This entry was posted on Sunday, December 26th, 2010 at 8:00 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Is the shaking something you get used to IV2? Or do you get better at ‘coping’?
I cant begin to imagine what it would be like.
Just a few days holidaying near Taupo was enough to unsettle me.
I think we had eleven “shakes” one morning.
From yesterday’s GD:
The moving target of the warmists. Not long ago they were predicting no snow and warmer weather, now is exactly the opposite but for the same reason: AGW.
Manolo
I have no love of Al Gore he is a hypocrite asking other people to save the planet while he consumes 30 times the average energy of an US citizen . However I did watch his movie which did say that the melting of the arctic seas would cause a long cold period in Western Europe and the Atlantic Coast of North America. So just because you and I don’t understand the science does not make wrong
This is why Hulun got the UN appointment. Gay marriage is one of the best ways to attack the family unit. Any leader who manages to get it through in their own country can count on a substantial reward and Hulun did lots of other things as well. They’ve obviously decided to give her even more responsibility to see what else she can do to advance the UN’s agenda.
Manolo (8.54am): Yes. Yes she is. It’s too much to hope for New Zealanders to suddenly wake up from their malaise and all convert to Conservatism overnight, so yes. ACT is absolutely necessary. Rodney is not the leader. Two questions though:
(1) did Coddington interview her navel to come up with this angle, or might it just be Prebble doing a gentle test of the waters?
(2) who do they get as their finance spokesperson? It would need to either be someone willing to be Sir Roger’s glove-puppet, or someone equally brilliant but less damaged.
How great it would be, to have a real opposition in the New Zealand parliament. Perhaps Mr Smile & Wave might not look so golden, huh?
Because … when gay people marry, it prevents straight people from marrying?
No gay marriage attacks the family unit because it destroys the integrity of the only legitimate union being between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation. This is the basis for raising children and when that is not the basis anymore it brings in the dynamic whereby people no longer look to the family unit as their mainstay of support but toward the state. This doesn’t happen overnight and it doesn’t even happen over a century. This has been happening since the 1920′s when the commies started it. If you want to know what political correctness is then look here because this is an upshot of that general campaign.
immigrant the blueprint for global govt is the EU and when you look at that and what it gradually does over time to destroy local democracy while building its own up, you see a blueprint for the process. Just keep an eye on that over the decades, is all I’m saying.
I always liked the word civil union tho.
Labels are very important in propaganda. This is why Liarbore always but always refer to the “failed policies of the nineties.” They have imprinted this on the minds of the reef-fish to the point it works like a pavlovian conditioned-response whenever they say it and they have to keep reminding people of it to keep that working so every now and again a gaggle of Liarborites will launch forth and the useful press will carry it to the chattering masses. This is why they fought so hard to name it marriage and not civil union. They were forced to back down but not until they’d pushed it as hard as they could. Disgusting creatures, aren’t they.
I must say its most regrettable the number of useful idiots on this issue [i.e. those who see it for only what the useful-idiot camouflage campaign says it is - a human rights issue]. Still, the number of people who buy feminism for the same reason are just about as numerous.
It’s not marriage, it’s a civil union, with complete legal rights as per a husband-wife partnership, just without the label.
What’s the obsession with the label?
The UN is the engine for major engineering changes ala e.g. the IPCC.
Hide did a deal with Newman to get the leadership, and that backfired on her when the board ranked her behind Roy in the party list. This is the fundamental problem with ACT – since 2004, the Parliamentary Party has lost touch with the membership (hence the dwindling in member numbers) and voters but the Parliamentary Party don’t care.
ACT needs to admit it’s core constituency is business, farmers and professionals and get out there and have the concerns of those communities back into Parliament instead of concentrating on Local Government and Consumer Affairs. And it needs to get out of bed with the Nats (but still support them passing legislation). Bring back strategy like Muriel Newman’s fantastic kneecap of Jenny Shipley when she asked what the benefits of the sale of two power stations were to let Shipley say how marvelous it all was, and then followed up by asking if selling two was so good, why not sell them all?
HUGE shake in Chch 10.29am Sunday (Boxing). Rolling aftershocks. We’ve had 5 big ones since 2.11am. The shakes are back aftera recess. This follows the 7.3 off coast of Vanuatu this morning, with 6 inch tsunami.
Reid – are you saying my marraige is less legitimate because men have married men and women have married women? This has caused our children to be the states responsibility? That’s unmitigated bullshit – I’m still married, the kids are Mrs Michael and my concern only.
Sorry about the last 3 paras of my 10:39 they should have been deleted before I posted. Anyway, further to the theme of political correctness:
As we all know political correctness is a communist-driven social engineering dynamic designed to destroy the family unit. It masquerades as a protector of human rights when in reality what it does is use the natural human instincts of love of others and a desire to protect others from harm and twists these natural instincts into an expression of hatred against a perceived object of aggression which is generated by stereotyping groups, in this case white men. At the same time of course it vigorously and loudly proclaims it is completely against all of those negative things: hatred, aggression, stereotyping and is profoundly for all those positive things: love of others and a desire to protect people.
The people who fall for the argument were called useful idiots by Stalin and it’s an accurate adjective because it encapsulates exactly what these people are: both useful and idiotic. Two useful idiots in your example Fletch are of course the lady who approached the father and aggressively stood over him and the mother who wrote in to Campbell Live. Of course, both those people profoundly believe they were indeed being loving and protective and I guarantee you that they will never ever be able to see how profoundly incorrect they actually are.
I’m coming to the conclusion that the only way to deal with this long-term twisting of the natural human psyche by evil forces, is to demonstrate to the useful idiots how profoundly idiotic their position is. There are many fields of political correctness and to do this in each field would take a different set of techniques specifically designed for that field but the way I’d do it in this particular field is as follows.
Pass a law banning every parent from ever being alone with any of their children of the opposite sex. Ban mothers from ever being alone with their sons and ban fathers from ever being alone with their daughters. Ban parental bathing of their children, ban parents taking any photos of any opposite sex child. Now this is idiotic, impractical, unworkable and cruel. But that’s what political correctness actually is. Doing such a radical thing would not be necessary were not so many people so easily taken in by its lies and spin but they are and there are more every day. Something completely over the top like this is the only way to demonstrate to these people how profoundly idiotic they truly are.
The politically correct brigade of evil ones could hardly argue against it because you’d sell it in exactly the same way they sell their poison: it’s for the childwen, don’t you understand, won’t someone think of the childwen…
The politically correct brigade of evil ones BTW are those people in positions of responsibility and power in politics, universities and schools who know exactly what they’re doing and they are evil because unlike the majority of people who express politically correct perspectives, they’re not idiots in any way.
Reid – are you saying my marraige is less legitimate because men have married men and women have married women? This has caused our children to be the states responsibility? That’s unmitigated bullshit – I’m still married, the kids are Mrs Michael and my concern only.
No. I’m saying that the way people think about the legitimacy of marriage as the one and only facilitating institutional mechanism to raise children, is being undermined and has been for a long time, and this is the latest attack on it.
No. I’m saying that the way people think about the legitimacy of marriage as the one and only facilitating institutional mechanism to raise children, is being undermined and has been for a long time, and this is the latest attack on it.
How, reid? How does gay marriage undermine that?
You are just making some claims without any reasoning, let alone evidence.
It’s just complete and utter bigotted paleoconservative bullshit! The very same kind of people once argued in the very same way against interracial marriage. Whoops, once it was legalised, lo and behold, civilisation did not collapse, the sun still rose every morning and the world was actually a better place.
Same thing will happen to gay marriage, sooner rather than later. And people will look back on you and shake their heads in disbelief at your ignorance, the same way we look back today on people who once argued against interracial marriage.
Only people who are deeply insecure about their sexuality would attack gay marriage. Look at all those queer religious leaders who attack gays and politicians. I use the term queer because those closets cases are queer.
Pass a law banning every parent from ever being alone with any of their children of the opposite sex. Ban mothers from ever being alone with their sons and ban fathers from ever being alone with their daughters.
Mate, the only one talking about banning something is you. You’d want to ban gay marriage if we allowed it. What business of yours is it what other people do? In reality, you’re more left-wing (loving government control), and politically correct (“think of the families“) than most gay people.
How, reid? How does gay marriage undermine that? It’s just complete and utter bigotted paleoconservative bullshit!
Isn’t it interesting how politically correct people can’t tolerate dissenting views. All explained in that google video link I gave above. So you’re one of em eh eszett?
The very same kind of people once argued in the very same way against interracial marriage.
Stereotyping now eszett? I thought politically correct people thought that was bad, or is it OK when justified by your overall caveat: Honesta turpitudo est pro causa bona? (For a good cause, wrongdoing is virtuous.) Handy thing that Honesta turpitudo isn’t it, since the rest of us are bound by honestly and sincerely, politically correct people can make it up as they go along, can’t they and they do that as well, don’t they. All the time.
Yes, I would tristanb. I’d like to ban sex ed in schools as well. This is because both are detrimental not beneficial and there is no social downside toward doing it. I recognise gays see civil union as an advance and if I was one I probably would as well. But that is only one side of the equation because if you just for a second accept that what I said above is true in terms of the way it works, then this is a decision that affects everyone, not just those toward whom its directed. Therefore the rest of us who aren’t gay also get to have a say. And when you look at it like that, the correct answer is quite obvious.
To be more precise, what I would do is remove legal recognition that anything except a male-female union has the same legal status as a marriage. This is what it was before, and it worked. The plaintive wounded cries of the self-interested that wished to push the agenda as well as those of the ignorant but well-intentioned would scream this was an attack on their basic human rights and so would most of the press. It would be hysteria-city Arizona. However I’m not arguing the difficulties of the strategy or even whether it would be a view supported by most, for I know it wouldn’t be. I don’t care. Most people don’t understand political correctness and what it means, despite the evidence of social disruption caused by the gradual dis-integration of society which is occurring not by accident but by design, being all around them.
P.S. Don’t forget that civil union is not the end goal, only the next step. What do you think they’ll ask for next, and so it goes. And some of you complain about Maori when they do this, yet are completely silent when this group does it. Why is that?
..being gay just aint natural Im afraid and trying to normalise it by adding children to the mix is just so wrong wrong wrong.
And before you cut me down in flames…Im entitled to my opinion as are the majority of people who think the same way. Good day.
Fred in the grass
You don’t get used to them..My husband was outside for the 10.30 one and saw our house moving from side to side ..I was inside terrified. I think when we don’t have them for awhile we relax and start to forget about them…just had another one…then they are very frightening again.
Our local mall[Riccarton] was evacuated. After Sept 4th , I never park in underground car parks or even parking buildings.
The British wife of a Malay faces the gallows in Malaysia for drug trafficking. She won’t get a fair trial. Why do western women get involved with these men? Naive I suppose.
Isn’t it interesting how politically correct people can’t tolerate dissenting views.
That’s really funny, reid. After all, you are the one who calls everyone “politically correct” as soon as they disagree with your views. Whatever that may mean. It’s just one of those typical deadbeat slogans that people bring up when they have no rational arguments on their side.
You are the one who made a claim, and a pretty big one. Back it up. Why is gay marriage going to have such a big influence on your marriage? Are you suddenly going to treat your children differently? Or are you afraid that you may run off with another man?
@starboard, yes, of course you are entitled to your opinion. But if you say it’s wrong to bring in children, how so? Gay people have been raising children since ages, and those children turn out no better or worse than other children. They don’t turn out to be gay any mor ethan other children do. The good parents and bad parents, regardless of their sexuality .
And define unnatural. Homosexuality has been around since mankind has been around. It is seen in other species as well. You may not like it, which is fine, but that hardly makes it unnatural.
SO retarted I know. These are grown ass people, You’d think you’d pick up some basic life skills after 20-30 years on the planet. I blame the parents. But then I see a couple of young guys where I work, and just cringe at how unkempt and scruffy they look.
Why is gay marriage going to have such a big influence on your marriage?
Ah another tactic of the politically correct: pretend you have misunderstood the proposition and raise a strawman.
Nothing I said above could be interpreted by anyone to mean I was addressing anything but the institution of marriage. That has many facets one of them being our perception of it as an institution. If you can’t make a distinction between that wider socio-political concept and what happens inside an individual marriage then you have yet learned very much about how to analyse societies, have you.
My my. Like a swam of angry bees over one nuptial pic.
Coddington is pretty unreliable on matters ACT.
She also forgets the basic maths. At five MP’s ACT can only make a difference on the margins. It cannot overplay it’s hand.
It’s not until National MP’s start to wake up and decide that they cannot afford to be associated with a policy setting that results in borrowing $300million a week.
And that will only happen when National voters communicate that to the National Party and some party vote ACT thereby increasing the influence on the margin.
In a child-like manner she also conjures up the “strongman” ideal to rescue us – a parliamentary superdaddy.
We’ve just walked around CBD Chch & Arts Centre. There are rolling aftershocks and some of them are large. There was a very big one mid-morning while we were at the Ron Meuck exhibition at the main art gallery. Broken glass, bricks and walls down in places, incl. cathedral square and parts of the CBD are cordoned off once again. Shelves in the main library are down and books strewn across the floor.
Chris I don’t have much time for her as a journalist since her biased article in defence of Wilson J, whom her husband defended, but on this I think she’s got a point.
I’m afraid Rodney has blown his credibility over Garrett and Roy. Roy was recoverable – just but with Garrett coming on top it was a bridge too far in most people’s minds. However Epsom voters will know what to do come election 2011 and if Rodney is the only hope of keeping ACT in Parliament he’ll get in, if not, he won’t.
I also agree with her analysis of the candidates, in particular Brash which like it or not is how he is perceived. It’s not what he’s really like, but it’s how he is perceived. It really does leave Prebble as the only alternative but they’ll probably go for Boscowan I would think.
Sadly Reid, I think you’re right. Boscawen is a hard-working MP, and about the only person in that cess-pool with any credibility. What he is not, is leadership. He is a straight-talker, hard-worker and likely an excellent deputy, but (from what I’ve seen) doesn’t have the charisma or commanding presence for leadership.
ACT’s brand is a hard enough sell in the socialist utopia of kiwiland without the side-show circuses that have haunted them the past year or so. With the travel, Garrett and Roy (and to a lesser extent the few shots that Tashkoff managed to land) I think Hide is spent. Were he willing to come back, I think Prebble’s reappearance might reinvigorate the party and the more fair-weather supporters they’ve managed to bleed recently. With Prebble back in charge they may get over 5% next year. With Hide, I very much doubt it.
[Boscowan] (from what I’ve seen) doesn’t have the charisma or commanding presence for leadership…
Well that’s a fatal isn’t it. I don’t know myself, Offshore_Kiwi I haven’t seen him in action. Yes, 5% is a big ask while Rodney’s leader, that’s for sure.
The opposition of course will make the anticipated Lazarus jokes. Do you think Richard and Roger will be able to hit those for six? Perhaps if they both hold the bat. Seriously, this is a serious issue, leadership-wise. What about that young guy who ran for Auckland mayor?
Thinking further on it, what would be wrong with ACT merging with National? National has definitely weakened in its policy settings as we’re seeing. What would be wrong with stiffening them up, apart from the ratings hit the new nats would take from this new coalition?
Isn’t it a shame. The right thing to do is just over there, yet the reef-fish won’t let us reach it.
On Red Blurt Iain Lees-Galloway uses his child to attack John Key.
Whaleoil makes a comment that is correct. The child will now think Politics is the way Schools teach.
You are a sad man Mr Iain Lees-Galloway. When will Liarbore learn that any Government is only just better than the Opposition? There is no opposition, Phil Goff is sooo embarasing and all the Pinkos can do is attack the Prime Minister.
Even a small brain fart from Labour might wake the lefties up http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/12/26/out-of-the-mouths-of-babes/#comments
The final argument that buries gay marriage, surely is that if we all adopted it, and if it was a credible alternative, that would be the enevitable doom of the human race.
Lets all turn homo, how many generations before we are extinct ?
Hey you gays, if we all went gay, i mean homo, how long would our species last ?
What else do you need to know ?
Doesn’t that give you a hint as to nature. if homo isim was Ok and we adoptoted it we are gone in one generation.
Thats not to say we cant indulge in a little depravity, just for fun, now and again, but we cant allow it to become a lifestyle. nature tells us that, surely.
It’s a dead end, realy.
Reid ACT join the Nats, would National want a party whose MPs believed it was good form to have a bloke who as an MP stole a child’s identity earlier ?
Trying to argue it was justified in having him as an MP will not fly.
Immigant, you desperate, dullheaded descendant of a wombat-fiddler. Your worst crime is that you’re utterly predictable like the rest of your Christian Heritage mates & their multiple accounts. I fart in your general direction.
So, if a man loves a man or a woman loves a woman and they wish to commit to this in a contract called a marriage – this will lead people who aren’t gay to give up on their families & all society? Is this what you’re saying? Really? Is there any chance you could be wrong?
National put themselves in a good position. Key is smart. They think they can keep their core supporters by having an alliance with Act. They need Act more than you think. I agree with Coddington, if there is a new leader, I’d vote for Prepple, they should seperate from National and not be in their government because National is loosing their core supporters and those supporters would have a place to go. Right now, they don’t. Winston Peters is even looking good.
December 26th, 2010 at 8:04 am
A busy night of shaking in Christchurch – just had another one at 8.04am
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 8:21 am
Is the shaking something you get used to IV2? Or do you get better at ‘coping’?
Vote:I cant begin to imagine what it would be like.
Just a few days holidaying near Taupo was enough to unsettle me.
I think we had eleven “shakes” one morning.
December 26th, 2010 at 8:21 am
WikiLeaks cable: Kiwi Muslims – Wahhabis in their midst
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10696498
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 8:23 am
I’m over quakes already again. Maybe I will leave town for a holiday.
All the quakes this morning were centred in central Christchurch which made them feel quite strong
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 8:42 am
No snow in London for Christmas day – at least not where we are.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 8:44 am
From yesterday’s GD:
The moving target of the warmists. Not long ago they were predicting no snow and warmer weather, now is exactly the opposite but for the same reason: AGW.
These “scientists” and peddlers of falsity are exposed as the liars and controlists they are: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1341388/Global-warming-Britain-longer-colder-winters-melting-sea-ice-plays-havoc-weather-patterns.html
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 8:47 am
McCully’s verbal gimnastics trying to justify Labour-lite’s pandering to the totalitarian Chinese:
Vote:http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10696548
December 26th, 2010 at 8:54 am
Is Coddington right? http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10696536
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 8:56 am
Manolo
Vote:I have no love of Al Gore he is a hypocrite asking other people to save the planet while he consumes 30 times the average energy of an US citizen . However I did watch his movie which did say that the melting of the arctic seas would cause a long cold period in Western Europe and the Atlantic Coast of North America. So just because you and I don’t understand the science does not make wrong
December 26th, 2010 at 8:57 am
While we are boasting we had one at 07:30 and another at 08:15.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 9:01 am
While we are boasting we had one at 07:30 and another at 08:15.
Vote:Wow (and only 45 minutes apart)! Did the earth move for you?
December 26th, 2010 at 9:12 am
Today’s the day we all have one thing on our mind.
“I wonder how much this piece of shit would make on Trademe”
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 9:28 am
See that Biden’s got high hopes for gay marriage and Obama’s thoughts on it are “in transition.”
This is why Hulun got the UN appointment. Gay marriage is one of the best ways to attack the family unit. Any leader who manages to get it through in their own country can count on a substantial reward and Hulun did lots of other things as well. They’ve obviously decided to give her even more responsibility to see what else she can do to advance the UN’s agenda.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 9:39 am
Good to see that the ‘One Ronnie’ is still going and just as funny
Here he takes his, er, blackberry back to the greengrocer because it’s not working.
Vote:
December 26th, 2010 at 9:50 am
Because … when gay people marry, it prevents straight people from marrying?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 9:52 am
I’m fully in favour of Gay Marriage.
Why shouldn’t Gays and Lesbians be as miserable as the rest of us!!
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 9:57 am
reid
What an awsome conspiracy theory. I always liked the word civil union tho. Marriage is between man and woman and sometimes man and job.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 9:57 am
Manolo
Yes.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:10 am
Manolo (8.54am): Yes. Yes she is. It’s too much to hope for New Zealanders to suddenly wake up from their malaise and all convert to Conservatism overnight, so yes. ACT is absolutely necessary. Rodney is not the leader. Two questions though:
(1) did Coddington interview her navel to come up with this angle, or might it just be Prebble doing a gentle test of the waters?
(2) who do they get as their finance spokesperson? It would need to either be someone willing to be Sir Roger’s glove-puppet, or someone equally brilliant but less damaged.
How great it would be, to have a real opposition in the New Zealand parliament. Perhaps Mr Smile & Wave might not look so golden, huh?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:21 am
Inventory2 (5,566) Says:
December 26th, 2010 at 8:04 am
A busy night of shaking in Christchurch – just had another one at 8.04am
This is Christchurch.
It shakes.
Get over it!
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:39 am
I would rather it did not shake
# MT_Tinman (1,178) Says:
December 26th, 2010 at 10:21 am
This is Christchurch.
It shakes.
Get over it!
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:39 am
Because … when gay people marry, it prevents straight people from marrying?
No gay marriage attacks the family unit because it destroys the integrity of the only legitimate union being between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation. This is the basis for raising children and when that is not the basis anymore it brings in the dynamic whereby people no longer look to the family unit as their mainstay of support but toward the state. This doesn’t happen overnight and it doesn’t even happen over a century. This has been happening since the 1920′s when the commies started it. If you want to know what political correctness is then look here because this is an upshot of that general campaign.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#
What an awsome conspiracy theory.
immigrant the blueprint for global govt is the EU and when you look at that and what it gradually does over time to destroy local democracy while building its own up, you see a blueprint for the process. Just keep an eye on that over the decades, is all I’m saying.
I always liked the word civil union tho.
Labels are very important in propaganda. This is why Liarbore always but always refer to the “failed policies of the nineties.” They have imprinted this on the minds of the reef-fish to the point it works like a pavlovian conditioned-response whenever they say it and they have to keep reminding people of it to keep that working so every now and again a gaggle of Liarborites will launch forth and the useful press will carry it to the chattering masses. This is why they fought so hard to name it marriage and not civil union. They were forced to back down but not until they’d pushed it as hard as they could. Disgusting creatures, aren’t they.
I must say its most regrettable the number of useful idiots on this issue [i.e. those who see it for only what the useful-idiot camouflage campaign says it is - a human rights issue]. Still, the number of people who buy feminism for the same reason are just about as numerous.
It’s not marriage, it’s a civil union, with complete legal rights as per a husband-wife partnership, just without the label.
What’s the obsession with the label?
The UN is the engine for major engineering changes ala e.g. the IPCC.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:40 am
Hide did a deal with Newman to get the leadership, and that backfired on her when the board ranked her behind Roy in the party list. This is the fundamental problem with ACT – since 2004, the Parliamentary Party has lost touch with the membership (hence the dwindling in member numbers) and voters but the Parliamentary Party don’t care.
ACT needs to admit it’s core constituency is business, farmers and professionals and get out there and have the concerns of those communities back into Parliament instead of concentrating on Local Government and Consumer Affairs. And it needs to get out of bed with the Nats (but still support them passing legislation). Bring back strategy like Muriel Newman’s fantastic kneecap of Jenny Shipley when she asked what the benefits of the sale of two power stations were to let Shipley say how marvelous it all was, and then followed up by asking if selling two was so good, why not sell them all?
P.S. Tinman – You could say Christchurch rocks?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:40 am
HUGE shake in Chch 10.29am Sunday (Boxing). Rolling aftershocks. We’ve had 5 big ones since 2.11am. The shakes are back aftera recess. This follows the 7.3 off coast of Vanuatu this morning, with 6 inch tsunami.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:45 am
Reid – are you saying my marraige is less legitimate because men have married men and women have married women? This has caused our children to be the states responsibility? That’s unmitigated bullshit – I’m still married, the kids are Mrs Michael and my concern only.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:49 am
In Chch we just had a series of 5 or six quakes in about 5 minutes. The largest was a 4.9 in Opawa
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:49 am
Michael (226) Says:
December 26th, 2010 at 10:40 am
P.S. Tinman – You could say Christchurch rocks?
and rolls ……. quite frequently.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 10:51 am
Sorry about the last 3 paras of my 10:39 they should have been deleted before I posted. Anyway, further to the theme of political correctness:
As we all know political correctness is a communist-driven social engineering dynamic designed to destroy the family unit. It masquerades as a protector of human rights when in reality what it does is use the natural human instincts of love of others and a desire to protect others from harm and twists these natural instincts into an expression of hatred against a perceived object of aggression which is generated by stereotyping groups, in this case white men. At the same time of course it vigorously and loudly proclaims it is completely against all of those negative things: hatred, aggression, stereotyping and is profoundly for all those positive things: love of others and a desire to protect people.
The people who fall for the argument were called useful idiots by Stalin and it’s an accurate adjective because it encapsulates exactly what these people are: both useful and idiotic. Two useful idiots in your example Fletch are of course the lady who approached the father and aggressively stood over him and the mother who wrote in to Campbell Live. Of course, both those people profoundly believe they were indeed being loving and protective and I guarantee you that they will never ever be able to see how profoundly incorrect they actually are.
I’m coming to the conclusion that the only way to deal with this long-term twisting of the natural human psyche by evil forces, is to demonstrate to the useful idiots how profoundly idiotic their position is. There are many fields of political correctness and to do this in each field would take a different set of techniques specifically designed for that field but the way I’d do it in this particular field is as follows.
Pass a law banning every parent from ever being alone with any of their children of the opposite sex. Ban mothers from ever being alone with their sons and ban fathers from ever being alone with their daughters. Ban parental bathing of their children, ban parents taking any photos of any opposite sex child. Now this is idiotic, impractical, unworkable and cruel. But that’s what political correctness actually is. Doing such a radical thing would not be necessary were not so many people so easily taken in by its lies and spin but they are and there are more every day. Something completely over the top like this is the only way to demonstrate to these people how profoundly idiotic they truly are.
The politically correct brigade of evil ones could hardly argue against it because you’d sell it in exactly the same way they sell their poison: it’s for the childwen, don’t you understand, won’t someone think of the childwen…
The politically correct brigade of evil ones BTW are those people in positions of responsibility and power in politics, universities and schools who know exactly what they’re doing and they are evil because unlike the majority of people who express politically correct perspectives, they’re not idiots in any way.
Reid – are you saying my marraige is less legitimate because men have married men and women have married women? This has caused our children to be the states responsibility? That’s unmitigated bullshit – I’m still married, the kids are Mrs Michael and my concern only.
No. I’m saying that the way people think about the legitimacy of marriage as the one and only facilitating institutional mechanism to raise children, is being undermined and has been for a long time, and this is the latest attack on it.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 11:12 am
My 10:51 was referring to this event last November.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 11:29 am
How, reid? How does gay marriage undermine that?
You are just making some claims without any reasoning, let alone evidence.
It’s just complete and utter bigotted paleoconservative bullshit! The very same kind of people once argued in the very same way against interracial marriage. Whoops, once it was legalised, lo and behold, civilisation did not collapse, the sun still rose every morning and the world was actually a better place.
Same thing will happen to gay marriage, sooner rather than later. And people will look back on you and shake their heads in disbelief at your ignorance, the same way we look back today on people who once argued against interracial marriage.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 11:39 am
Deborah is right.
Vote:lol@reid, in the closet with blueballs. Nice one eszett
December 26th, 2010 at 11:43 am
Only people who are deeply insecure about their sexuality would attack gay marriage. Look at all those queer religious leaders who attack gays and politicians. I use the term queer because those closets cases are queer.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 11:45 am
Mate, the only one talking about banning something is you. You’d want to ban gay marriage if we allowed it. What business of yours is it what other people do? In reality, you’re more left-wing (loving government control), and politically correct (“think of the families“) than most gay people.
Anyway, only women and homos like weddings! Maybe if we let gay people marry other gay people, we’d have fewer events like this: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10696521
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 11:48 am
@ fredinthegrass – I don’t know if anyone would ever get used to quakes like the 4.9 we had here at 10.30am
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 11:50 am
How, reid? How does gay marriage undermine that? It’s just complete and utter bigotted paleoconservative bullshit!
Isn’t it interesting how politically correct people can’t tolerate dissenting views. All explained in that google video link I gave above. So you’re one of em eh eszett?
The very same kind of people once argued in the very same way against interracial marriage.
Stereotyping now eszett? I thought politically correct people thought that was bad, or is it OK when justified by your overall caveat: Honesta turpitudo est pro causa bona? (For a good cause, wrongdoing is virtuous.) Handy thing that Honesta turpitudo isn’t it, since the rest of us are bound by honestly and sincerely, politically correct people can make it up as they go along, can’t they and they do that as well, don’t they. All the time.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:02 pm
You’d want to ban gay marriage if we allowed it.
Yes, I would tristanb. I’d like to ban sex ed in schools as well. This is because both are detrimental not beneficial and there is no social downside toward doing it. I recognise gays see civil union as an advance and if I was one I probably would as well. But that is only one side of the equation because if you just for a second accept that what I said above is true in terms of the way it works, then this is a decision that affects everyone, not just those toward whom its directed. Therefore the rest of us who aren’t gay also get to have a say. And when you look at it like that, the correct answer is quite obvious.
To be more precise, what I would do is remove legal recognition that anything except a male-female union has the same legal status as a marriage. This is what it was before, and it worked. The plaintive wounded cries of the self-interested that wished to push the agenda as well as those of the ignorant but well-intentioned would scream this was an attack on their basic human rights and so would most of the press. It would be hysteria-city Arizona. However I’m not arguing the difficulties of the strategy or even whether it would be a view supported by most, for I know it wouldn’t be. I don’t care. Most people don’t understand political correctness and what it means, despite the evidence of social disruption caused by the gradual dis-integration of society which is occurring not by accident but by design, being all around them.
P.S. Don’t forget that civil union is not the end goal, only the next step. What do you think they’ll ask for next, and so it goes. And some of you complain about Maori when they do this, yet are completely silent when this group does it. Why is that?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
reid (5,789) Says:
December 26th, 2010 at 10:51 am
Excellent. The best thing Ive read on Kiwiblog all year. Well said that man.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:18 pm
Thanks starboard, I was beginning to feel a bit lonely…
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
How fucked up would you grow up if you got brought up in a gay couple tho? Anyone done any studies on this?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
..being gay just aint natural Im afraid and trying to normalise it by adding children to the mix is just so wrong wrong wrong.
Vote:And before you cut me down in flames…Im entitled to my opinion as are the majority of people who think the same way. Good day.
December 26th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Fred in the grass
Vote:You don’t get used to them..My husband was outside for the 10.30 one and saw our house moving from side to side ..I was inside terrified. I think when we don’t have them for awhile we relax and start to forget about them…just had another one…then they are very frightening again.
Our local mall[Riccarton] was evacuated. After Sept 4th , I never park in underground car parks or even parking buildings.
December 26th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
The British wife of a Malay faces the gallows in Malaysia for drug trafficking. She won’t get a fair trial. Why do western women get involved with these men? Naive I suppose.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
i’d say they get involved for the drugs and money.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
“# immigant (70) Says:
December 26th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
How fucked up would you grow up if you got brought up in a gay couple tho? Anyone done any studies on this?”
Graham Capill has. Seems a few of his flock still linger on.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
“Seems a few of his flock still linger on.”
More stereotyping Diziet? Tut tut.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Diziet Sma
WTF was your post about? Graham Capill didn’t do any studies on the subject, are you trying to be clever and have a go at me mate?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Go on reid, give us a lecture on stereotypes. I love irony.
Vote:I’m not your mate immigant.
December 26th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Go on reid, give us a lecture on stereotypes. I love irony.
You mean as misused by PC advocates? I already did Diziet, see my 10:51, second para and my 11:50 fourth para.
I’m not lecturing, you’re most welcome to attack it as factually or logically incorrect, if you can…
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:32 pm
That’s really funny, reid. After all, you are the one who calls everyone “politically correct” as soon as they disagree with your views. Whatever that may mean. It’s just one of those typical deadbeat slogans that people bring up when they have no rational arguments on their side.
You are the one who made a claim, and a pretty big one. Back it up. Why is gay marriage going to have such a big influence on your marriage? Are you suddenly going to treat your children differently? Or are you afraid that you may run off with another man?
@starboard, yes, of course you are entitled to your opinion. But if you say it’s wrong to bring in children, how so? Gay people have been raising children since ages, and those children turn out no better or worse than other children. They don’t turn out to be gay any mor ethan other children do. The good parents and bad parents, regardless of their sexuality .
And define unnatural. Homosexuality has been around since mankind has been around. It is seen in other species as well. You may not like it, which is fine, but that hardly makes it unnatural.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
Diziet Sma
You slimy little serpent. You are too scared to say anything in open text. I understand irony perfectly well, except yours is clumsy and obtuse.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Taxpayers’ money wasted in nonsensical initiatives such as http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4495016/Taxpayers-fund-scheme-to-teach-job-hunters-how-to-scrub-up
How far can you go in babysitting losers and morons?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
IN fact I reckon Diziet Sma is a recent graduate, already brainwashed by a liberal arts degree.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Manolo
SO retarted I know. These are grown ass people, You’d think you’d pick up some basic life skills after 20-30 years on the planet. I blame the parents. But then I see a couple of young guys where I work, and just cringe at how unkempt and scruffy they look.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Why is gay marriage going to have such a big influence on your marriage?
Ah another tactic of the politically correct: pretend you have misunderstood the proposition and raise a strawman.
Nothing I said above could be interpreted by anyone to mean I was addressing anything but the institution of marriage. That has many facets one of them being our perception of it as an institution. If you can’t make a distinction between that wider socio-political concept and what happens inside an individual marriage then you have yet learned very much about how to analyse societies, have you.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 1:56 pm
“Manolo (2,580) Says:
December 26th, 2010 at 8:54 am
Is Coddington right? http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10696536
Unlikely.”
My my. Like a swam of angry bees over one nuptial pic.
Coddington is pretty unreliable on matters ACT.
She also forgets the basic maths. At five MP’s ACT can only make a difference on the margins. It cannot overplay it’s hand.
It’s not until National MP’s start to wake up and decide that they cannot afford to be associated with a policy setting that results in borrowing $300million a week.
And that will only happen when National voters communicate that to the National Party and some party vote ACT thereby increasing the influence on the margin.
In a child-like manner she also conjures up the “strongman” ideal to rescue us – a parliamentary superdaddy.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
We’ve just walked around CBD Chch & Arts Centre. There are rolling aftershocks and some of them are large. There was a very big one mid-morning while we were at the Ron Meuck exhibition at the main art gallery. Broken glass, bricks and walls down in places, incl. cathedral square and parts of the CBD are cordoned off once again. Shelves in the main library are down and books strewn across the floor.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
Chris I don’t have much time for her as a journalist since her biased article in defence of Wilson J, whom her husband defended, but on this I think she’s got a point.
I’m afraid Rodney has blown his credibility over Garrett and Roy. Roy was recoverable – just but with Garrett coming on top it was a bridge too far in most people’s minds. However Epsom voters will know what to do come election 2011 and if Rodney is the only hope of keeping ACT in Parliament he’ll get in, if not, he won’t.
I also agree with her analysis of the candidates, in particular Brash which like it or not is how he is perceived. It’s not what he’s really like, but it’s how he is perceived. It really does leave Prebble as the only alternative but they’ll probably go for Boscowan I would think.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
Sadly Reid, I think you’re right. Boscawen is a hard-working MP, and about the only person in that cess-pool with any credibility. What he is not, is leadership. He is a straight-talker, hard-worker and likely an excellent deputy, but (from what I’ve seen) doesn’t have the charisma or commanding presence for leadership.
ACT’s brand is a hard enough sell in the socialist utopia of kiwiland without the side-show circuses that have haunted them the past year or so. With the travel, Garrett and Roy (and to a lesser extent the few shots that Tashkoff managed to land) I think Hide is spent. Were he willing to come back, I think Prebble’s reappearance might reinvigorate the party and the more fair-weather supporters they’ve managed to bleed recently. With Prebble back in charge they may get over 5% next year. With Hide, I very much doubt it.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 3:27 pm
[Boscowan] (from what I’ve seen) doesn’t have the charisma or commanding presence for leadership…
Well that’s a fatal isn’t it. I don’t know myself, Offshore_Kiwi I haven’t seen him in action. Yes, 5% is a big ask while Rodney’s leader, that’s for sure.
The opposition of course will make the anticipated Lazarus jokes. Do you think Richard and Roger will be able to hit those for six? Perhaps if they both hold the bat. Seriously, this is a serious issue, leadership-wise. What about that young guy who ran for Auckland mayor?
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
Thinking further on it, what would be wrong with ACT merging with National? National has definitely weakened in its policy settings as we’re seeing. What would be wrong with stiffening them up, apart from the ratings hit the new nats would take from this new coalition?
Isn’t it a shame. The right thing to do is just over there, yet the reef-fish won’t let us reach it.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 8:06 pm
On Red Blurt Iain Lees-Galloway uses his child to attack John Key.
Vote:Whaleoil makes a comment that is correct. The child will now think Politics is the way Schools teach.
You are a sad man Mr Iain Lees-Galloway. When will Liarbore learn that any Government is only just better than the Opposition? There is no opposition, Phil Goff is sooo embarasing and all the Pinkos can do is attack the Prime Minister.
Even a small brain fart from Labour might wake the lefties up
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/12/26/out-of-the-mouths-of-babes/#comments
December 26th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
The final argument that buries gay marriage, surely is that if we all adopted it, and if it was a credible alternative, that would be the enevitable doom of the human race.
Lets all turn homo, how many generations before we are extinct ?
Hey you gays, if we all went gay, i mean homo, how long would our species last ?
What else do you need to know ?
Doesn’t that give you a hint as to nature. if homo isim was Ok and we adoptoted it we are gone in one generation.
go figure.
Vote:December 26th, 2010 at 9:09 pm
Thats not to say we cant indulge in a little depravity, just for fun, now and again, but we cant allow it to become a lifestyle. nature tells us that, surely.
Vote:It’s a dead end, realy.
December 27th, 2010 at 9:20 am
Are we there yet?
Vote:December 27th, 2010 at 9:42 am
bereal you protest just a touch to much dear boy, you who rant on about gays gives others the idea you may have something to hide.
Vote:December 27th, 2010 at 9:50 am
Reid ACT join the Nats, would National want a party whose MPs believed it was good form to have a bloke who as an MP stole a child’s identity earlier ?
Trying to argue it was justified in having him as an MP will not fly.
Vote:December 27th, 2010 at 10:39 am
Immigant, you desperate, dullheaded descendant of a wombat-fiddler. Your worst crime is that you’re utterly predictable like the rest of your Christian Heritage mates & their multiple accounts. I fart in your general direction.
So, if a man loves a man or a woman loves a woman and they wish to commit to this in a contract called a marriage – this will lead people who aren’t gay to give up on their families & all society? Is this what you’re saying? Really? Is there any chance you could be wrong?
Vote:December 27th, 2010 at 11:10 am
National put themselves in a good position. Key is smart. They think they can keep their core supporters by having an alliance with Act. They need Act more than you think. I agree with Coddington, if there is a new leader, I’d vote for Prepple, they should seperate from National and not be in their government because National is loosing their core supporters and those supporters would have a place to go. Right now, they don’t. Winston Peters is even looking good.
Vote: