Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Isaac Freeman,
We normally just call it “Interfaith”, but I can see why people might like a noun. It is basically what it sounds like: people from different religions talking to each other.
This might sound rather odd coming from me, but I can “dialogue” with people of other faiths without a shadow cabinet portfolio or ministerial warrant attached. I’d actually argue that people of faith are the very people who should be most invested in Church (and synagogue and mosque and temple) and State keeping a wary but civil separation.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Cecelia,
He looks tired and old at only 54
Woah... ageist much? Way too much like the deposition of Harriet Jones, former Prime Minister, for my liking...
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Russell Brown,
Back on topic!
What the frig is "Inter-Faith Dialogue"?
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Megan Wegan,
But maybe it’s worth remembering that people complain about the discussion because they value it so much?
Yup – and speaking on my own account, sometimes your ego getting some bruising and the occasional fetching scar is not a bad thing if it leaves you a little more thoughtful, considered and downright non-rectal at the end of it.
On a recent post, I got a rather sharp (but civil) rap over the knuckles for carelessly using “tranny” in a way that was read as a slur on transgendered folks. I’d prepared a snarky riposte, but you know what… there was a fair point there and it lead to some damn useful reflection (and research) on that usage point. I’ve said before Emma and Deborah, Jackie and others have certainly made me more mindful of how I speak to, and about, women – which is a net win.
ETA: And for all the snarking, sniping and cussing Russell and I have done over the years, I'd like to think we've also learned a few things from each other.
-
Legal Beagle: Paula's Peril; or The…, in reply to BenWilson,
FFS, Ben, if you really thought anyone in National was going to just stand by and let Bennett get Protillo-ed without a peep I've got a bridge to sell you. Several.
-
Legal Beagle: Paula's Peril; or The…, in reply to Phil Lyth,
Nice of the Herald to write a story about the Waitakere decision
Not so nice reading this...
Auckland lawyer Peter Kiely was recount scrutineer for the National Party
and said some changes came about because votes allowed on election night might have had a mark in the box rather than a tick.Kiely revealed 425 declared votes were disallowed - nine were dual votes, 393 ineligible votes and 12 were not authorised by a witness.
"Those 393, not only were they not on the roll in Waitakere, but they weren't enrolled anywhere."
What the what? You know what, if I had anything to do with it (and if the statement attributed to Kiely is accurate, not something I'd assume where The Herald is concerned) I'd be doing a very careful risk analysis of having those 393 votes put under the scrutiny of an electoral petition.
-
Legal Beagle: Paula's Peril; or The…, in reply to BenWilson,
If that eventuated, then the whole National party could end up cursing her for going for the judicial recount when she was going to get in on the list anyway, and possibly cursing themselves for not reading Legal Beagle.
No - just no. I know there are a lot of people with a not entirely healthy or rational investment in Bennett getting Portillo-ed, but the judicial recount in Waitakere was every bit as rational as Labour's in Christchurch Central. Sometimes you come up trumps, others it's snake-eyes all the way. Live with it.
-
Legal Beagle: Paula's Peril; or The…, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Not only that but there is something not quite right about a round number, exactly 20 votes found lying around somewhere all with Bennett’s name on them? or exactly 20 votes discounted for Sepuloni . Fishy eh?
You’re taking the piss, right? But hey, if you want to accuse District Court Judge John Adams of outright judicial corruption, you might actually want to wait until he releases his judgement next week. Just for the shits and giggles.
If I were Sepuloni I’d totally go for a petition.
It’s not entirely up to her, to be frank. I’m trespassing on my host’s territory here, but I believe you got to come to an electoral petition with specific grounds for complaint. And with the enormous amounts of time, energy and money involved I don’t think anyone pulls that trigger casually.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Andrew E,
It seems to me that it is precisely because people get defensively prickly about class labels that any offence which might have been intended or caused has been magnified.
Yeah, well I sincerely help it’s seen as unhelpfully penile to say I do get seriously pissed off about “middle class” being used as a passive-agressive sneer. Not least because it’s damn insulting to my father who made a lot of sacrifices to make sure I had all the “wanky” shit he didn’t – like an education and opportunities so I have the chance to make a living writing rather than working eighteen hour days as a labourer until the Second World War gave me an opportunity to learn a trade.
I’ve stayed the hell out of this because, really, I’m damn sick of feeling like I have to apologise for and justify my whole damn life. Over and over again.
-
Snapper?
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 204 205 206 207 208 … 1235 Older→ First