Open mike 28/11/09

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 28th, 2009 - 9 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

mike

Topics of interest, announcements, general discussion. The usual rules apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

9 comments on “Open mike 28/11/09 ”

  1. dave 1

    Good article from John Armstrong in the Herald, isnt it…

  2. Armstrongyou mean the unilluminating monotone whiner? whose columns are generally useful only for a quick precis of current Crosby/Textor think.

  3. andy 3

    Yeah Armstrong’s column is a wonderful analysis of the ETS and its impacts on businesses and individuals, I not he also goes into great detail about what it means to Maori Forestry interests as opposed to individual Maori taxpayers.

    /sigh

  4. randal 4

    hello folks.
    (capcha reads smile).
    this mornings dompost (saturday) leads off witha front page item about three dollar bill going downtown to get a haircut and his entourage deciding that the parking laws do not apply to them.
    this is the arrogance of the National Party.
    they dont want to do the hard yards and face the hard choices; all they want to do is swan around down town wellington big noting.
    Thats what power means to these people.
    Riding roughshod over everyone else just because they can.
    We can see that when the PM refuses to take part in the most momentuous conference of our time and now this outbreak of feeble pompous strutting that the governments priorities are those of pinheads or someone who has just won the lotto.
    No Matter.
    this government is on the way out down a rapidly increasing sliding slope and is speedily accumulating a backlog of demerit points.

    • Tigger 4.1

      If there is no evidence that English ordered the driver to park there then, in all fairness, we have to conclude it was the driver, not English who is to blame. I say that leaving aside the fact that in National’s mind there are people who are not innocent until proven guilty…

      But then there is the fact that this happened on Thursday…
      “He had not attended Parliament on Thursday because he had a back injury, his spokesman said.”
      So he’s too ill to work but well enough for a haircut? How many employers would slam their employees for doing this sort of thing…

      P.S. 50 minutes for a haircut? Who is he, Mariah Carey?

      • felix 4.1.1

        Back injury my arse – he’d need a spine for that.

      • Armchair Critic 4.1.2

        “If there is no evidence that English ordered the driver to park there then, in all fairness, we have to conclude it was the driver, not English who is to blame”
        So he didn’t notice? There have been discussions about how passengers in crown cars that did’t notice when the driver broke the law. I’m surprised at the lack of “Labour did it, too” comments. Surely he would have seen the yellow lines when he walked from the car to the shop?
        I’m more interested to know why he needed a couple of drivers and minders to get a haircut. Wouldn’t it have been cheaper to get the barber to come to him?
        “P.S. 50 minutes for a haircut? Who is he, Mariah Carey?”
        My guess is he was following Steve Joyce’s example and getting a bit of policy advice at the same time.

    • felix 4.2

      FTA:

      His security detail members of the Diplomatic Protection Squad now face a $150 fine and his own driver can expect a $60 ticket from Wellington City Council.

      Are we going to end up paying these fines for Bill’s haircut? And are we paying for the haircut itself as well?

      Normally I wouldn’t even bother to ask but this is a guy who expects the taxpayers to clean up after him and his family in their own home, after all.

  5. outofbed 5

    he has has a back injury because of the extra house work he has to do