pm

    Populist policy-on-the-hoof wins out again. On the surface it looks like
    an arbitrary date of Jan 1 2000 apparently defines the condition and safety of your motor vehicle.

    There are vehicles that have been wonderfully maintained, serviced and WOF’d that were registered well before 2000. On the other hand there are vehicles that are 5, 6 and 7 years old that you would be very wary of getting into.

    “Changes to WoF system aim to save $159m annually”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10861731
    • Bill 13.1

      27 January 2013 at 2:01 pm

      So companies that buy for their car fleets save a fuck of a lot of money, and (Tui) rental costs come down accordingly. Meanwhile, what they should be concentrating on is emmssion standards. All new cars should be no more than 100g carbon/km.
    • fenderviper 13.2

      27 January 2013 at 2:17 pm

      Another saving for the more affluent who own the newest vehicles.

      Another 2000 jobs lost (according to MTA)

      More Pike River type policy that will result in a rise in road deaths.
14. clashman 14

    27 January 2013 at 3:19 pm

    Whats the bet the cost of a wof rises considerably to compensate for the lower volumes.
    So the only people saving money here, will be those able to afford new cars regularly and large businesses with leased fleets .
    Those lower down the ladder will face increased costs as they will still require 6 monthly wofs which will undoubtedly increase in price.
    Basically another kick in the guts for the poor. Thanks National, you fucking devious pricks.

    Whoops -meant to be a reply to 13
    • fenderviper 14.1

      27 January 2013 at 10:47 pm

      You are probably correct clashman, that would be the Nact way to “ballance” the ledger.

      Would sleepy hobbits wake up over such a tactic I wonder, or would they mobilise themselves for a protest similar to the French truck drivers(?)
15. ScottGN 15

    27 January 2013 at 6:52 pm

    I wonder if the Tourism Minister has noticed that Queenstown’s pretty busy this weekend with lots of Australians visiting and that’s due to the fact that Australia Day is a mondayised public holiday?
16. joe90 16

    27 January 2013 at 7:29 pm

    The trailer for The Revisionaries, a documentary about the hijacking of US public school syllabuses by the religious right.
17. Te Reo Putake 17

    27 January 2013 at 8:56 pm

    Attention Citizens! Dredd Gay Shock!

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/comic-book-hero-judge-dredd-might-be-gay-8466959.html
    • Rhinoviper 17.1

      27 January 2013 at 9:02 pm

      The very essence of Dredd is that he is closeted – closeted even as a human. Revealing that he is gay or straight or having any overt sexuality would be like him taking his helmet off and that is unthinkable! Drokk!
      • CV - Real Labour 17.1.1

        27 January 2013 at 9:07 pm

        lol, just point me to the perp, citizen
        • Rhinoviper 17.1.1.1

          27 January 2013 at 9:19 pm

          From the article:
          “I’d rather a story be provocative than just, ‘and they have a fight’.
          

          OK, maybe. It could be fun to suggest all sorts of things about Dredd and never confirm any of them. If is essence is repression, lets suggest that he might be repressing everything. Next issue: Dredd collects stamps! Maybe or maybe not. Following issue: Dredd makes ships in bottles. Maybe or maybe not. Next issue after that: Dredd is a Morris dancer. Maybe or maybe not…
        • Rhinoviper 17.1.1.2

          27 January 2013 at 9:27 pm

          FWIW, my editor has worked with a lot of the 2000AD writers and has a clue on why he’s been so popular. The writers generally hated him, or rather what he represented, so they tried to show how awful he was… but because the strip has always been satire, any attempt to depict him as awful has only strengthened the satire, so in the end, they all loved Dredd the character and made him better.
        • Descendant Of Sssmith 17.1.1.3

          27 January 2013 at 9:32 pm

          It’s only a surprise to those who don’t read Judge Dredd.

          Here’s an example of pregnant men in #300.

          http://calamity-coyote.blogspot.co.nz/2010/08/reason-1457-why-judge-dredd-is-awesome.html

          and this episode has been known about for some time. We were discussing it months ago.

          http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/10/29/and-finally-a-very-gay-judge-dredd/

          Non-comic fans are all outraged as are what seems to be mainly US media.

          I think it’s pretty cool and entirely consistent with the Dredd universe.
          • Rhinoviper 17.1.1.3.1

            27 January 2013 at 9:50 pm

            Oh I’m cool with Dredd being gay, I’m just not cool with him not being repressed about… everything.
            • CV - Real Labour 17.1.1.3.1.1

              27 January 2013 at 9:56 pm

              Patrolling a MegaCity is a tough job and feelings are liabilities on the tough streets.
            • Descendant Of Sssmith 17.1.1.3.1.2

              27 January 2013 at 10:06 pm

              When I was writing that only TRP had posted.
              • Rhinoviper …

                27 January 2013 at 11:01 pm

                Cool. No worries. We can’t get into mistaken arguments over Judge Dredd, can we? 🙂
18. the Al1en 18

    27 January 2013 at 10:00 pm

    I’ve always thought Dredd’s man servant droid Walter was an pictorial euphemism.
19. Dave Kennedy (bsprout) 19

    27 January 2013 at 11:49 pm

    Garage conversions are National’s secret solution to the housing crisis:
    http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/john-keys-housing-solutions.html

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS