All the news that's shit to print.

Xtra’s home page this morning lead with the “news” that there still had been no charge laid against the four English rugby players who had allegedly raped a woman in Auckland. It seems to me a strange lead. With all that has happened in the world, why would you lead with something that has not happened? The fact that those players will be subjected to an internal enquiry by the English Rugby Union may have some news purpose and that could well have been the lead. But it wasn’t. And nor, in my view, should it have been. The whole story seems fatuous from the start. It smacks of xenophobic prurient interest by our media who seems to have time as well as something else on their hands. Yes, I guess there is a place for that type of thing in our media, and readers and viewers for it, but I can’t help thinking that the investigative expertise of the reporters involved could be placed better elsewhere. For example they could investigate how a country of 4 million, akin to a small city elsewhere, can afford to shell-out almost $500 million to a small sector of society while many in our community suffer and the welfare system disintegrates around us. The “Treelords” deal, the latest but not the last in a long line of multi-million dollar so-called Treaty settlements may or may not be morally justified. But, looked at realistically and altruistically (neither of which seems to have much to do with Treaty settlements), could not have Maoridom who negotiated this deal with a compliant government have said, “look you have $500 million in assets and back-rental, we’ll drop the claim if you ring-fence those funds for an injection into our heath system, in putting more police on the beat and resourcing our schools—in helping the total community”? But no. Instead we have something like “open up your coffers, we’ll see how much you have to spare, add 10%, take it and later come back for more. And wile we are at it we have a couple of cousins lining up behind us.” I don’t think that lady was raped, no matter what inference the media take from what happened, but I think the country is.ow many more police the $400 million spent on the “Treelords” settlement would put on the beat or doctors in our wards.

----------------
Now playing: Johnny Cash - The Wall
via FoxyTunes

Fitting the Bill

I can’t say I am sorry to see the back of Hilary Clinton; I find it much preferable to her front. Bill probably does to, given that he spend much of his time these days tagging along behind. But in the final numbers before the national convention it is Hilary who is behind though it is, gratifyingly for her and no doubt Bill, quite a small behind. She may well be still in a position to pull it off with and for Barack Obama. The size of Obama’s constituency is of concern to him and Hilary’s ability to pull off many thousands of blue-collar workers will no doubt appeal to him, as it no doubt does to them. If Hilary can spread what many see as her best asset and sweetly pull in a huge constituency seeking instant relief she will be giving Obama the hand he desperately needs, while blowing off McCain at the same time. She has already demonstrated she can get down deep and dirty, though not perhaps as visibly as husband Bill. Obama is yet to do so, or even to give any indication that he likes to do so. Which is probably why, when I think about it, he hasn’t gone down, and Hillary has.

----------------
Now playing: Tony Joe White - Catawalling Alley In Nice
via FoxyTunes

How Now Brown Brow

I know someone who devotes her life to improving that life. She devours every course and book on self-improvement, self-assessment and self-recovery she can find. The problem is she has been so busy planning her voyage of self-discovery, she has never actually embarked on it.

Nevertheless, earlier this week, with a little time on my hands, I decided to try something similar, though with less conviction and with more modest goals. I began with addressing the big questions of the Universe—questions of Life and purpose; questions that in many cases had led to wars and, less often, had halted them; questions that had taxed, indeed plagued, greater minds than mine, questions such as: why do we have eye-brows?

Well, let me say at the outset that nothing else in our lives, short of the existence of my wife or if you live in Canterbury Robbie Deans, epitomises a Higher Being at work than eye-brows. They are a miracle of nature, an extraordinary evolutionary retainment after much else has been expelled. And for good reason; those tufts of hair, it has been ordained, serve great purpose and have therefore been retained. Eyebrows, it seems, are there to help keep moisture out of our eyes when we sweat or walk around in the rain. The arch shape diverts the rain or sweat to the sides of our face, keeping our eyes relatively dry. The most obvious advantage of this is that it lets us see clearly when we're sweating a lot or out in the rain. Without eyebrows, getting around in these conditions is a little more difficult. The shape of your brow itself diverts a certain amount of moisture, but eyebrows make a significant difference in your ability to see. Diverting the sweat away is also good because the salt in sweat irritates the eyes, making them sting a little. That at least is what sweaty-scientists tell us.

Of course the arching of eyebrows is also a very significant sign of disapproval or questioning. And this is used to frightening effect by our present prime minister and more recently by John Key, though the latter has not yet mastered the technique. Of some interest also is that the World’s most famous Italian widow, Mona Lisa, had no eye-brows; Lisa Presley, conversely, has them to excess.

There you go: in a short few words I have succeeded in enriching your life and without a book or course in sight. Say thank you Fryday.