Thursday, August 30, 2012

Cowardly weasels of our time

UPDATE:  who'da thunk it?  They did the right thing twice in one week!  How often do you get to say of the New Zealand Parliament "I'm pleasantly surprised?"

For an excellent description of what happened to the compromise vote (all the more excellent for being speculative, having been written before the vote was taken), see Graeme Edgeler's post on the subject.



Back in April I wrote about the conscience vote being taken in Parliament today over alcohol law "reform" (in quotes because reform is supposed to imply changes that improve things).  I had this to say about the prospect of a split purchase age:

...or even worse, enacting some kind of split purchase age level so that... so that... well, I'm fucked if I know what the aim of it is apart from making the law a lot more complicated.  It seems to be one of those compromises in which you choose the most stupid, pointless, expensive and difficult option exactly and only because you get to call it a compromise.

And also this:

This will be an interesting conscience vote - it will tell us who in Parliament has the integrity to stand up against the practice of picking on a minority for the sake of being seen to do something about a problem. ...  Happily, it will also tell us which MPs are such cowardly weasels that they'd inflict by far the worst option on us for the sake of being able to say they reached a compromise.

So, guess which camp the Chief Weasel has declared himself for?  You should be able to, it didn't come as any surprise to me.

7 comments:

The Veteran said...

What part of 'it's a conscience vote' don't you understand.

You could argue that to abstain is "cowardly".

Psycho Milt said...

What makes this "cowardly" isn't voting according to your conscience, it's voting for the crappiest option just because you can call it a compromise - ie, because you don't have the bollocks to take a stand on a controversial issue.

Actually, in the PM's case I'm not certain it's cowardice - given his history of having no values, principles or goals beyond "Key for PM," maybe he genuinely doesn't have a stand to take on this.

The Veteran said...

Ok, now I understand. Not voting for 'your' preferred option is cowardly. Thanks ....

As for your second para and suma, suma.

gravedodger said...

As if fiddling with a chronological factor at a rate of around 10% and taking zero account of maturity, behavior or circumstance will make a twig of Daphne's difference in any outcome.
It might look better and smell nicer to some with limited intellectual ability but the reality will be a feeding frenzy for the repeaters and negligible difference to the problem of people sliding into gutters with their vomit.
A pox on all of them for wasting time on such misdirected social engineering.
Pissheads will get alcohol whatever tinkering is done at the edges.

Psycho Milt said...

Ok, now I understand. Not voting for 'your' preferred option is cowardly.

Er, what? Where does it say that? If some MPs want to join Doug Sellman on the wowser bandwagon and vote for raising the age back to 20, that's their right and the worst I could say about them is "I disagree." The cowardly weasels backing the pointless and just plain stupid compromise option, though? I can say plenty about them.

Shane Ponting said...

"Actually, in the PM's case I'm not certain it's cowardice - given his history of having no values, principles or goals beyond "Key for PM," maybe he genuinely doesn't have a stand to take on this. "

Where's the like button when you need it.

dad4justice said...

So psycho did Helen Clark have more principles than John Wee or did Peter Davis roger the principal so he could see the 14 year old?

Play chess psycho? Anyway check....your move lefty turnip.