Labels

Friday, November 29, 2013

Motorbike Mechanics aren't Rocket Scientists

They may not be, but by the Lord Harry they make damned fine Mayors. They can kick-start like nobody's business. And this Tavern welcomes such sleeves-rolled-up men who become Guardian Angels well before their time.

I speak of one here; one who dropped in to tell us what he DID, to save his town, his kids, his Soul. And were we pleased to see him.




Dale Williams is Mayor of Otorohanga, in New Zealand. Crikey, even in Christchurch they had never heard of his motorbike business. In Auckland, the Capital, his small town barely registered in the maps office.
But he put it on the map.

Take your helmets off and listen to what he had to say. You will be as pleased as all in the Bar. I'll pull a few pints for you.



Small town big change: Dale Williams at TEDxAuckland

(Until You Tube and Blogger sorts out which is which you will have to click the link)

Youth Unemployment is a real problem particularly when so much 'Government' strips kids of Parents who can give them the support they need. Not to mention the 'skools' being Dominated by female teachers (he carefully avoids mentioning that) who haven't a clue. 
Let's all drink to Dale. A Man who rolls his sleeves up and puts a ring-spanner to work.

19 comments:

  1. For once I thought you had managed to write something without referencing females in a derogatory manner, but no. My mother taught elementary school for most of her life and was an exemplary educator so your latest attack is offensive to me and feels personal.

    I can't read this anymore. Neither am I interested in the views of a couple of weak women who encourage your inanity. This woman Cherry who is going to stand with you and harass other women who are acting within the law is probably a bitter dried up old prune and I would guess, childless. If you and she wish to sit on a bench in peaceful prayer then I guess nobody will stop you. (This relates to previous post) Or you could even go inside of either of the two churches and nobody will stop you. If however, you are acting in a sanctimonious,self righteous manner causing distress to those whose situation you have no knowledge or understanding of, then the pair of you should be ashamed of yourselves.

    You and your friend Cherry can go hang.

    John C.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where do I start? There is so much here that I could tear into, but frankly what is the point. Almost.

      Your diatribe is worthy of response even if it is simply to acknowledge the encouragement from the customers to get my sword out.

      Let's start by acknowledging your dear old mum. I take it that your mum was of a generation of teachers who did actually know how to teach and did actually like her pupils. It was not I that criticised the 'Careers' teacher, but the Mayor. I mearly pointed to his 'caution' in not wishing to have you in his audience heckling.

      When more men than women are employed in an industry, the 'Male Domination' chant goes forth from Feminist mouths, but you object when the sauce is poured on the gander in equal measure. Got a problem with equality?

      Being rude about other customers at my bar is, well, rude. Only from a rude mouth would the defence of the innocent be termed 'sanctimonious. Be thankful that your mum didn't consider you an impediment to her 'lifestyle'.

      You do not want to drink in my Tavern.

      Good.

      The door is where you came in. Do you want to walk out or try flying out? No one is forced to stay but help in ejecting is at hand.

      Begone. Many are called but few are fit company for Saints and Heroes.

      Delete
    2. To John C: I see no "derogatory" remarks in the O/P at all. In fact the only reference to women, was the general truism that female school teachers "haven't a clue" about the needs of young male students. This a statement that had been reversed and said words to the effect of:

      "Male teachers haven't a clue about how to deal with little girl students"

      would no doubt be greeted with great praise by you.

      THEN John goes into a a hateful lengthy paragraph (nearly so long as I think the whole article) making the typical "white knight" or "mangina" remark that "not all women are like that" or "NAWALT". The problem is however John is that YES. YES most women ARE like that! Most women in the teaching profession think young boys are exactly like the little girls and this is a huge mistake. These kid boys need their recess and physical ed programs on average much more than the girls. Similarly little boys excel best when they COMPETE with each other. Yet competition has essentially been removed from the school curriculum of young people in western culture because some researcher decided that "girls do not perform well when boys actively compete with them"

      Well if this is so? Then perhaps someone can volunteer their time teaching math skills to young girls in single gender classes. However the needs of little boys are absolutely unrecognized in the stupid gender neutral system. Typically we've found that all one needs to do with a slow performing boy having tasks of say long division crammed down his throat is the REVERSE method used upon the girl. Instead of coddling the boy who fails to figure out a math problem you chide the kid a tad by saying. "Yeah that's right Timmy, I'll bet ya CAN'T solve this problem. Huh?.."

      Suddenly when the task is put to him like a challenge? He demonstrates an eagerness from out of this world. Thus near immediately moving up the class room in ability!

      Next, the O/Poster mentions how the government has "stripped kids of the parents" and this is 100% true as well. Through the past 40+ years of male bashing, a crooked family court system with child custody laws favoring the mothers perhaps ten times to one? We see the sexist demoralization of men. GET THEM OUT OF THE HOME!. Strip these "dangerous men" of their fathering rights so they become absentee dads. Then send them to the only debtors prisons left on the planet if they fall short of supposed "child support" payments. Yeah "child support": having your wages garnished in order to pay the living expenses of a nagging, lazy ex-wife and the poorly treated children you aren't allowed to even visit. Just pay and pay and PAY.

      So screw YOU John. We can not have the depravity of feminism without the complicity of males. I urge you to view "On Toxic Women and Stupid Men". Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNzxdxTM5UI

      Indeed it is guys like you who are far more a part of the problem than the original poster is.

      Delete
    3. There are pints by the yard on the bar for you Jorge. Here speaks a man worthy of serving.

      Thank you for that excellent support.

      Delete
    4. Thank you, John C., for teaching us all how to not reference females you don't even know in a derogatory manner - by talking about a female you don't know, in a derogatory manner.

      Your loss - Cherry is a wonderful person who just happens to be smart enough to know when to take issue with someone and when not to and to find the good in everyone and common ground. I doubt she or anyone needs to "hang" over it.

      I don't agree with Amfortas, virtually at all, really - but I'll defend his right to say it without censure, and the same is true for you - however, at least Amfortas doesn't sound like a gigantic, hypocritic arse, when he exercises freedom of speech.

      Do I wish he'd find a new topic other than evil feminists and abortion? Yes I do, but mostly because I don't think it's healthy to focus on the dark all the time.

      However, I had my own time of being angry with men and assuming they were all the same, we all have those times after injury - but the important thing is that we move PAST that and stop punishing all of one gender because of a few a-holes.

      Because in the end, they don't give a fig if we're hurt/angry with them, so the only person those feelings are hurting is ourselves when we do ;)

      Amfortas, this really is in support of you, though it may not sound like it - but I had to be honest, just to prove I'm not "disingenuous".

      (Btw, it actually depends on the issue which way I lean, and like Cherie, I like to hear all perspectives and make an informed decision first - despite "someone" stamping that label on my head;)

      Take care,

      Chrystal


      Delete
    5. Thank you for joining in Chrystal. I appreciate the 'balance' there and will address some of the points you raise.

      There are topics raised in the bar that have little to do with feminism or abortion. Many in fact. Heck, I even make room for cooks and musicians, sports-women and men, choirs and children in these pages. Perhaps I should put more aircraft here.

      The recent focus has been brought about by a serious series of political events nearby which have 'moment' and need addressing. I could, like most people, bury my head. I would not go so far as to bury it up my backside though as a recent commenter does. Oz politics has been severely distorted by feminist agendas and some are occasionally highlighted. I simply show the tip of icebergs.

      (See the Mountains of Gold for a contrast)

      I am not 'angry at women'. I am sad. I am disappointed. I am dismayed. That goes for many if not most men too. Most men do little to improve my observations of people's 'good points'. I have to do my own hard work digging those out. Can you not see that so clearly drawn? Perhaps I should emphasise it more.

      Feminism is a modern scourge using all the tried and tested methods that have been deployed by evil throughout history. That includes the misguided too. It is reliant on useful idiots. As a Tavern Keeper I am useful but definitely not in Thrall to evil.

      Feminism damages women - many who are becoming increasingly aware - almost as much as the direct damage it is and has been doing to men. I can just as easily ignore it but conscience informs me not to.

      The 'dark' is gathering all around. I cannot detail them all. If you care to look down the right side column you will see some other blog examples where a wide range of matters and views are discussed. And of course the left column spells out the ethos here. Is there something on the left that you take issue with, by the way?

      So sit at the bar and give me something else, more illuminating to talk about. I am quite happy for people to suggest and even 'hold forth' here, and I will add my view. You can email me with your take on things. I will respect them with the respect due.

      Delete
    6. Well, that's true - if you took a look at my past few blog posts, as a snapshot of it's focus (or the lack thereof), you'd think that was all I ever talked about too lol - sorry about that :)

      Though I have noticed, both here and elsewhere, antifeminism does seem to be the focus, when I can tell you have so much more to say than that.

      Thank you, Amfortas, I do appreciate your invitation, and I know you mean that as a gentleman - it's just that my bf doesn't care for me regularly talking on mens' blogs, just now and then, and I'd like to respect his wishes on that, because I respect him - but I do thank you for your offer - cheers and best to you :)

      Delete
    7. By the way, Chrystal, I noticed you were 'selective' - shall we say - when you paraphrased me in one of your posts. (Ref JH's Women Bishops). You omitted to say that I first off agreed with Cherie before I mentioned the ladies being almost as bad.

      I could not put that on your blog in response as there seems to be no commentary facility.

      Nice blog though.

      :)

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  2. For once I thought you had managed to write something without referencing females in a derogatory manner, but no. My mother taught elementary school for most of her life and was an exemplary educator so your latest attack is offensive to me and feels personal.

    LOL.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clearly she omitted to teach him good manners.

      Delete
  3. Whoops. Looks like my Bouncer's wife has been busy. (it was his turn to tuck the kiddies up.) She slung some boorish troll out the door. Don't bother to come back, John C. Don't let your arse scrape my doorstep.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Okay, let's go public. Watch and wait. Your choice, because it could have been contained.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh dear. An anonymous person with bitterness and a grudge. You do not have to come here, whoever you are. There is a life out there beyond the Tavern hedges. Chill out.

      Delete
  5. Oh crap...now where did my whet stone get to....?

    CaptDMO

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sharpen it up Captain. You can use mine.

      Delete
  6. For future trolls I put this here:

    It is from Mr Cook who drops in from time to time.

    FROM THE EDITOR
    Hi there,

    Last year BioEdge had a world scoop when it was the first to report the publication of an article about infanticide in the Journal of Medical Ethics. "After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?" was irresistible fodder for the tabloid media. As they say in newsrooms, it had legs.

    While some authors might have luxuriated in the publicity, Francesca Minerva, the corresponding author, did not. She received hundreds of abusive emails, including some death threats. Dealing with the fall-out robbed her of precious time for tranquil reflection on an airy balcony of the ivory tower.

    So she proposes in the journal Bioethics this month that contributors to academic journals should be able to make anonymous contributions. This will spare them the pain of unwelcome publicity and foster daring expeditions into the realm of dangerous ideas.

    While I am sorry about the abuse, I am surprised by Dr Minerva naiveté. Everyone knows that the internet is a dark jungle of nastiness, of venomous creepy-crawlies and sabre-toothed carnivores. I moderate comments on BioEdge and MercatorNet and I have seen the most innocuous articles bucketed with bile. In her case, she was advancing ideas which have real world consequences. People living in the real world were bound to respond.

    More than anything else, it is anonymity that generates the nastiness on the internet. I fail to see how anonymous publication in academic journals will function differently, albeit with Olympian sneers instead of four-letter words. Anonymity brings out the very worst in people. When they do not feel that they will be held to account, they lose their balance and perspective. Are bioethicists really that different?

    Cheers,

    Michael Cook
    Editor
    BioEdge

    Now. this Tavern Keeper understands Michaels view. I take the view that there are sad souls out there who are filled with venom and must rid themselves of it onto others. Me included.

    Love the Sinner: Hate their sin.

    I pray for mothers and babies, for fathers and Doctors. I leave it to My Lord to do the condemning and I am pretty sure He lets people condemn themselves by their own consequences.

    Why anyone should despise me, personally, enough to troll this tavern, is beyond reasoning.




    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Amfortas - whups, that's me above too, the deleted one - I have one gmail for my blog and a separate one for emails that I only give out to people I know well, which I'd forgotten I was logged into, at the time. (As I said, I rarely comment anywhere anyway.) Nothing more "sinister" than that, tho - - sorry for any confusion.

    Here's an exact copy of what I said (minus a typo correction):

    Amfortas - well, thank you for being polite about my blog ;)

    I haven't had much time to put much effort into it recently while moving, but there are moments, further back, to which I hope we can all relate, at times.

    I honestly had my focus on another aspect of that thread, at the time, and had meant that exchange between you and Cherie as background explanation to the events that later transpired - I was more focused on feeling misinterpreted myself later (not by you).

    I'm sorry about that, let me change it now. (I'm sure that will get me accused of being 'disingenuous' or some other dastardly motivation because I edited the post, after the fact, but as long as you and I know how/why, I'm good with that:)

    I already put in someone else's blog ID name in my most recent post, to make it clear which male was meant, so there was no confusion between you and anyone else

    My comments are closed because of 2 relentless trolls - it just gets tiresome, the relentless ones. Even ignoring them and with moderator, you have to read through their crap and I just didn't need to read that every day :)

    Detroit and I are reading you while simultaneously taking a blog boat ride in Lucerne, with Cherry via her blog, while listening to Mozart's violin concertos and drinking a modest pinot noir - and we offer up a toast?

    "A toast to those brave enough to speak their mind and heart on a subject, regardless of it's popularity" :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. :)

      Have another Chateau de Generosity Pinot on the Tavern, m'dear.

      Delete

Ne meias in stragulo aut pueros circummittam.

Our Bouncer is a gentleman of muscle and guile. His patience has limits. He will check you at the door.

The Tavern gets rowdy visitors from time to time. Some are brain dead and some soul dead. They attack customers and the bar staff and piss on the carpets. Those people will not be allowed in anymore. So... Be Nice..