Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
Not all evangelicals are QAnon though and indeed plenty of black evangelicals will have voted for Biden-Harris.
While an authoritarian like yourself may regard a fifth of a group willing to use violence as small, that is a crazy high number to those of us that value democracy. It is getting up towards numbers in the Muslim world.
As the foundation of the USA was a bloody revolution, rejecting the use of violence to pursue political goals is an interesting point of view, suggesting that the whole idea was a mistake...
Indeed, otherwise it would be King Charles IIIrd of the USA too
Interesting factoid: the UK has has a female head of state for more than half the time that the USA has been in existence, during which time they have had none.
And the average monarch (by median, mode or mean) is?
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
I think that the best sign of intelligence is the ability to explain things in a jargon free manner that could be understood by a normal 12 year old.
I think that's a sign of intelligence, but far from the only one. My father-in-law is one of the cleverest people I know. He is a professor. However, he is clever in a very niche field and his ability to communicate anything complex to anyone not already at A level maths/physics level is almost nonexistent, to the frustration of my wife when she was a teenager struggling with algebra. He is also very clever in one thing and one thing only and sees no need to be clever about anything else - managing to put a new duvet on, finding your way around your home town, managing to feed yourself a nutritious meal... In most practical respects he is almost wholly dependent on my mother-in-law.
Nonetheless, at our wedding, he delivered by far the best and funniest father of the bride's speech I have ever heard.
There is an awful lot of Physics which is very simple as long as you can understand the maths, but trying to describe it in words ends up confusing everybody. It is a bit like music: if you know the notation a piece of music makes perfect sense but trying to describe it clearly to someone just using words (particularly if they don't even know the names of the notes) would be very frustrating.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.
It is completely bizarre, he managed to drive past 25 CCTV cameras both ways and was never caught on any of them.
He managed to abduct his wife from a busy walkway at 9 a.m. on a workday morning with no one seeing him or the car before, after or during the abduction.
If he was as cunning as they say then he would have made sure there was no blood left and would never have abducted her in his friends car (he owned up to the police staright away that he had borrowed his friends car on the day of the abduction)
And police scientists took three attempts to find blood that was easily seen with the naked eye in a car that had been valetted after the police's first two attempts to find stuff had yielded nothing.
And yet the BBC researcher who examined the case later expressed herself satisfied. I certainly feel that there's more than was reported in the piece you posted.
There is more but nothing that benefits the prosecution case. If he did do it he pulled off an incredible series of events.
One of the reports said he was jailed for "a minimum of 16 years". Will he ever get out if he doesn't say where the body is? Surely there is a defined jail term isn't there?
I dont think he will ever get out, he has to admit he did it to get parole, and he won't. He has been a model prisoner and has been in a open prison for a while now, which indicates that the Prison service do not see him as a threat. If he did admit it and give the location of the body then he would get released pretty quickly.
If he didn't kill her then he will spend the rest of his life in prison.
There is an excellent book The Nicholas Cases: Casualties of Justice by Bob Woffinden. Glyn Razzell's case is chapter 1
I've read your posts on this, including the blog you linked to.
It looks very dodgy to me. But surely, if what you've posted/I've read is totally accurate, the judge would have directed the jury that the evidence for murder is just too thin to convict? I feel as if there is something missing, though obviously I don't know what.
I agree
There was one odd comment that attracted my attention. His first appeal failed because “he was unable to provide any new DNA evidence”. What does that mean?
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
Not all evangelicals are QAnon though and indeed plenty of black evangelicals will have voted for Biden-Harris.
While an authoritarian like yourself may regard a fifth of a group willing to use violence as small, that is a crazy high number to those of us that value democracy. It is getting up towards numbers in the Muslim world.
As the foundation of the USA was a bloody revolution, rejecting the use of violence to pursue political goals is an interesting point of view, suggesting that the whole idea was a mistake...
Indeed, otherwise it would be King Charles IIIrd of the USA too
Interesting factoid: the UK has has a female head of state for more than half the time that the USA has been in existence, during which time they have had none.
And the average monarch (by median, mode or mean) is?
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
I think that the best sign of intelligence is the ability to explain things in a jargon free manner that could be understood by a normal 12 year old.
I think that's a sign of intelligence, but far from the only one. My father-in-law is one of the cleverest people I know. He is a professor. However, he is clever in a very niche field and his ability to communicate anything complex to anyone not already at A level maths/physics level is almost nonexistent, to the frustration of my wife when she was a teenager struggling with algebra. He is also very clever in one thing and one thing only and sees no need to be clever about anything else - managing to put a new duvet on, finding your way around your home town, managing to feed yourself a nutritious meal... In most practical respects he is almost wholly dependent on my mother-in-law.
Nonetheless, at our wedding, he delivered by far the best and funniest father of the bride's speech I have ever heard.
Something he thought was important, which he put his mind to and prepared for.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
A friend who worked with him at the FCO found that he didn't read his briefs, and spouted bullshit that was easily seen through. Often diplomats are quite good at Latin!
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Whatever you make of the substance here, just imagine how it will go down with the UK’s ambassadors around the world to learn that their private conversations with the Foreign Secretary are now regarded as fair game for briefings to the newspapers. https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/1455091576087134212/photo/1
D P McBride?
That initial makes him sound both unbiased and trustworthy!
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
I think that the best sign of intelligence is the ability to explain things in a jargon free manner that could be understood by a normal 12 year old.
There are some top intellects that can teach and explain brilliantly (Brian Greene, Richard Fenyman) whilst other can't. Probably the majority of good teachers are those who have a command of a subject but who struggled a bit so that they empathise with the pupils.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
I've said it before, Boris is up there with tier one PM's like Blair and Thatcher.
Clearly he is a political giant in a way tier two PMs like Cameron and Major weren't and tier three PMs like Brown and May could only dream of.
That doesn't necessarily mean he's actually any good at governing of course...
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
I think there had to have been a James II in order for us to talk about James I; we don't call the previous Queen Victoria I and Good Queen Bess would have been known as just Elizabeth until 1952.
Having said that, the Scottish element complicates things, so I could be talking complete rubbish.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
I've said it before, Boris is clearly up there with tier one PM's like Blair and Thatcher.
Clearly he is a political giant in a way tier two PMs like Cameron and Major weren't and tier three PMs like Brown and May could only dream of.
That doesn't necessarily mean he's actually any good at governing of course...
For sure. He is very clever at winning elections. Actually governing? - the jury is out
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
That's bowler-hat talk, that.
Don't really understand what you're trying to say. I just like the story - A Dutch invasion army comes across to save the island from Chatholicism.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
I think that the best sign of intelligence is the ability to explain things in a jargon free manner that could be understood by a normal 12 year old.
There are some top intellects that can teach and explain brilliantly (Brian Greene, Richard Fenyman) whilst other can't. Probably the majority of good teachers are those who have a command of a subject but who struggled a bit so that they empathise with the pupils.
It is also a skill that can be taught rather than something innate.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
I think that the best sign of intelligence is the ability to explain things in a jargon free manner that could be understood by a normal 12 year old.
I think that's a sign of intelligence, but far from the only one. My father-in-law is one of the cleverest people I know. He is a professor. However, he is clever in a very niche field and his ability to communicate anything complex to anyone not already at A level maths/physics level is almost nonexistent, to the frustration of my wife when she was a teenager struggling with algebra. He is also very clever in one thing and one thing only and sees no need to be clever about anything else - managing to put a new duvet on, finding your way around your home town, managing to feed yourself a nutritious meal... In most practical respects he is almost wholly dependent on my mother-in-law.
Nonetheless, at our wedding, he delivered by far the best and funniest father of the bride's speech I have ever heard.
Something he thought was important, which he put his mind to and prepared for.
He did. It was brilliant. Long, long diversions off topic into football, economics, hard science, his wife, musings on life - nervous laughter from the audience of 'where's this going' interspersed with genuine laughter of a unique speech brilliantly delivered. And then all brought back around to relevance at the last minute, much to everyone's surprise and relief. He's a genuine eccentric, my father-in-law, but I consider myself pretty fortunate to be indirectly related to him.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
In any case politicians who were genuine intellectuals like Roy Jenkins, Michael Portillo, Oliver Letwin or Enoch Powell rarely get to No 10 anyway.
PMs can hire intelligence and hire very clever people and advisers, what they need above all is good judgement (with ideally some charisma to win elections)
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
Ooh, he was: 1685-1688. And then he was deposed by the glorious revolution. I'm sure HYUFD can fill in the details if he's still around.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
I think there had to have been a James II in order for us to talk about James I; we don't call the previous Queen Victoria I and Good Queen Bess would have been known as just Elizabeth until 1952.
Having said that, the Scottish element complicates things, so I could be talking complete rubbish.
Just, by coincidence, reading the second of two fascinating books by J. D. Davies about the Stuart navy in England under the Charleses and James VII and II. Gives a very different perspective on James from the usual land-centred histories. Particularly interesting on such things as the royal yachts, naming of RN ships (a surprising number of modern RN ships also derive their name from the Carolingian illegitimates), and the use of ornate carved ornament as an arguably legitimate weapon of state,.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
That's bowler-hat talk, that.
Don't really understand what you're trying to say. I just like the story - A Dutch invasion army comes across to save the island from Chatholicism.
What I'm saying is that people who go around saying stuff like "I'm pro Glorious Revolution" usually also have a penchant for Glaswegian football clubs that play in blue, and imploring supreme beings to keep female monarchs safe from harm. Orange sashes and songs about King Billy. Bowler-hat talk. You know what I mean.
Not necessarily. I'm pro-glorious revolution because it is why we have a constitutional monarchy, not an absolute monarchy.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
Ooh, he was: 1685-1688. And then he was deposed by the glorious revolution. I'm sure HYUFD can fill in the details if he's still around.
He was deposed by his daughter, Mary and her husband the Dutch Prince William of Orange who became monarchs at Parliament's invitation
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
Ooh, he was: 1685-1688. And then he was deposed by the glorious revolution. I'm sure HYUFD can fill in the details if he's still around.
He was deposed by his daughter, Mary and her husband the Dutch Prince William of Orange who became monarchs at Parliament's invitation
He has plenty of instinctive, opportunistic political cunning I think, but very little wisdom. That would also be consistent with being poor at the job of governing, itself.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
That's bowler-hat talk, that.
Don't really understand what you're trying to say. I just like the story - A Dutch invasion army comes across to save the island from Chatholicism.
What I'm saying is that people who go around saying stuff like "I'm pro Glorious Revolution" usually also have a penchant for Glaswegian football clubs that play in blue, and imploring supreme beings to keep female monarchs safe from harm. Orange sashes and songs about King Billy. Bowler-hat talk. You know what I mean.
Reading the posts on Boris, I'd like to summarise - I think accurately - his degree of cleverness/intellectualism in language used in the circles I move in.
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
I don't know what is more staggering, the police saying this was a civil matter until the BBC put pressure on them and it was upgraded to a criminal matter, or the solicitors who have well and truly screwed up.
A man has described his shock at returning to his house and finding it stripped of all furnishings after it was sold without his knowledge.
Having been alerted by neighbours, the Reverend Mike Hall drove to Luton and found building work under way and a new owner who said he had bought the house.
A BBC investigation found Mr Hall's identity had been stolen and used to sell the house and bank the proceeds.
Police initially told him it was not fraud but are now investigating.
Mr Hall, who was away from the property and working in north Wales, said he received a call from his neighbours on 20 August, saying that someone was in the house and all the lights were on.
The following morning, he drove there.
"I went to the front door, tried my key in the front door, it didn't work and a man opened the front door to me," he told BBC Radio 4's You and Yours.
"I pushed him to one side and got in the property. I really didn't know what he was doing there.
"The shock of seeing the house completely stripped of furniture; all furnishings, carpet, curtains - everything - was out of the property."
The man said he was doing building work, to which Mr Hall replied: "I haven't sold the house. This is still my property."
Mr Hall phoned the police, but the builder left and returned with the new owner's father, who said he had bought the terraced house in July, adding: "It is now my property. You are now trespassing. Get out."
Presumably the fake vendor’s solicitors insurance ends up compensating the buyer for the purchase price and the seller to make good? Unless negligence by the solicitor can be proved?
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
That's bowler-hat talk, that.
Don't really understand what you're trying to say. I just like the story - A Dutch invasion army comes across to save the island from Chatholicism.
What I'm saying is that people who go around saying stuff like "I'm pro Glorious Revolution" usually also have a penchant for Glaswegian football clubs that play in blue, and imploring supreme beings to keep female monarchs safe from harm. Orange sashes and songs about King Billy. Bowler-hat talk. You know what I mean.
Well an Aberdeen fan and I call Old Firm matches "Scotland's Shame" - but if you want to lump me in with the huns because of my religion that's fine by me.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'll give you no guiding political philosophy - or at least not a consistent one. He's sort of pro-liberty, but that only lasted very briefly in the fires of the pandemic. Though we'd have probably had even less liberty with other PMs. No strategy for delivering it - well that follows from the above. But yes. No deep ideas - again, possibly a vague principle of liberty, but not strongly held. But I'd say his communication is pretty good and his engagement with reality as good as any. I don't think any other PM could have delivered the 'some of us will die' speech at the beginning of the pandemic so well.
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
I think there had to have been a James II in order for us to talk about James I; we don't call the previous Queen Victoria I and Good Queen Bess would have been known as just Elizabeth until 1952.
Having said that, the Scottish element complicates things, so I could be talking complete rubbish.
Just, by coincidence, reading the second of two fascinating books by J. D. Davies about the Stuart navy in England under the Charleses and James VII and II. Gives a very different perspective on James from the usual land-centred histories. Particularly interesting on such things as the royal yachts, naming of RN ships (a surprising number of modern RN ships also derive their name from the Carolingian illegitimates), and the use of ornate carved ornament as an arguably legitimate weapon of state,.
PS There's a story of James in exile, with a party of French nobles, standing on the shore watching the RN thrash the French and jumping up and down and saying how well "my" ships and sailors were fighting. Not a tactful chap, our Jamie.
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
Ooh, he was: 1685-1688. And then he was deposed by the glorious revolution. I'm sure HYUFD can fill in the details if he's still around.
He was deposed by his daughter, Mary and her husband the Dutch Prince William of Orange who became monarchs at Parliament's invitation
The deposition-by-daughter is is a historical point seldom dwelled on. Must have been a bit awkward at subsequent Christmas dinners.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
I think that the best sign of intelligence is the ability to explain things in a jargon free manner that could be understood by a normal 12 year old.
I think that's a sign of intelligence, but far from the only one. My father-in-law is one of the cleverest people I know. He is a professor. However, he is clever in a very niche field and his ability to communicate anything complex to anyone not already at A level maths/physics level is almost nonexistent, to the frustration of my wife when she was a teenager struggling with algebra. He is also very clever in one thing and one thing only and sees no need to be clever about anything else - managing to put a new duvet on, finding your way around your home town, managing to feed yourself a nutritious meal... In most practical respects he is almost wholly dependent on my mother-in-law.
Nonetheless, at our wedding, he delivered by far the best and funniest father of the bride's speech I have ever heard.
One of my lecturers at university was undoubtedly bright. He did not, however, have any ability to explain anything anyone who was not one his level - an IQ of about 200....
This made teaching undergraduates a waste of time. For him and the undergraduates.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
If getting the message across is an important part of the job, then Boris certainly managed that at COP26. His speech was actually listenable with some memorable phrases. It's not all that easy even if you have recourse to speechwriters. Compare his effort to Biden's for instance.
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
The first hint of dusk at 4.36. The light is fragile. The sky inclines
UGH
My sympathies. I love the winter and the dark nights to snuggle down. Find something decent to watch on TV. Whiskey consumption increases markedly. And then the joy of the new spring to look forward too.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
Fear not, Richard, I've also succeeded in never meeting him. My brother hasn't though.
The inescapable conclusion from his comments is that HYFUD is arguably the site's most fervent republican.
The notion that the Crown could veto legislation, irrespective of manifesto contents, beyond defending our democracy in extremis (govt extending life of a Parliament except in war, declaring one party state etc) is bewilderingly grotesque. There's a reason why the last veto was in 1708.
Such an action would be a direct assault on our constitution. No party would even conceive of supporting it: a Republic established within 12 months max. It ain't going to happen.
Charles will be a model constitutional monarch. That really is the end of it.
It wouldn't. We do not have a written constitution, our constitution is based on the sovereignty of Crown in Parliament in lawmaking.
The English civil war and the glorious revolution merely asserted that Parliament had to be used to make laws and raise taxes and make wars, we could not be governed by the divine right of Kings alone.
However it did not mean that the monarch could have no role in lawmaking whatsoever. If the monarch vetoed a bill which was not in the manifesto of the elected government it would not be unconstitutional even if maybe not advisable. Whatever the parties in Parliament thought about it they could not stop it.
However even if Charles is unlikely to do even that there is certainly absolutely nothing in our constitution to stop the monarch giving their personal views on matters of policy or politics, which was my original point
We do have a constitution albeit an unwritten one. Numerous learned tomes have been written on it: you could make an easy and readable start with Walter Bagehot.
It would be a truly moronic Monarch who started pontificating on poitically contentious or partisan issues. And a very short-lived reign too.
With the best will in the world, don't you ever pause and reflect on the implications of some of your outlandish assertions? On this one, Republicans couldn't have a better friend and ally than you. We Tory patriots, who genuinely cherish our constiutional monarchy, recoil in horror.
Bagehot is merely giving his opinion of what it is, it is still Crown in Parliament on which our constitution is based and Crown in Parliament alone.
You need both Parliament's support and the Crown's agreement to make laws.
You can rant as much as you want and try and muzzle Prince Charles speaking on climate change. However constitutionally there is nothing whatsoever to stop it.
I already said if the monarch continually said very unpopular things or vetoed manifesto commitments and popular things becoming law there would be a problem.
If the monarch says things most agree with, like on climate change, or even if they vetoed unpopular bills not in the government's manifesto, there would be no problem whatsoever. Either constitutionally or with the public
"If the monarch says things most agree with, like on climate change, or even if they vetoed unpopular bills not in the government's manifesto, there would be no problem whatsoever. Either constitutionally or with the public".
Utterly and tragically delusional. Stick to the park benches and the allotments.
Is it? If a future government passed a deeply unpopular bill through Parliament to, say, allow development in our National Parks beyond just exceptional circumstances which was not in its manifesto and which Prince Charles vetoed I expect he would have the full support of most of the public on that even if it annoyed senior politicians
One final go and that's it from me. I can only do so much for King, country, party and pb.
So, let's take your example. Suppose this was a Tory govt with a Commons majority who passed such legislation and the King vetoed it. The Government would of course resign and its MPs and party activists would be outraged. That's TORY activists. Now, would Labour take office in these circumstances? Absolutely not, and indeed the veto would be grist to the mill of their Republicanism.
So off we jolly well go to a general election with ALL parties (including LibDems, SNP, Greens, SDLP - I'll possibly give you the DUP) fighting it on the platform of unelected, unaccountable monarch vs Parliamentary democracy. So, whoever wins, the King loses with abdication at best and abolition altogether most likely.
It is quite absurd that this has to be explained to you. And of course it will never, ever happen.
I'm sorry John, but you're wrong.
If a Conservative government were to pass a measure that the Monarch would veto, then they wouldn't be a Conservative government! It is one of the core tenets of True Conservatism to be a monarchist, and no monarchist would pass a Bill that the Monarch could not give assent to.
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
From 1685 to 1688. His brother had no legitimate children (although half the nobility of England is decended from his illegitimate offspring). He was deposed for being a bit too Catholic.
Thanks for the correction - I'm pro Glorious Revolution so I should have known that already.
I think there had to have been a James II in order for us to talk about James I; we don't call the previous Queen Victoria I and Good Queen Bess would have been known as just Elizabeth until 1952.
Having said that, the Scottish element complicates things, so I could be talking complete rubbish.
Just, by coincidence, reading the second of two fascinating books by J. D. Davies about the Stuart navy in England under the Charleses and James VII and II. Gives a very different perspective on James from the usual land-centred histories. Particularly interesting on such things as the royal yachts, naming of RN ships (a surprising number of modern RN ships also derive their name from the Carolingian illegitimates), and the use of ornate carved ornament as an arguably legitimate weapon of state,.
PS There's a story of James in exile, with a party of French nobles, standing on the shore watching the RN thrash the French and jumping up and down and saying how well "my" ships and sailors were fighting. Not a tactful chap, our Jamie.
During the Crimean War, Lord Ragalan had a habit of referring to the Russians as "the French".
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
You can also be "clever" and also a complete fool... someone like David "two brains" Willets or Oliver Letwin would fall into that category.
Was it James II/VII who was described as the "wisest fool in Christendom"? Or was it another king?
It was James I.
James II was never king - he was Charlie II's brother wasn't he?
Ooh, he was: 1685-1688. And then he was deposed by the glorious revolution. I'm sure HYUFD can fill in the details if he's still around.
He was deposed by his daughter, Mary and her husband the Dutch Prince William of Orange who became monarchs at Parliament's invitation
So not by the Grace of God then.
By that too, it was by Grace of God and confirmed at the glorious revolution we were to be a Protestant nation
Apple the best. They are causing Facebook real pain.
Apple’s decision to change the privacy settings of iPhones caused an estimated $9.85bn of revenues to evaporate in the second half of this year at Snap, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, as their advertising businesses were shaken by the new rules.
Apple introduced its App Tracking Transparency policy in April, which forced apps to ask for permission before they tracked the behaviour of users to serve them personalised ads.
Most users have opted out, leaving advertisers in the dark about how to target them. Advertisers have responded by cutting back their spending at Snap, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube and diverted their budgets elsewhere: in particular to Android phone users and to Apple’s own growing ad business.
Providentially, Apple stiffing Facebook means more money for Apple. Huzzah, or not.
This is spot on.
Apple has its own advertising network, where tracking is (can you believe it?) turned on by default. You can go into Settings to disallow it, but even there, it talks about personalisation, whereas for FB, etc. it talks about tracking.
As a consequence, people who advertise on iOS devices are basically forced to use Apple's network. It will - I'm sure - result in tens of billions of dollars of advertising revenue for Apple. It will not actually increase user privacy, because they offer exactly the same programmatic advertising as everyone else.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
Except that Johnson has one crucial political skill when he is "governing" (not just campaigning)
He can spot talent, and he promotes it rapidly, and he uses it well
Dominic Cumming is one example. Another is Kate Bingham, the Vaccine Woman
Being a good talent-spotter and a good delegator is an underrated ability. Look at the worst modern prime ministers - Brown, TMay. They notably lack this ability. Boris has it, and it may make him a decent prime minister as well as a hugely clever election-winner. We shall see
The first hint of dusk at 4.36. The light is fragile. The sky inclines
UGH
My sympathies. I love the winter and the dark nights to snuggle down. Find something decent to watch on TV. Whiskey consumption increases markedly. And then the joy of the new spring to look forward too.
Like you I much prefer autumn and winter to summer. I seem to suffer from a reverse form of SAD. My work rate and activity go through the roof as the nights close in.
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
Tackling global warming is the right thing to do without Godwins or fallacious comparisons to genocide.
It just makes the speaker look mental.
Well Welby believes in a sky fairy knocking up a virgin and you worry today's comments make him look mental?
Does he?
I thought he was Church of England.
OTOH that makes him believe that HMtQ has the (residual) divine right to be head of his church. Just because Henry VIII wanted to change wives.
The ultimate head of all churches is God (as indeed God is also ultimate head of the Muslim and Jewish faith), the monarch is just the Church of England's head on earth just as the Pope is the Catholic church's head on earth.
The first hint of dusk at 4.36. The light is fragile. The sky inclines
UGH
And yet I am viewing November with happy anticipation. When it stops raining, the light is glorious. The trees are finally blazing with glory. A bonfire at the rugby club on Friday - missed that last year - our annual fireworks party with a few friends on Sunday - missed that one too. We'll make the Christmas Cake the following weekend - another annual tradition: I've got photos of us doing it every year since my oldest was 1; younger daughters joining in in subsequent years. The next weekend we'll walk up Arnside Knott to see the sunset, and have tea at the Albion in Arnside: that's a family tradition for November too which we missed last year. And then the weekend after I've got my first weekend of evading parental responsibility since 2018, seeing some friends I've not seen for three years. A conversation in a pub with some friends: what better way of spending a bleak November evening.
Which was the biggest domestic betting market in 2016?
I suspect those who underestimating Boris lost far more than those overestimating him did.
Rather depends on how much you staked. You'd have been a fool to stake much on the Remain campaign. I backed Leave to the hilt and won heavily and had a nibble at Boris for the leadership and lost some of my winnings.
I don't have the figures with me but OGH or TSE do but I expect an order of magnitude more cash was staked on the Remain campaign in 2016 than on Boris's leadership bid. Much more.
I expect those who overestimated Boris still ended up on average betting winners between the two markets. As OGH often says, its about value not winning every bet.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
Except that Johnson has one crucial political skill when he is "governing" (not just campaigning)
He can spot talent, and he promotes it rapidly, and he uses it well
Dominic Cumming is one example. Another is Kate Bingham, the Vaccine Woman
Being a good talent-spotter and a good delegator is an underrated ability. Look at the worst modern prime ministers - Brown, TMay. They notably lack this ability. Boris has it, and it may make him a decent prime minister as well as a hugely clever election-winner. We shall see
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
Except that Johnson has one crucial political skill when he is "governing" (not just campaigning)
He can spot talent, and he promotes it rapidly, and he uses it well
Dominic Cumming is one example. Another is Kate Bingham, the Vaccine Woman
Being a good talent-spotter and a good delegator is an underrated ability. Look at the worst modern prime ministers - Brown, TMay. They notably lack this ability. Boris has it, and it may make him a decent prime minister as well as a hugely clever election-winner. We shall see
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
Tackling global warming is the right thing to do without Godwins or fallacious comparisons to genocide.
It just makes the speaker look mental.
Well Welby believes in a sky fairy knocking up a virgin and you worry today's comments make him look mental?
Does he?
I thought he was Church of England.
OTOH that makes him believe that HMtQ has the (residual) divine right to be head of his church. Just because Henry VIII wanted to change wives.
The ultimate head of all churches is God (as indeed God is also ultimate head of the Muslim and Jewish faith), the monarch is just the Church of England's head on earth just as the Pope is the Catholic church's head on earth.
The Pope doesn't have the administrative secretary of the Vatican territories as his boss, does he?
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
Except that Johnson has one crucial political skill when he is "governing" (not just campaigning)
He can spot talent, and he promotes it rapidly, and he uses it well
Dominic Cumming is one example. Another is Kate Bingham, the Vaccine Woman
Being a good talent-spotter and a good delegator is an underrated ability. Look at the worst modern prime ministers - Brown, TMay. They notably lack this ability. Boris has it, and it may make him a decent prime minister as well as a hugely clever election-winner. We shall see
Nadine Dorries
What's wrong with Dorries?
She's not a proven failure like Williamson. And has said good things about how to deal with the BBC in the past so quite happy for her to have a chance in that role.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
That don’t impress me much?
Yep! - glad to see people get it when I do that sort of nonsense. I'd have to stop doing it otherwise.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'll give you no guiding political philosophy - or at least not a consistent one. He's sort of pro-liberty, but that only lasted very briefly in the fires of the pandemic. Though we'd have probably had even less liberty with other PMs. No strategy for delivering it - well that follows from the above. But yes. No deep ideas - again, possibly a vague principle of liberty, but not strongly held. But I'd say his communication is pretty good and his engagement with reality as good as any. I don't think any other PM could have delivered the 'some of us will die' speech at the beginning of the pandemic so well.
I disagree on engagement with reality, and I think it's an important one because it explains both his strength as a campaigner and his weakness in government. Having a weak grasp on reality actually helps him politically because it allows him to say things that aren't true without appearing dishonest. But in government reality matters. I would be interested if anyone knows the highest level Johnson achieved in a STEM subject as he gives the strong impression of being unable to think in quantitative terms. Eg does he have A level maths? I would be genuinely surprised if he did. Again, this is the sort of thing that can be a plus politically - it allows him to rattle off statistics without any care as to their accuracy, and the innumerate press corps give him a free pass. But in government it is a disadvantage. Compare and contrast with the highly numerate Thatcher, for instance.
Apple the best. They are causing Facebook real pain.
Apple’s decision to change the privacy settings of iPhones caused an estimated $9.85bn of revenues to evaporate in the second half of this year at Snap, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, as their advertising businesses were shaken by the new rules.
Apple introduced its App Tracking Transparency policy in April, which forced apps to ask for permission before they tracked the behaviour of users to serve them personalised ads.
Most users have opted out, leaving advertisers in the dark about how to target them. Advertisers have responded by cutting back their spending at Snap, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube and diverted their budgets elsewhere: in particular to Android phone users and to Apple’s own growing ad business.
Providentially, Apple stiffing Facebook means more money for Apple. Huzzah, or not.
This is spot on.
Apple has its own advertising network, where tracking is (can you believe it?) turned on by default. You can go into Settings to disallow it, but even there, it talks about personalisation, whereas for FB, etc. it talks about tracking.
As a consequence, people who advertise on iOS devices are basically forced to use Apple's network. It will - I'm sure - result in tens of billions of dollars of advertising revenue for Apple. It will not actually increase user privacy, because they offer exactly the same programmatic advertising as everyone else.
From memory it offers a lot less tracking opportunities so it's harder for a online shop to run a remarketing campaign on different sites of items you've looked at in the past.
And what it has really scuppered is Meta's and Google's love of tracking things across all devices that you are logged in to.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
Except that Johnson has one crucial political skill when he is "governing" (not just campaigning)
He can spot talent, and he promotes it rapidly, and he uses it well
Dominic Cumming is one example. Another is Kate Bingham, the Vaccine Woman
Being a good talent-spotter and a good delegator is an underrated ability. Look at the worst modern prime ministers - Brown, TMay. They notably lack this ability. Boris has it, and it may make him a decent prime minister as well as a hugely clever election-winner. We shall see
Nadine Dorries
She offered to look after my two year old son when my daughter needed to use the bathroom, so I think Ms Dorries is OK.
World is screwed. Will continue to be screwed. We have,no right to survive.
World is not screwed. World will be fine, at least until the sun gets too hot.
500 million years ago, the Earth was almost entirely covered in ice. If it hadn't been for a few volcanoes emitting CO2, it would have been stuck as an ice world pretty much forever.
50 million years ago, there was a period when it was about 10 degrees warmer than the present day. The _increase_ in biological activity this caused eventually brought the temperature down by dumping carbon in the deep oceans.
There's no runaway happening here - either way - otherwise such a thing would already have happened.
The big issue for _us_ is what happens when a large proportion of the world's cities are flooded and lots of people have to move.
Perhaps the empty spaces of Siberia will become easier to live in...
Something which is going to be a problem fairly soon (historically speaking) with or without man doing anything.
We suffer from having short racial memories and a short history. We have lived through a relatively stable period that has allowed civilisation to grow in an extremely unusual period of climate stability. This has meant we have planted much of our population in places where we should not have done. Places that would flood in the not too distant future even if man had never appeared on the planet. Moreover our failure to understand or ignore processes such as isostatic readjustment - and to take steps that have made it even worse in places like New Orleans means that we have simply added to our woes.
We are a short lived species lacking a proper sense of how much the world changes of its own accord. As such we will continue to believe we can do something to change it and will remain woefully unprepared for when it is finally realised that we can't.
There are sound economic reasons why human society has developed largely around coasts and rivers. How exactly do you propose to undo that?
You can't. We just have to accept that natural processes will eventually undo it for us with or without our agreement.
So what? Natural processes will eventually undo you and me and everybody else. That isn't generally regarded as an argument against the practise of medicine, which is merely a huge exercise in delaying the inevitable.
The point being argued is that it is possible to prevent either isostatic or eustatic sea level changes. It isn't. So your medicine argument is a straw man with nothing to do with this discussion.
Eustatic? Please can we stop with Brexit!
I thought that made you ecstatic.
No, just one of those slightly tedious things that had to be done
The first hint of dusk at 4.36. The light is fragile. The sky inclines
UGH
And yet I am viewing November with happy anticipation. When it stops raining, the light is glorious. The trees are finally blazing with glory. A bonfire at the rugby club on Friday - missed that last year - our annual fireworks party with a few friends on Sunday - missed that one too. We'll make the Christmas Cake the following weekend - another annual tradition: I've got photos of us doing it every year since my oldest was 1; younger daughters joining in in subsequent years. The next weekend we'll walk up Arnside Knott to see the sunset, and have tea at the Albion in Arnside: that's a family tradition for November too which we missed last year. And then the weekend after I've got my first weekend of evading parental responsibility since 2018, seeing some friends I've not seen for three years. A conversation in a pub with some friends: what better way of spending a bleak November evening.
I rather like November.
"Autumn is the mind's true spring"
I can see that. Indeed I get the same feeling myself. As the light retreats my mind crackles, like a bonfire. I often work harder, I often think better. Autumn is commonly when I have new ideas
And I love the whole fireworks and frosty evenings and kicking-the-fallen-leaves-in-the-park stuff. I can get behind Autumn, and December can be a gas, as we head for Christmas
It is what Autumn leads to that slays me. Winter. And winter in Britain has almost nothing to be said for it. Our winter isn't even thrillingly cold and snowy. It is just long, bleak, dank and dark. I hate it with a passion. Hopefully I will be able to sod off somewhere sunny this winter, as I was not allowed to do, last winter
Apple the best. They are causing Facebook real pain.
Apple’s decision to change the privacy settings of iPhones caused an estimated $9.85bn of revenues to evaporate in the second half of this year at Snap, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, as their advertising businesses were shaken by the new rules.
Apple introduced its App Tracking Transparency policy in April, which forced apps to ask for permission before they tracked the behaviour of users to serve them personalised ads.
Most users have opted out, leaving advertisers in the dark about how to target them. Advertisers have responded by cutting back their spending at Snap, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube and diverted their budgets elsewhere: in particular to Android phone users and to Apple’s own growing ad business.
Providentially, Apple stiffing Facebook means more money for Apple. Huzzah, or not.
This is spot on.
Apple has its own advertising network, where tracking is (can you believe it?) turned on by default. You can go into Settings to disallow it, but even there, it talks about personalisation, whereas for FB, etc. it talks about tracking.
As a consequence, people who advertise on iOS devices are basically forced to use Apple's network. It will - I'm sure - result in tens of billions of dollars of advertising revenue for Apple. It will not actually increase user privacy, because they offer exactly the same programmatic advertising as everyone else.
From memory it offers a lot less tracking opportunities so it's harder for a online shop to run a remarketing campaign on different sites of items you've looked at in the past.
And what it has really scuppered is Meta's and Google's love of tracking things across all devices that you are logged in to.
I'm not sure that's true: Apple tracks you across all your activity across all your apps across all your Apple devices.
It may not track you on your Windows PC, but that's still a hell of a lot of tracking that's used to sell advertising more efficiently.
And for the record, it works. We have had some incredible success with Apple at Just.
The first hint of dusk at 4.36. The light is fragile. The sky inclines
UGH
And yet I am viewing November with happy anticipation. When it stops raining, the light is glorious. The trees are finally blazing with glory. A bonfire at the rugby club on Friday - missed that last year - our annual fireworks party with a few friends on Sunday - missed that one too. We'll make the Christmas Cake the following weekend - another annual tradition: I've got photos of us doing it every year since my oldest was 1; younger daughters joining in in subsequent years. The next weekend we'll walk up Arnside Knott to see the sunset, and have tea at the Albion in Arnside: that's a family tradition for November too which we missed last year. And then the weekend after I've got my first weekend of evading parental responsibility since 2018, seeing some friends I've not seen for three years. A conversation in a pub with some friends: what better way of spending a bleak November evening.
I rather like November.
Although not religious I have a thing I refer to as the 'Sacred Season'. It starts in September around the time of Harvest Festival and Last Night of the Proms. It then continues through the Autumn Equinox, Halloween, Bonfire Night, various birthdays, all the pre Christmas markets and events and then Yule and finally Christmas. Throw in the feast of St Nicholas at the start of December for the kids and there are loads of excuses for celebrations, meals and parties. Lots of family traditions. All against the background of our fantastic changing seasons. Definitely my favourite time of year.
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
Hope he doesn't start waffling on about the Roman Empire. WTF was that about? Guy seems to think he's some 'amusing' raconteur down the pub half the time. You know the type. Mile wide, inch deep.
It was a dog whistle to all those kipper types who fetishise Rome and think that complex multi-generation historical events can be explained by saying "forrners bad". He knows what he's doing and he is an arsehole for doing it.
In the interview I saw he was referencing "open door immigration" in Rome's fall. Free movement. So, yes, now we've tightened up on that, we can return to our Glory Days. Oh dear.
In general, what I hate is this patina of cod "ancient learning" he sprays about. Guess some like it, find it illuminating or impressive, but I'm totally Shania Twain about it - and him.
I have long thought that Johnson is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like.
Have heard this phrase before. What is the intelligent person's idea of what an intelligent person look like?
Someone who can express complex ideas clearly rather than using complicated language to obfuscate or mislead. In the political realm I guess I am thinking of someone like Clinton or Blair. In the modern Tory party Hunt or Sunak seem to me to have those qualities. If you're impressed by frequent forays into schoolboy Latin then you will think Johnson is a clever chap.
In what respect is Boris "not clever"
Scholarship to Eton
Oxford degree
Highly successful journalist - eventually making £300k a year
Highly successful editor of the oldest magazine in the world, and one of the most prestigious magazines, too
Successful mayor of a World City, re-elected
Won an 80 seat majority as Prime Minister
In the meantime he has written multiple books, and presented TV series
Feel free to point out British politicians who are obviously cleverer and more accomplished
Have you read his books? They are crap. Oxford is full of not very clever people. Earning >£300k a year doesn't mean you are clever. SKS was DPP. Sunak has a first from Oxford and an MBA from Stanford. Javid earned millions at Deutsche having been born with few of Johnson's advantages. I think there are plenty of politicians who are as accomplished and clever as Johnson.
I've met him. He's notably clever. It is silly to pretend otherwise
Clever or just well educated? There is a world of difference. I ask seriously being one of the few here apparently who are not on intimate terms with him.
What he isn't is an "intellectual" in the French tradition: a deep thinker who has profound new insights. I guess that's what people mean when they stubbornly say he isn't "clever"
But "intellectual" is just one narrow type of intelligence, and it is often ineffective and sometimes downright dangerous
I don't simply mean that he isn't an intellectual - and in fact I don't really have an opinion on that question. What I mean is that he is incapable of things like quantitative analysis, sustaining a complex argument, or boiling down complicated ideas into terms that can be communicated easily. What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
It must be very annoying for lefties, that they keep getting whacked by this guy who is apparently as thick as a breeze-block
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Of course, it's part of his act. As others have noted, I am not saying that he is stupid, simply that in the realm of top flight global politics where you expect a certain level of intelligence, he is simply an act, an empty performance, with no guiding political philosophy, no strategy for delivering it, no deep ideas, no ability to communicate complex ideas, not even any apparent ability to engage with reality. It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
I'm reminded of the book 'The psychology of military incompetence' by Norman Dixon which argued, IIRC, that the qualities one needs for promotion in the army, etc., are historically often positively opposed to those which are needed to actually fight a war well, let alone win it, even in wartime. There is, likewise, a distinction between being able to get elected to run the UK versus actually doing so well, and it's easy to see again how the personal qualities needed can differ in a way which is dysfunctional. A lot of people think this is happening in the case of Mr Johnson. ,
Except that Johnson has one crucial political skill when he is "governing" (not just campaigning)
He can spot talent, and he promotes it rapidly, and he uses it well
Dominic Cumming is one example. Another is Kate Bingham, the Vaccine Woman
Being a good talent-spotter and a good delegator is an underrated ability. Look at the worst modern prime ministers - Brown, TMay. They notably lack this ability. Boris has it, and it may make him a decent prime minister as well as a hugely clever election-winner. We shall see
Nadine Dorries
She offered to look after my two year old son when my daughter needed to use the bathroom, so I think Ms Dorries is OK.
No sun — no moon! No morn — no noon — No dawn — no dusk — no proper time of day.
No warmth, no cheerfulness, no healthful ease, No comfortable feel in any member — No shade, no shine, no butterflies, no bees, No fruits, no flowers, no leaves, no birds! — November!
Thomas Hood.
That's what a haiku would look like if the Japanese were as good as we are at this stuff.
Dr. Jon Stanley @JonMarcStanley · 1m The UK, through @DavidGHFrost , needs to tidy up the Good Friday Agreement. It cannot be maintained in good faith so long as the EU in mentioned in it.
We have left. So long as they are mentioned they feel we have not. Those references need removed or eventually GFA will fail.
The first hint of dusk at 4.36. The light is fragile. The sky inclines
UGH
And yet I am viewing November with happy anticipation. When it stops raining, the light is glorious. The trees are finally blazing with glory. A bonfire at the rugby club on Friday - missed that last year - our annual fireworks party with a few friends on Sunday - missed that one too. We'll make the Christmas Cake the following weekend - another annual tradition: I've got photos of us doing it every year since my oldest was 1; younger daughters joining in in subsequent years. The next weekend we'll walk up Arnside Knott to see the sunset, and have tea at the Albion in Arnside: that's a family tradition for November too which we missed last year. And then the weekend after I've got my first weekend of evading parental responsibility since 2018, seeing some friends I've not seen for three years. A conversation in a pub with some friends: what better way of spending a bleak November evening.
I rather like November.
"Autumn is the mind's true spring"
I can see that. Indeed I get the same feeling myself. As the light retreats my mind crackles, like a bonfire. I often work harder, I often think better. Autumn is commonly when I have new ideas
And I love the whole fireworks and frosty evenings and kicking-the-fallen-leaves-in-the-park stuff. I can get behind Autumn, and December can be a gas, as we head for Christmas
It is what Autumn leads to that slays me. Winter. And winter in Britain has almost nothing to be said for it. Our winter isn't even thrillingly cold and snowy. It is just long, bleak, dank and dark. I hate it with a passion. Hopefully I will be able to sod off somewhere sunny this winter, as I was not allowed to do, last winter
Yes, I agree. There's only actually five or six weeks of bleak - from January 2nd to pancake day. Pancake day is when it feels like New Year should really be: still cold and relatively dark but the days starting to lengthen at a pace, and the first flowers poking through. But I would envy you being somewhere else for it.
I also like Autumn because it's when the school year starts. And it always therefore feels like a time of new beginnings and new possibilities.
If you watch Macron in that clip from yesterday, when he said (of Australia) "I don't just think they lied, I know" - then you can see the bitterness, anger and stinging humiliation, in his eyes. AUKUS really hurt. Personally for Macron, and politically for his country
The absurd over-reaction to fish (and everything else) is all about this. They want us to hurt as they have been hurt, and they think they can do it. We need to treat them, cordially, as an enemy from now on, and expect them to behave as such
Comments
What he is good at is humour, an arresting turn of phrase, and lying. For what it's worth, I think he is far more dangerous than any intellectual.
There was one odd comment that attracted my attention. His first appeal failed because “he was unable to provide any new DNA evidence”. What does that mean?
I don't think him capable of original thought.
Alternatively, you lot - and many others - consistently under-estimate him, hence his sustained and remarkable success. Has it not occurred to you that Boris acts the clown for this very reason?
Skilful catch
Clearly he is a political giant in a way tier two PMs like Cameron and Major weren't and tier three PMs like Brown and May could only dream of.
That doesn't necessarily mean he's actually any good at governing of course...
Having said that, the Scottish element complicates things, so I could be talking complete rubbish.
He's a genuine eccentric, my father-in-law, but I consider myself pretty fortunate to be indirectly related to him.
PMs can hire intelligence and hire very clever people and advisers, what they need above all is good judgement (with ideally some charisma to win elections)
It is frustrating that this proves so successful, and I agree with you that he has a real cunning and excellent political antennae which make him hard to beat. I'm not sure how one can counter him, really - we probably just have to wait for his shtick to grow stale and for his political platform to collapse under the weight of its contradictions and his governing incompetence. That might take a while, sadly.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kings-Sea-Charles-James-Royal/dp/1848324006
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pepys-Navy-Ships-Warfare-1649-89/dp/1473879280/ref=asc_df_1473879280/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=310979544451&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=814520079166420493&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9050372&hvtargid=pla-592255466579&psc=1&th=1&psc=1
He's a smart arse. That's it.
Justin Welby on 'cursing' leaders if they fail to act at COP- 'people will speak of them in far stronger terms than we speak..of the politicians who ignored what was happening in Nazi Germany because this will kill people all around the world for generations'
He went on to say 'It will allow a genocide on an infinitely greater scale. I'm not sure there's grades of genocide, but there's width of genocide, and this will be genocide indirectly, by negligence, recklessness'
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1455208478994206720
Tackling global warming is the right thing to do without Godwins or fallacious comparisons to genocide.
It just makes the speaker look mental.
UGH
No strategy for delivering it - well that follows from the above. But yes.
No deep ideas - again, possibly a vague principle of liberty, but not strongly held.
But I'd say his communication is pretty good and his engagement with reality as good as any. I don't think any other PM could have delivered the 'some of us will die' speech at the beginning of the pandemic so well.
I thought he was Church of England.
This made teaching undergraduates a waste of time. For him and the undergraduates.
I know that doesn't count.
Absolute bucketloads.
I suspect those who underestimating Boris lost far more than those overestimating him did.
Apple has its own advertising network, where tracking is (can you believe it?) turned on by default. You can go into Settings to disallow it, but even there, it talks about personalisation, whereas for FB, etc. it talks about tracking.
As a consequence, people who advertise on iOS devices are basically forced to use Apple's network. It will - I'm sure - result in tens of billions of dollars of advertising revenue for Apple. It will not actually increase user privacy, because they offer exactly the same programmatic advertising as everyone else.
He can spot talent, and he promotes it rapidly, and he uses it well
Dominic Cumming is one example. Another is Kate Bingham, the Vaccine Woman
Being a good talent-spotter and a good delegator is an underrated ability. Look at the worst modern prime ministers - Brown, TMay. They notably lack this ability. Boris has it, and it may make him a decent prime minister as well as a hugely clever election-winner. We shall see
In mid to late April 2012 plenty of the polls had Boris Johnson winning the first round by over 10% and the second round by a similar amount.
The reality was just under 4% on the first round and 3% in the second round.
I rather like November.
I expect those who overestimated Boris still ended up on average betting winners between the two markets. As OGH often says, its about value not winning every bet.
Spotted.
Promoted.
She's not a proven failure like Williamson. And has said good things about how to deal with the BBC in the past so quite happy for her to have a chance in that role.
Actually it is Boris Johnson who was the essay crisis chap and Dave was the girly swot.
There's a reason why Dave ended up with a first and Boris Johnson ended up with an upper second.
Both intelligent but only one applied themselves.
I would be interested if anyone knows the highest level Johnson achieved in a STEM subject as he gives the strong impression of being unable to think in quantitative terms. Eg does he have A level maths? I would be genuinely surprised if he did. Again, this is the sort of thing that can be a plus politically - it allows him to rattle off statistics without any care as to their accuracy, and the innumerate press corps give him a free pass. But in government it is a disadvantage. Compare and contrast with the highly numerate Thatcher, for instance.
Given how many things are constantly demanding the PM's attention, an ability to essay crisis could be useful.
And what it has really scuppered is Meta's and Google's love of tracking things across all devices that you are logged in to.
I can see that. Indeed I get the same feeling myself. As the light retreats my mind crackles, like a bonfire. I often work harder, I often think better. Autumn is commonly when I have new ideas
And I love the whole fireworks and frosty evenings and kicking-the-fallen-leaves-in-the-park stuff. I can get behind Autumn, and December can be a gas, as we head for Christmas
It is what Autumn leads to that slays me. Winter. And winter in Britain has almost nothing to be said for it. Our winter isn't even thrillingly cold and snowy. It is just long, bleak, dank and dark. I hate it with a passion. Hopefully I will be able to sod off somewhere sunny this winter, as I was not allowed to do, last winter
It may not track you on your Windows PC, but that's still a hell of a lot of tracking that's used to sell advertising more efficiently.
And for the record, it works. We have had some incredible success with Apple at Just.
https://www.lopinion.fr/edition/international/emmanuel-macron-pardonne-aux-etats-unis-ignore-l-australie-punit-258587
https://twitter.com/jdomerchet/status/1455171408661725195?s=20
No morn — no noon —
No dawn — no dusk — no proper time of day.
No warmth, no cheerfulness, no healthful ease,
No comfortable feel in any member —
No shade, no shine, no butterflies, no bees,
No fruits, no flowers, no leaves, no birds! —
November!
Thomas Hood.
That's what a haiku would look like if the Japanese were as good as we are at this stuff.
@JonMarcStanley
·
1m
The UK, through
@DavidGHFrost
, needs to tidy up the Good Friday Agreement. It cannot be maintained in good faith so long as the EU in mentioned in it.
We have left. So long as they are mentioned they feel we have not. Those references need removed or eventually GFA will fail.
There's only actually five or six weeks of bleak - from January 2nd to pancake day. Pancake day is when it feels like New Year should really be: still cold and relatively dark but the days starting to lengthen at a pace, and the first flowers poking through. But I would envy you being somewhere else for it.
I also like Autumn because it's when the school year starts. And it always therefore feels like a time of new beginnings and new possibilities.
@JonMarcStanley
·
38s
Replying to
@JonMarcStanley
Let's hear them say it,
"The EU has no selfish strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland"
If they can't, nor should we. Let's hear it. Remove the EU from the GFA.
@J_Donaldson_MP
@BeattieDoug
@JimAllister
@CatharineHoey
@benhabib6
The absurd over-reaction to fish (and everything else) is all about this. They want us to hurt as they have been hurt, and they think they can do it. We need to treat them, cordially, as an enemy from now on, and expect them to behave as such