Far be it from me to start following trends...

Wrathchild said:
"Access" is not, nor will it ever be a verb. One can have, get, gain or acquire access *to* information on a computer, but to "access" it just sounds bloody stupid.
Click to expand...

The verb "access" has 2 senses in WordNet.

1. access -- (obtain or retrieve from a storage device; as of information on a computer)
2. access, get at -- (reach or gain access to; "How does one access the attic in this house?"; "I cannot get to the T.V. antenna, even if I climb on the roof")

Wordnet is run by princeton, whom I assume know what a verb is.

http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn?stage=1&word=access
 
I'd like to access my brain to say that you didn't access the right files for your access information access.

Oh yeah, 4 verbs. Or at least 1.
 
Haupassia said:
Im not against people who vote Labour Spiff, I don't like the people who vote for the party, not the people running and their policies.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid your post confused the fuck out of me, Haupy! What do you mean exactly?

Split infinitives are ok!

I've always hated Cold Chisel!

I wish Labor were further to the left! I wish Labor had a "u" in it!

I hate reality TV!

I hate it when people use "lay" when they really mean lie - it's either the past form of lie, or the present form of the transitive verb!

I despise conservative policiticians!

Reagan's dead! Yay! Maybe Howard will be next?!!!!!
 
"Im not against people who vote Labour Spiff, I don't like the people who vote for the party, not the people running and their policies."

what he wanted to say was

"I'm not against people who vote Labour, I don't like the people who vote for the party instead of voting for the people running and their policies."

...I think :)
 
Far be it from me to suggest that putting Garrett into the race is little more than a cynical vote-buying exercise ( :) ) but I find it interesting that they're letting him run for a seat in a safe Labor area. I could run for election for Labor in Maroubra and win. Nevertheless, Peter Garrett is an exceptionally honourable and noble human being with a level of honesty, integrity and guts that almost everyone else in politics lacks. If I could, I'd vote for him.
 
Is getting Peter Garrett in different that putting Mary Delahunty in? Other than Mary's a state representative, and not a federal one?

I mean, once Mary was a well respected and well liked journalist, and now she's just a politician who used to be a well respected and well liked journalist.
 
I dont think Garrett will last long in Labor, he is a hippy greeny and that wont mesh with Labors policies. I know he probably thinks he can change the party from the inside, but it wont happen...
 
That won't matter after the election spawn. As long as he wins the seat for Labor at the election, and Labor then wins the election, it won't really matter if he decides to become an Independent afterwards. Peter's shrewd enough to know that his celebrity and integrity is being exploited. I did hear him say through the week however something about the need for striking a balance between the needs of the economy and the protection of resources, which is more of a Labor thing to say than a Greens one.
 
Its ridiculous, Garretts views are pretty much identical to the Greens party, yet he is in Labor! The only reason I can think of is that he thinks he can effect change from within the Labor party, which he wont...
 
True, but I think Labor under Latham is somewhat more aligned to Garrett's ideologies than Labor was under Keating, or even Hawke (who won on the back of his opposition to damming the Franklin River). It's also likely that he feels he's more likely to see policy implemented or changed if he's with a major party than with a minor act like the Greens.
 
I think he can only hurt the Labor party.
One of their biggest problems (pre and post Iraq) is that their international policy may be seen as quite soft, quite 'green'. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but by recruiting Garrett it would seem they’ll only further alienate the voters who may still support out stance on terrorism, Iraq, and so on – without gaining any new votes. :err:

In conclusion, what's the point?
 
Publicity, and a chance to get one up on Howard. Look for Howard to announce a high-profile candidate running in a safe Liberal seat shortly. :)
 
I don't see how Garrett can be good publicity though. I think he's a hippie wanker, and I'm not alone in those views.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back