Too many choices to settle on just one

So much to bitch about and so little time ... or, in this case, space.

It's quite the quandary - to select just one topic.

There's the GCSB drama continuing to play out with its ever-deepening plot lines. I'm just waiting for someone to appear with a shoephone and a watch that shoots tranquillising darts or Dotcom to release footage of the discovery of a horse head in his bed.

I'm not too sure whether to class the whole affair as a gripping drama or a comedy of errors. I think I'll leave this topic to the real journalists and appropriately so as they are now at the centre of unfolding events.

I could also make mention of the very democratic elections that have taken place in Zimbabwe. I'm sure everything is above board and any speak of election rigging will just be scaremongering and propaganda.

No nicer megalomaniac than Mugabe could you find. I'm still trying to rid myself of the image I saw some months ago, when we still had real news programmes, of a villager going to buy a loaf of bread with a wheelbarrow full of their very much devalued dollars.

It's such a shame to see the once-abundant "fruit bowl" of Africa dried up and rotting, unable to feed its own people let alone export to the world, and to see a man who is so delusional and egotistical that he really does believe that the world will buy the story that he is the peoples' choice as leader. I could make a local comparison but in the interests of avoiding a lawsuit, I shall hold my tongue this once.

Speaking of tongues, is it time we all committed to memory the Maori names of our highly creatively titled islands? Will those who oppose the idea be branded as racist or will we go the politically correct route and have both to appease and please.

I really don't have a preference either way, other than the cost of the whole exercise should the Maori names get the thumbs-up.

Then there is the wider issue of renaming the entire country Aotearoa. Judging by the number of submissions received thus far it is promising to be a debate even livelier than our own "H" issue.

If W(h)anganui's experience is anything to go by, we will most certainly be in for some drama. And what of the lesser-mentioned Stewart Island, great name that it is. Poor little island doesn't even rank a mention in the weather forecasts on any channel. Why is that? We get weather reports for Australia and the Pacific islands.

Last I heard it did actually have a population - maybe it's become a republic. How would we know - we never hear a bloody word about the place? Small it may be, but it's just as much a part of our country as the big islands. We live in a tri-land paradise, let's never forget.

I could also make mention of the recent earthquakes, putting Wellington on reminder in no uncertain terms that they are due for the "big one".

It's also a reminder that the supposed experts are pretty well clueless. Having not occurred along the usual fault line, they could no more predict this event any more than they could predict what happened in Christchurch but, with a margin of error of roughly 40 years, they have to cover their bases somehow to give us all the impression that they can actually see into the future.

As long as they remain to be "not the big one", I'm just happy that I can truthfully say that the earth still moves for me. I'll take it in whatever form I can get it.

As an animal lover I could throw in my two cents on the animal testing debate. It might put me in overdraft but it's worth it. I watched a news item a few weeks back with the withered old crone and couldn't help but have a chuckle at the wording of the report. It was about a new use for the little blue wonder drug Viagra which had shown positive results in the lab when tested on "mice, sheep and a few Canadians" - like Canadians were now the "lab rat" of choice.

I have never quite understood why they test on animals at all. Physiologically we are such different animals so how they can make comparisons is beyond me.

As for testing party pills/legal highs ... well, it's just plain bizarre. The human brain is nothing remotely like that of any animal they are subjecting to testing so why would any human with a brain be convinced by the findings.

The closest I get to animal testing with my beloved Waffle is to have him sample my cooking. If I couldn't cook, I could see how this might be classed as animal cruelty, but I can and I'm happy to say that Waffle loves being my sous chef.

Some of the spicier delights might give him the kind of breath that could peel the hair off a camel's scrotum but overall he's a happy camper with the traits that make him and all other dogs worthy of the title of "man's best friend" - loyalty, devotion, unquestionable love, and not a hint of greed, malice or vanity. And we think ourselves superior?

If the powers that be would just grow a pair and outlaw the substances altogether, we could kill two birds with one stone instead of killing innocent animals and our youth. I suggest we find an appropriate group of social misfits to test these drugs on, the real dregs of society - maybe politicians, telemarketers or the cast of Shortland Street.

Having chosen not to write about any of the above, I have now run out of room, so I'm off to spoon with Waffle. Thanks for all your feedback and please keep it coming - investik8@gmail.com

As always, smile loudly.