Posts by mark taslov
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
nice writing, what a great world you inhabit, i lost myself in it.
-
would help if the bird were more famous than the fruit
-
"and at the end of the day it seems that it boils down to a politician being a shade to economical with the truth. Given how out there in talkback land all politicians are assumed to be compulsive liars, what is all this fuss all about? "
word
"sir it's dogs"
"and what are they doing?"
"it appears that one of them is lifting its hind leg..."
"yes?"
"and passing water..."
"yes?"
"against a lamp post!"
"o my G@d! all hands on deck! man the lifeboats!" -
But as to your point - it ain't a huge issue because the policies don't differ. National supported Labour deploying troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.
and so why do you as new zealanders support that?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080905/ap_on_re_as/angry_afghans;_ylt=Ah.ysc9CGrMGff7hNkBFHNIBxg8F
-
certainly on form today
-
Whereas, in China you eat what you're told, right Mark?
yeah, as opposed to ordering some dish and being disappointed when they're out, then protest a bit, then go home, drink till 3 or 5 depending on who won the election, and ready that pencil for the nect voteathon. But more to the point in relation to sage, where there's no enforsed closing time on bars where <cough> smoking is still legal.
Oh wait, I get it now: You're saying you favour the STV voting system. Good on you!
for the first modicum of proportional representation of people, that would be a nice start.
STV might have even won that referendum if it had been an STV referendum.
but just the tip of the iceberg...
the distant future, the distant future 000000001000000001------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Democrats and Republicans have stuff all effective difference on the use of force. Democrats go to war and bomb places for "humanitarian reasons". Republicans go to war and bomb places to "fight for freedom".
Clinton went to war against Serbia and annexed Kosovo because of a humanitarian crisis. Obama has adopted Darfur as a hotline issue, describing the genocide as a humanitarian issue.
Bush (the first) went to war for the freedom loving Kuwaitis. Bush (the second) invaded Iraq and Afghanistan for freedom. McCain thinks that Iran is suppressing the freedom of its people.
Somewhere, someplace a tribesman is going to hear a roar, look up and see a cruisemissile inbound. The only difference this election is going to make is whether the explosion is going to be for "humanity" or for "freedom".
again, for u angus, seems i should reiterate the point;
and i'm fucking surprised that the major parties stances on supporting the next US military campaign aren't a huge issue in the NZ election, cos it's not like Jamaica has troops in Afghanistan
-
if democrazy was even trying to represent anyone you'd expect people'd be able to give their second choice if not their top 5
A likes sandwiches
B likes Souvlaki
C & D like chicken
E likes lattewhat's for dinner sage?
-
no, do you?
your last post evident as to why the whole system bound to fail.
those two hours..dude...
make all the difference to people who don't know when to say whenwhat does the pregnancy of paling's daughter have to do with whether she's a suitable vice president? the USA needs new ideas, first and foremost. and that's precisely what the Palin McCain item aren't offering.
there are few qualifications beyond the ability to communicate and the ideas the candidates are bringing to the table, namely vision. and the Obamas' ideas seem a mite more tuned into the concept of long term development.I don't think preventing abortion is gonna save America..
i can appreciate the entertainment value of celebrity democracy. I'm kinda ok with the fact the future of this place here isn't left hanging in the balance every three or four years .
while education systems are still prone to deliver voluble fucks who are prepared to swing their portion of an entire country's future into the hands of total strangers on the basis of whether or not the candidates in question support bar owners having to take money from casualties of alcohol abuse any longer than necessary, i will continue to enjoy the lark
seems the general final selling points that decide most elections are just windscreen wipers on secondhand cars.
folks keep buying them cars for them wiper.
flabbergasted, by how much bought into media propaganda of what constitutes a worthy candidate people are.
with potential to wipe out 100s of 1000s of lives
mcCain is a living breathing WW2
that hoot bush was a tsunamiwill the US election bring about a scenario where kiwis are sent off to some other far flung country like afghanistan to fight for freedom? and will new zealand tax payers pay for this?
if McCain wins, probability 68%
if Obama wins, probability lowerdoes anyone have a link to Ms McCain's speech?
and i'm fucking surprised this isn't a huge issue in the NZ election, whether the major parties are going to support the next US military campaign, cos it's not like Jamaica has troops in Afghanistan
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1557787/Jamaican-troops-serenade-Queen-with-reggae.html
-
hey but, ah democracy, what a winner.
Hamish McDouall; insighteful choice, looking forward to the candidates quiz.
-
and to quote you from 2006-
At first glance, the China Daily - China’s most read English language mainland Chinese daily looks much like any other newspaper, except for a lack of advertising which is not needed to boost profits.
http://www.tewahanui.info/news/060901-beijingchinglish-moore.shtml