Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 112641	2010-09-15 09:31:00	Act's David Garrick	mikebartnz (21)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1137452	2010-09-18 05:52:00	They did the Nats said vote for our pet right wing wombat and the Epson electorate duly did so	gary67 (56)
1137453	2010-09-18 06:06:00	They did the Nats said vote for our pet right wing wombat and the Epsom electorate duly did so Knowing he would probably win that seat. Will be interesting to see if they are disillusioned by his antics etc.	Cicero (40)
1137454	2010-09-18 07:54:00	Hmm can see the headlines now dancing with the criminals star Rodney and his dancing partner David have unfortunately been voted off by you the audience at home	gary67 (56)
1137455	2010-09-18 08:24:00	They did the Nats said vote for our pet right wing wombat and the Epson electorate duly did so Interesting voting pattern. Overwhelming majority as consituency MP but less party votes than the Greens. www.electionresults.govt.nz	martynz (5445)
1137456	2010-09-18 10:25:00	Well it's been hilarious watching one of the Sensible Sentencing Trust brethren getting caught by his own get tough on crime BS. Why he had to go for an historic offence isn't clear as it is hardly crime of the century even if it is a bit weird. (except for the outrage from his fellow get tough on crime crowd). What do people want, for prospective politicians to list every possible misdemeanour they may ever have done on the ballot paper? Looks like from now on we'll only get people with no real life experience in parliament, because everyone will be worried about what the press might later dig up on them. Mr Garrett is aligned with the Sensible Sentencing Trust which opposes name suppression. So does ACT. It is completely inconsistent and dishonest for him to espouse this argument, while secretly benefiting from name suppression. The issue isn't about youthful foolishness, its about integrity today. If he'd learned from the experience and gained humility, he'd have released the information when he first became politically active.	Winston001 (3612)
1137457	2010-09-18 10:51:00	Mr Garrett is aligned with the Sensible Sentencing Trust which opposes name suppression. So does ACT. It is completely inconsistent and dishonest for him to espouse this argument, while secretly benefiting from name suppression. The issue isn't about youthful foolishness, its about integrity today. If he'd learned from the experience and gained humility, he'd have released the information when he first became politically active. :thumbs:	mikebartnz (21)
1137458	2010-09-19 01:06:00	Mr Garrett is aligned with the Sensible Sentencing Trust which opposes name suppression. So does ACT. It is completely inconsistent and dishonest for him to espouse this argument, while secretly benefiting from name suppression. The issue isn't about youthful foolishness, its about integrity today. If he'd learned from the experience and gained humility, he'd have released the information when he first became politically active. So why wasn't the Sensible Sentencing Trust owning up to this from the start? He must have known when Garrett went to Court as he was the SST lawyer at the time, seems name suppression suited him on this occasion. As usual the SST has one rule for others and another rule for themselves.	Twelvevolts (5457)
1137459	2010-09-19 01:59:00	So why wasn't the Sensible Sentencing Trust owning up to this from the start? He must have known when Garrett went to Court as he was the SST lawyer at the time, seems name suppression suited him on this occasion. As usual the SST has one rule for others and another rule for themselves. And your suggestion about how the SST (and Hide for that matter) should have handled this is????? Were they supposed to have gone public and risked contempt of Court proceedings? I support you if you are arguing that SST, Garrett, Hide, and Act, are guilty of rank hypocrisy, but they couldn't fess up the way you are suggesting. It would have been better if Garrett had never been selected on the Act list in the first place, or never been made the Act spokesman on bringing back the stocks or whatever it is that shower stands for. Or better yet, if he had never committed the offence in the first place. Or, wait, better if he hadn't been born, though I suppose someone must love him, hard though it must be to credit that.	John H (8)
1137460	2010-09-19 02:02:00	I am just having a flash back. I have been thinking about the unattractive Garrett too much... Who was that unlovely character who was a Labour MP from Dunedin - ex-Phys Ed teacher? He hung around like a bad smell for far too long, just like Garrett. Similar hypocrisy, similar bullying personalities really. Does politics attract pond scum like this?	John H (8)
1137461	2010-09-19 02:21:00	Politics attract controlling and ambitious people some of whom never had a real job and don't live in the real world. It also has to be noted that they rely for advice on public servants who we can't vote out.	Snorkbox (15764)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10