Daily Review 29/11/2017

Written By: notices and features - Date published: - 41 comments
Categories: Daily review

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

41 comments on “Daily Review 29/11/2017”

Comment numbers have changed to permanent references. Older quoted numbers may no longer identify the same comment.

        1. 2.2.1.1

          Exactly. Labour still has a significant dead weight to it, consisting of dead wood they should have got rid of way back when it first started dragging the party down. Curran’s demonstrated her dead-wood quality over and over again – how many times before someone in the Labour heirarchy notices?

    3. 2.3

      I hope that Idiot Savant is wrong, and that Ministerial diaries will soon be published automatically again, after the previous National government cancelled the practice.

      I also hope that Alwyn will remove the nose-ring that the National Party has inserted in his face, but I’m not optimistic that either scenario will occur.

      1. 2.3.1

        When were these diaries published, and where.
        I have been looking for any occurrence of the Office Diaries for Helen Clark and can find nothing.
        Neither can I find any reference to them having been published.
        Can you please provide some evidence for the statement
        “Ministerial diaries will soon be published automatically again, after the previous National government cancelled the practice.”

          1. 2.4.1.2.1

            And you think that’s specific?

            They’re lucky the response wasn’t “took a shit, might have used a nat manifesto to wipe off”.

            So basically you guys have forgotten how to ask a question.

      1. 2.5.1

        I’m sorry but I don’t understand this comment.
        I thought Idiot/Savant was male and I therefore used “his”.
        On the other hand I really did think that Clare Curran was a female and I therefore used “her” when referring to her.
        Am I wrong? Is “she” a “he”? Or is “he” a “she”?

          1. 2.5.1.1.1

            You are not a Minister of the Crown.
            Or if you are you are not currently in the House and under the rules of their Question Time.
            You can’t therefore choose to only answer one part of a multipart question.
            Would you really like me to get more specific and ask multiple questions?

            1. Is I/S male?
            2. Is I/S female?
            3. Is Clare Curran female?
            4. Is Clare Curran male?

            There. Four one part questions. In this exam answer all four questions.

              3. 2.5.1.1.1.1.3

                I think that you misread what I had written and thought I had made an error.
                Now you are embarrassed by your foolishness and don’t have the guts to admit you made a mistake.

                Well to err is human (you)
                To forgive divine (me).

                Given that I am, of course, Almighty God, I am willing to forgive you little man.
                Don’t let it happen again though dupe.

                    3. 2.5.1.1.1.1.3.1.2.3

                      I did assume that was what you meant.
                      I just couldn’t resist the opportunity.
                      I take it that you can confirm that, at least at that date, “he” was a “he”.
                      I can now rest assured that my use of gender in the comment about I/S and CC was correct.

  4. 4

    Is anyone else freaking out about this new alliance of Israel and Saudi Arabia? The drums of war are beating, so they will be wanting the blood of our young. It would appear that the Yanks will take the brunt of this rubbish, Saudi Arabia cares not – how many Americans die.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42094105

    http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/11/covert-israeli-saudi-arabia-relations-171120142229835.html

    And if you canny be bothered reading 6 minute video.

    1. 4.1

      Off topic but does anyone else think the middle east oil economy is screwed because of very rapidly advancing electric technology?

      Could be carnage in the region when the money tap turns off.

    2. 4.2

      Nope, I’m not “freaking out” about this particular piece of political theatre any more than any other.

      “The International situation is desperate, as usual”. Tom Robbins.

      “Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia”. George Orwell.

      “Situation normal: all fucked up”. Anonymous, WWII.

    4. 4.4

      And on the edge of the Pacific …

      “In his 12-day trip to Asia, U.S. President Donald Trump largely focused on North Korea and trade, all but avoiding the simmering disputes in the South China Sea and steering clear of sharp criticism of Beijing’s increasingly aggressive activities there.

      http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/16/with-trump-focused-on-north-korea-beijing-sails-ahead-in-south-china-sea/?utm_content=bufferc63b3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

      With the Trump administration focused elsewhere….

Comments are closed.