Posts by Kyle Matthews
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm 100% behind sub prime. It sums up a series of sporting achievements (rugby, cricket, netball, that stupid thing with the sailing boats), legislative attempts (EFB, Section 59 repeal), the actions of various people around October 15th.
It just feels like the year that "wasn't really".
-
I'm sure this is a publicity exercise by the production company or TV channel.... the only real question, is one of the three leaked endings the real one, or are they all fake?
I think it's becoming increasingly common to write and film multiple endings/climaxes to major shows. Means that there might only be half a dozen people who know what's actually going onto the tv, rather than a hundred or so.
I'd bet the actual ending wasn't leaked at all. The 'Secret 4th ending' and all that.
-
...that would look quite freaky on a giant HD screen.
One presumes that the modern media minder has somewhere in their list of things to think about "visible erect nipples". It's a new world after all.
-
Really, I thought Day One involved standing around freezing your tits off at your inauguration, then playing kissy face with your donors at a string of parties.
Actually, Hilary will be the first person to freeze their tits off.
Throughout history, every other American President has frozen something else.
-
I didn't understand the "re" in "reconditioning", why not just call it something masculine and deceptively simple like "training". "Reconditioning"
is an ugly word to look at, is needlessly hard to say and would seem to be an injury-prone-making sort of process when applied to top athletes.I don't find the phrase at all useful. Re- implies that they used to be conditioned, no longer are, and need to be reconditioned. I don't spend a lot of time checking out All Black fitness levels and physiques in the off-season (or indeed, the on-season), but I'm not sure the 're' is at all accurate.
-
The concept of "police investigating police" is not viewed without considerable cynicism.
That's also somewhat dated. All my police complaints from the 90s were handled by the PCA, but investigated by police. About five (?) years ago the PCA got staffed up in response to the above criticism and they now do their own legwork, rather than relying on the police to do it.
I think the problem more is, they're pretty closely linked to police ideas, and reluctant to criticise the police unless their actions are quite blatant.
-
Anybody notice that the company that bought Telecom's directory business are outsourcing 018 to the Philipines? And did you know they've already put the price up to 50 cents?
I thought the price had been 50 cents for a while. But then again, I haven't used the service in about 15 years...
-
Alas, for a lot of the older activists who remember the Springbok tour and the clowns incident, that sort of thing is suitable for a Tui billboard. Police investigating police is not something they care much about - certainly not after what came up during Dewar's trial, not when Greg O'Connor describes the Nicholas case as a "distraction" and "an isolated incident" and Bazley's report on a culture of misogyny and sexual abuse as a clean bill of health.
I don't think older history is appropriate to reflect upon the PCA. I have very little faith in the PCA, but they have never had authority over most of these things. Springbok Tour etc all predate the PCA, and from what I heard on the radio this morning, it's only just became the case (along with a name change) that they can look at events pre-1988 (I presume they started in 1988).
Looking at events older than 20 years ago and reflecting upon the actions to date of the PCA in their light isn't fair if they PCA didn't exist then, and wasn't legally able to look at them.
-
I actually think they should open the Cullen Fund up to Kiwisaver investors, using Kiwibank or others as the retailer.
I'll concur with that. It does seem strange to have a big NZ investment fund, which I understand is doing pretty well in terms of financial return, and not have that as one of the options on the list.
-
The basis of your argument there seemed to be that the civil liberties of the accused should not be defended because, hey, Thatcher defended Pinochet. It was a cheap ad hominem shot at best.
You're thinking of someone else there, who's not me. The person you're looking for in this matter is Finn.
Doctors have to adhere to very strict ethical guidelines and are struck off and/charged if they don't because of the nature of the power relationship that they have with their patients. If the doctor was in full combat gear and carried a bloody big gun, I'd be rather concerned to put it mildly. You cannot argue that there is not a further elevation of a coercive power relationship there. That's a false analogy.
Department of Corrections staff, Police staff, Customs NZ staff carry out these sorts of searches all the time, and sometimes it's done in the presence of armed guards, and sometimes the person being searched is restrained. I'm sure in most instances they do so very professionally, and following the ethical guidelines set down by their employers. And I can't imagine in many instances it's consensual. None of those things make it rape.