Post by James Christophers Post by James Christophers Post by Tony
finally beginning to wake up and realise that she is just
Maybe but unlike the luckless Collins's, Ardern's numbers are a mere
from a consistently high average. And you can take it that with both
and National belly up in their own slough of despair and despond,
good as yer gonna get for the time being, barring some unforeseen
Once more, this this not about Collins or National.
But Elliot's article is about Collins and National - plus Labour - and it is
Elliot's article that Crash has put up for debate.
Read the article and you'll realise the essence of what you would call " the
topic" is in Crash's header, the last three words being the nub of the whole
thing: "...when humour bites". This leaves the whole topic wide open for
further commentary on the understated **substance** behind the entire piece
which in more or less equal measure makes fun of the shortcomings of all three
protagonists: the sitting government, Bridges and Collins. Elliot reserves a
special place in his heart for the stumbling, fumbling Bridges, metaphorically
putting the poor bastard out of his misery once and for all with his deft
coup-de-grâce, "National Oydentity" - the unkindest cut of all. But
not to say that Elliot has not subtly addressed the feast of underlying
problems, albeit obliquely and also plainly for his own, and your, sweet
savouring. He's writing for fun because he's good at it.
So here, again, a little leavening of the discourse from time to time makes
for a more balanced perspective, particularly when those who must repeatedly
argue every nit-picking detail over issues **they know full well** they
themselves are powerless to act on, inevitably make holy fools of themselves.
Insistently pressing on others one's own earnestness of purpose while
simultaneously lacking even the faintest clue how **actually** to pursue it
one's self is strictly for the compulsive twits of this world.
Prior to the 2017 election, I said in plain words that the aspirant Labour
Party hadn't a hope of meeting the avalanche of policies and projects it had
announced. I then called it "irrational exuberance" - "pie in the sky".
And so it has turned out. Where it matters, and from all sides and for a
multitude of reasons, virtually the entire show has been hobbled from the very
outset, this made only worse and ever-increasingly difficult both by a
seriously ailing infrastructure this country cannot **now** afford to replace
let alone fully remediate, and more recent Act of God events et al - "The
best laid plans of mice and men...".
So I for one am not disappointed by Labour at all. What I see is, to the
greater degree, more or less what I had expected all along simply because I'm a
The higher one's expectations, the greater one's risk of disappointment. And
that goes s much for National as it does for any other party. Simply, our
political class is mediocre and certainly not up to the task of efficient,
effective governance. What's more, it seldom has been for at least the
years, this due in large part to a complacent and compliant voting
a parochial parish-pump Fourth Estate that for the most part should hang its
head in shame.
 Correction: "Nish-know Oydentity".
 Institutional drift and neglect, raised and fostered by institutional
self-satisfaction and complacency.
Yes it also mentiuons National but not as the main issue.