Paul Little

Paul Little has written a piece about how we must all build up and not out. As is typical of the inner city dwelling liberal elite he passes opinion on where other people live and declares that we are all tacky.

The thought of extending Auckland, a city that has never placed any importance on the appearance of its built environment, to consume more open land is short-sighted. Do we really want another Albany or Dannemora with their cut-and-paste rows of identical mini-mansions showing all the design sense of a North Korean retirement home?

Oh yeah? I like living out here…the parks, walking trails, creeks, dams, bird life…I love it, it’s great and there aren’t any cocksmokers like Paul Little out here. He clearly has never been out here, otherwise he wouldn’t make such inane statements.  Read more »

Commenters are pretty emphatic…and I have taken the liberty of adding Bernard Orsman.

The nominees are:

Barry Soper – Teletubby explains:

Barry Soper for continually being more important than the story. Cock

Brian Rudman – Brian Rudman constantly bangs on about liberal elite past-times that he’d like to fund with other people’s money. A big fan of buses and trains…again funded by other people. His biggest bug bear though is that Auckland doesn’t have a suitable theatre that meets his fussy audiophile standards and he expects the ratepayers to have one damn it all! Troy explains:

Brian Rudman. Recipient of the Charles Southwell Award (for equitable and informed journalism) … yeah right, most of his articles are simple trash, so much so that I hardly make the effort to read them any more.

John Campbell – Cows4me writes:

Yeah he’s a lefty suckhole, most of the media in NZ are bent to the left. If we had a true right wing channel that held some of these dribbling lefty’s up to the light people like Campbell would struggle for air. It’s so easy to be a greasy, politically correct lefty when there’s no opposing voice.

Simon Collins – Collins pimps the poor, he came to my attention with his shocking half story about Tania Wysocki. I note to date he hasn’t had the stones to re-visit that story…he wouldn’t want to have to write about success by a battler. Hagues said:

Simon Collins for his series of wow and misery blamed either on the govt or “someone else.”

Bernard Orsman – Orsman is Len Brown’s direct line into the Herald. He has written so glowingly in favour of Len Brown I thought perhaps he had moved from the Herald Albert Street offices into the Town Hall to shorten the communication lines.

David Fisher  - Fisher has compromised himself so badly this year. He has written little else other than PR articles on behalf of Kim Dotcom or Ian Wishart. He has become fixated, so much so he is now allegedly writing a book about Dotcom with the assistance of Paul Little…I hope they don’t get too friendly…we know what happens when wine, late nights and friends mix with Paul Little.

 Loading ...

Cactus Kate writes about Paul Little’s gay little article about how he can’t deal with rude people.

Paul Little tries to confuse his audience yet again.  While I accept his conclusion of over-diagnosis of depression where many will be offended, apparently we now cannot admit to the self-deprecating label of being a bit Aspergery in order to screen out people who may be poor petals and offended easily.  There are hundreds of thousands of us all around Little.  Another generation he will be in the minority.

I admit to being as offensive to some now as I was at about age 11 when I discovered the worst your parents can do to you is socially isolate you to your bedroom for some blissful peace and quiet from the nagging and noise so you can read a book.  They gave up on the basis I kept getting A’s for them. It was a happy bilateral trade.  School teachers were the same.  Needless to say I read a lot of books in my room in my teens.

I cannot handle gabbing to people I do not know exchanging shallow pleasantries, giving or receiving.  If someone says something nice to me these days I am more likely to go bright red with embarrassment and burst out giggling.

The difference is as you get older people are more accepting of the condition because with age and achievement you earn the right to be an unsociable introverted shit if you like.  You live with it as there are 7 billion people in the world.  Find another one to have social intercourse with, one that shares your disability at some level.  There are plenty around in the modern age.  People are more likely than ever to see through others bullshit and call them on it.

And as you get even older and wiser you learn to move to the other side of the room when you meet someone like Paul Little.  Your worst nightmare is a stand-up cocktail party with a hundred strangers like him all forced to do small talk or at a party with similar.

Paul Little is a whiny little ass. I have long given up being polite to cocksmokers like him.

I am rude for a reason. It filters out wankers from being around me. It is my bullshit detector. I have found it exceedingly useful. Only the truly steely can handle being around me, and only those I actually want to spend time with will make the grade.

I find most people boring…intensely boring…and when they come up and want to share the minutiae of their sad little lives…well…being rude is preferable to punching them in the face to shut up.

Soft, gay little metrosexual types with hipster clothes and bodies like half sucked throaties may find this intimidating and even rude…rest assured it is meant to be that way. If they don’t like it they could stick to gobbling off their best mate….or something similar.

The bottom line is the world needs rude men, they get things done while whiny little tossers like Paul Little just moan about what happened.

ᔥ Kiwiblog.co.nz

Paul Little on the Greens:

Experienced politicians would say they are also untainted by reality or experience

ᔥ NZ Herald

There isn’t much I agree with Paul Little on…in fact I think this may well be the only thing. I certainly don’t share his idea of good fun after dinner entertainment.

This is what he thinks of TVNZ7 and whingers lamenting its demise:

Some weeks ago, a town meeting in Auckland protested against the closure of TVNZ7, which made its final self-important broadcasts yesterday.

A few hundred people who looked like they had only just come to terms with the introduction of colour television turned out to bemoan, pointlessly, yet another fait accompli, “demand” that TVNZ7 be saved and tacitly congratulate themselves on their superior taste in viewing.

There’s no denying we no longer have programmes of the calibre of Stars on Sunday, Pukemanu, The Black and White Minstrel Show and On the Buses.

Those who lament the passing of the good old days of public service television should be condemned to an evening watching it.

Russell Fairbrother should join Trevor Mallard in the dock being prosecuted for breaches of the Electoral Finance Act. It is scandalous that these hypocrites can continue to break the law that they passed.

Thanks to a vigilant fan who sent me this photo.

Story behind the story: The Clinton myth – Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen – Politico.com

One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning.

Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That means the only way she wins is if Democratic superdelegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party’s most reliable constituency.

Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote — which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle — and use that achievement to pressure superdelegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.

Precisely! and that is why she is screwed. Obama got in early and made the bit hits count. Clinton camp insiders reckon she has no more than a 10 per cent chance of winning. So why the gushing competition?

The real question is why so many people are playing. The answer has more to do with media psychology than with practical politics.

Journalists have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver.

One reason is fear of embarrassment. In its zeal to avoid predictive reporting of the sort that embarrassed journalists in New Hampshire, the media — including Politico — have tended to avoid zeroing in on the tough math Clinton faces.

The biggest reason though is self-importance. Reporters and editors love a close race. But how close is it. Well not close at all actually.

Simple number-crunching has shown the long odds against Clinton for some time.

In the latest Associated Press delegate count, Obama leads with 1,406 pledged delegates to Clinton’s 1,249. Obama’s lead is likely to grow, as it did with county conventions last weekend in Iowa, as later rounds of delegates are apportioned from caucuses he has already won.

They keep talking about the tough math, how tough is it really, though?

But let’s assume a best-case scenario for Clinton, one where she wins every remaining contest with 60 percent of the vote (an unlikely outcome since she has hit that level in only three states so far — her home state of New York, Rhode Island and Arkansas).

Even then, she would still be behind Obama in delegates.

There are 566 pledged delegates up for grabs in upcoming contests. Those delegates come from Pennsylvania (158), Guam (4) North Carolina (115), Indiana (72), West Virginia (28), Kentucky (51), Oregon (52), Puerto Rico (55), Montana (16) and South Dakota (15).

If Clinton won 60 percent of those delegates, she would get 340 delegates to Obama’s 226. Under that scenario — and without revotes in Michigan and Florida — Obama would still lead in delegates by 1,632 to 1,589.

In other words, she is screwed.