We turn our back for a few moments, and it all happens. Labour releases it's Party List for the November election, Damian O'Connor makes his now-infamous "gaggle of gays and unionists" comment, and Phil Goff says something extraordinary, even by his standards.
What did Goff mean when he told an interviewer that there were "winners and non-winners" in the selection of Labour's list? Whatever happened to calling things the way they actually are? Since when was the word "loser" become a banned word?
How things have changed between 2005 and 2008. Michael "We won; you lost; eat that" Cullen would be mortified. And Phil Goff's appeal to the electorate would be greatly enhanced if he didn't resort to fudging his words.
3 comments:
Come now, I2 - you're not suggesting that non-winners should be labelled losers, are you?
Back to language/thought control classes for you.
And the Perth Wildcats are NON_WINNERS, yea, what you wrote prior to the three game semis didn't look to hot after game one but tonight they nailed it and on to the final.
I guess they just wern't quite in the zone for game one but they delivered in spades for two and three.
Now CJB has another two games for the Breakers.
Cheers for that GD; I actually saw s.ome of game 2 on the telly here on Sunday night; that was gutsy! Well done Breakers - WINNERS!
Post a Comment