Posts by kmont
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I seems we do need more debate around these issues in NZ but god damn if it isn't tiring.
-
Exactly Andrew, the allusion doesn't fit.
-
Sigh, I do appreciate the distinction between accused and acquitted and how it applies in that example. But there are still a whole lot of dodgy arguments/non sequiturs/obfuscation going down that I cant be bothered dispassionately picking apart. I am only commenting at all because Span asked so nicely ; )
You don't strike me as a troll. -
I am with Mr/Ms BJones on this one.
You're comparing moonlighting in a legal enterprise with being charged with a violent offence. There's no same logic. That's like equating being a shopkeeper with being an accused thief.
and also gotta agree,
Obfuscation & non sequiturs again.
So why I am letting the big boys speak for me........
because I think this is a case of feeding the troll.
Why don't you use your name?
-
I am observing from the sidelines of this thread, to be honest I don't feel like getting in amongst it when the standard of discussion is arguments like,
A policewoman was recently censured because she was moonlighting as a prostitute. Again, not great judgment but the woman was apparently allowed to remain in the force. By the same logic, the guy who was yesterday acquitted of strangling a prostitute should also be allowed to remain in the force.
I doubt that many women want to come onto a public forum using their full name and interact with people with this kind of "logic" god forbid we might get emotional.
-
I guess you could be considered his handbag, in the "actress needs a fake date to the Oscars" way.
-
Thanks you are lovely.
-
I found http://bp3.blogger.com/_a7jkcMVp5Vg/RrUl2fOfJHI/AAAAAAAABXI/8seipCs5XXU/s1600-h/puzzle.jpg/this on post a secret.
-
Yes, it was good insight and he seemed sincere. The speech was a little tiny weeny bit long for this perhaps overly-critical member of the audience. I was rather surprised to be temporarily locked out of the venue with Bill English at about 6:40. Suffice to say, he made a few calls and we were let in eventually. It was all very Wellington for this girl.
-
Mr Stephen Judd,
abso-bloody-lutely!
I am also not up for Socratic enquiry, even being that I am well aquaintanted with the thought experiement ; )Daniel if you have something more specific to add I would actually like to hear it. Maybe it is the nature of commenting online, sometimes it can be a bit nerve wracking to put your ideas out there....
I say yes to babysitting for stressed parents, yes to keeping an eye on children in your community, yes to more Plunket nurses, yes to thinking about what kind of society we want to live in and yes to serious policy discussions. None of these things are mutually exclusive.