![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Nov. 5th, 2008 07:41 pmEverything I have suffered in this series of election debates (featuring: John Key insisting that his party stands for "safe streets and better education" - really, because you know, Labour's policies of unsafe streets have been a big concern for me personally; also, Helen Clark wearing pink, which is an absolutely TERRIBLE colour on her and whoever picked it out should be shot; I'm sorry to bring up clothing but it was just not a good choice) Anyway it was all worth it for this exchange:
YOUNG CHILD: [parent-scripted dialogue about smoking displays in dairies]
HELEN: [policy]
SAINSBURY: Have you ever smoked?
HELEN: Well, of course I did, when I was a teenager like everyone else, and thank goodness I never got addicted. [policy, policy]
SAINSBURY: John?
JOHN: [policy, policy] My mum smoked and I begged... [Note: I kind of want to know whether he was going to say begged her to stop, or begged for one]
SAINSBURY: And did you smoke?
JOHN: No, as a matter of fact, I never did.
SAINSBURY: And while we're on the topic, ever do anything else?
JOHN: No, no, I - [laughs] I never inhaled!
HELEN: [jovially] You know, this comes up periodically in these kinds of debates [which I just noticed is a nicely subtle way of reminding everyone that she's got a shitload of political experience] and I remember saying to Paul in one of these things, I said, Paul, you and I were both university students in the sixties!
EVERYONE: LOL!
I don't know why this is so amusing to me, but.
While I'm on it I may as well talk about policy: I think both Helen and John dropped the ball on the gangs question (actually, it was a quite anti-John boot-camp question.) They were both very quick to talk about cracking down on gangs and blah blah blah (although I do think H was using language of "troubled young people" and "our kids" where J was using language of "human timebombs" and, well, I know which language I prefer, is all) but overall what they were saying is basically meaningless. "Cracking down on gangs"? What does that mean? Does it mean "We will target kids in the poorest areas of town who feel alienated from their families and trapped in cyclical poverty and we will ensure extensive afterschool programmes are available, we will try to make them feel involved and connected to their community and we will give them a voice, we will address domestic violence" or does it mean "We will ban bandanas"? And unfortunately I think they both basically meant "we will ban bandanas." And that doesn't cut it. Most telling phrase?
JOHN: [policy about bootcamps, policy about youth offenders, etc] And lastly: rehabilitation.
Uh-huh.
Thing I did like: I really enjoy how Helen keeps hitting the "equality of opportunity" notes. It's so Rawls. I like it.
( some more commentary, why not. Mmm, politics. Sick of it yet? )
YOUNG CHILD: [parent-scripted dialogue about smoking displays in dairies]
HELEN: [policy]
SAINSBURY: Have you ever smoked?
HELEN: Well, of course I did, when I was a teenager like everyone else, and thank goodness I never got addicted. [policy, policy]
SAINSBURY: John?
JOHN: [policy, policy] My mum smoked and I begged... [Note: I kind of want to know whether he was going to say begged her to stop, or begged for one]
SAINSBURY: And did you smoke?
JOHN: No, as a matter of fact, I never did.
SAINSBURY: And while we're on the topic, ever do anything else?
JOHN: No, no, I - [laughs] I never inhaled!
HELEN: [jovially] You know, this comes up periodically in these kinds of debates [which I just noticed is a nicely subtle way of reminding everyone that she's got a shitload of political experience] and I remember saying to Paul in one of these things, I said, Paul, you and I were both university students in the sixties!
EVERYONE: LOL!
I don't know why this is so amusing to me, but.
While I'm on it I may as well talk about policy: I think both Helen and John dropped the ball on the gangs question (actually, it was a quite anti-John boot-camp question.) They were both very quick to talk about cracking down on gangs and blah blah blah (although I do think H was using language of "troubled young people" and "our kids" where J was using language of "human timebombs" and, well, I know which language I prefer, is all) but overall what they were saying is basically meaningless. "Cracking down on gangs"? What does that mean? Does it mean "We will target kids in the poorest areas of town who feel alienated from their families and trapped in cyclical poverty and we will ensure extensive afterschool programmes are available, we will try to make them feel involved and connected to their community and we will give them a voice, we will address domestic violence" or does it mean "We will ban bandanas"? And unfortunately I think they both basically meant "we will ban bandanas." And that doesn't cut it. Most telling phrase?
JOHN: [policy about bootcamps, policy about youth offenders, etc] And lastly: rehabilitation.
Uh-huh.
Thing I did like: I really enjoy how Helen keeps hitting the "equality of opportunity" notes. It's so Rawls. I like it.
( some more commentary, why not. Mmm, politics. Sick of it yet? )
