"Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."
Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?
The by-election in Hartlepool was precipitated by allegations (later confirmed in an Employment Tribunal) against the Labour MP.
I doubt there is a particular link between political affiliation and being a wrong'un. However, I do suspect that the more recent history is related to the Conservatives having been in office a long time and having a leader who is uniquely poorly placed to insist on high standards of personal behaviour.
Poor Mr Johnson - it's just blow after blow for him lately.
Indeed. Plus the SNP have their own issues with Patrick Grady too.
All parties have issues, but its quite standard for the Party of Government to have many more visible problems than the Opposition.
Patrick Grady was far more senior for his party than Pincher, but Pincher is the one that gets the headlines because he's a Tory and the Tories have Downing Street.
Also the Government obviously have many more MPs, so will have more opportunities for 'bad eggs' as a result.
That we have MPs crossing the line is not party-political or something new. Not that long ago that "I drank too much" was a Labour MP or two in the headlines. Before that a string of Tories. Or Jeremy Thorpe. Etc etc.
The issue here is that (a) the Tory Party invariably knows that MP x is a deviant and (b) refuses to do anything abut it. Or in the case of Pincher - who reportedly needed a party handler to ensure he didn't get smashed and start ball fondling - they actually promoted him to the whips office - twice.
This is the partisan bit. There are bad MPs in all parties But the Tories seem happy to both ignore and even promote such behaviour. That the PM liked to get sucked off in his office by his mistress probably explains the air of "so what" in the party.
The SNP didn't just promote Grady to the Whips office, they made him Chief Whip.
As you say, it happens in all parties. That the Lib Dems can squeeze into a taxi probably makes it less likely for them.
I don't know, in the 1970s the old liberal party's mps were pretty much all either crooks or perverts. Or both.
It was pretty much a requirement for being a Liberal MP, in those days.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
I'm sure there will be rationing, but it won't be controlled. We're at risk of not being able to generate enough electricity, of running low on gas. The "rationing" will be when the power goes off...
Suspensions/resignations from party this Parliament due to scandal:
SNP (out of 48): Hanvey, Ferrier, Grady Plaid (out of 4): Edwards Labour (out of 202): Webbe, Coyle Tory (out of 365): Roberts, Khan, Warburton, Parish… and we wait to see on Pincher
Proportionately speaking, Plaid are the worst, followed by SNP, then Conservative, then Labour, with LibDem, Green, DUP, Sinn Fein, SDLP and Alliance all clean. Small sample size effects clearly an issue.
TBH that last para is meaningless, since you have nothing like consistent data,
Bit disappointed with the LDs there. They should be doing better.
You can *always* get the LDs for dodgy statistics.
"Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."
Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?
The by-election in Hartlepool was precipitated by allegations (later confirmed in an Employment Tribunal) against the Labour MP.
I doubt there is a particular link between political affiliation and being a wrong'un. However, I do suspect that the more recent history is related to the Conservatives having been in office a long time and having a leader who is uniquely poorly placed to insist on high standards of personal behaviour.
Poor Mr Johnson - it's just blow after blow for him lately.
Indeed. Plus the SNP have their own issues with Patrick Grady too.
All parties have issues, but its quite standard for the Party of Government to have many more visible problems than the Opposition.
Patrick Grady was far more senior for his party than Pincher, but Pincher is the one that gets the headlines because he's a Tory and the Tories have Downing Street.
Also the Government obviously have many more MPs, so will have more opportunities for 'bad eggs' as a result.
That we have MPs crossing the line is not party-political or something new. Not that long ago that "I drank too much" was a Labour MP or two in the headlines. Before that a string of Tories. Or Jeremy Thorpe. Etc etc.
The issue here is that (a) the Tory Party invariably knows that MP x is a deviant and (b) refuses to do anything abut it. Or in the case of Pincher - who reportedly needed a party handler to ensure he didn't get smashed and start ball fondling - they actually promoted him to the whips office - twice.
This is the partisan bit. There are bad MPs in all parties But the Tories seem happy to both ignore and even promote such behaviour. That the PM liked to get sucked off in his office by his mistress probably explains the air of "so what" in the party.
The SNP didn't just promote Grady to the Whips office, they made him Chief Whip.
As you say, it happens in all parties. That the Lib Dems can squeeze into a taxi probably makes it less likely for them.
I don't know, in the 1970s the old liberal party's mps were pretty much all either crooks or perverts. Or both.
"Oh, for Christ's sake, Baldrick, you're going to be an MP! I'll just put fraud and sexual deviance."
Mr. Pioneers, you meant having sod all gas storage and prioritising closing fossil fuel power stations over guaranteeing the lights stay on aren't sensible energy policies?!
Sacre bleu!
[This is not party political. They've all been dire on energy.]
on Thursday the ONS published new data showing that the UK’s current account deficit widened to a record 8.3 per cent of GDP in the first quarter of this year, including a record trade deficit of 5.4 per cent. The Financial Times chose to lead its coverage with the striking claim that these “official figures corroborate academic studies showing a sharp drop in exports since Brexit.”
This is sloppy. For a start, UK exports have now recovered following an initial fall at the end of the transition period. At most, the “academic studies” suggest that exports are still lower than they might otherwise have been. But it is nonsense to imply that Brexit explains the sharp deterioration in trade performance at the start of 2022.
The rest of the FT story only briefly touched on the real issues. In particular, the surge in global commodity prices has increased the cost of imports, which also explains why the EU’s trade balance in goods has collapsed. Other potentially important factors behind the surge in the current account deficit include changes in the way that the UK’s trade data are collected, and a jump in outflows of investment income as UK firms start paying dividends again.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.
Instead, it's that a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.
The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league
So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble
Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.
It's such a fine line, isn't it?
You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean
I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido
From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).
But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
That hits the nail on the head. These are the teenage incels who later find themselves in a moderate position of power.
I just made a bunch of comments at the end of the last thread.
Sigh.
I spent over an hour effusing over why I thought Steve Bray was a nob the other day without realising everyone else was over 300 comments into a new thread.
It happens.
Steve Bray IS a knob, tho. That is the exact word. Knob
His entire life is dedicated to being an irritating prick
Exactly. If it hadn't been Brexit it would have been over something else.
He's divorced, estranged from his daughter, junked all his friends "because they voted Leave" and is always alone on Westminster green, despite millions agreeing with his views.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
Mr. Pioneers, you meant having sod all gas storage and prioritising closing fossil fuel power stations over guaranteeing the lights stay on aren't sensible energy policies?!
Sacre bleu!
[This is not party political. They've all been dire on energy.]
For decades. But we are where we are, and the government of the day always cops the blame. Especially one bragging about being pro-nuclear having failed to deliver.
Well I say failed to deliver. They gave a licence to print Yuan contract to the chinese government to build a power station that will eventually open in 2376, and cancelled a Forgemasters loan that kyboshed the nascent nuclear industry development.
He enthusiastically supported BoZo's shitty Brexit deal, which makes him more extreme than the people BoZo Expelled.
Not at all. They were extremists in a different way. Unless you are claiming that there is only ever one form of extremism? Which would be a 'brave' contention.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
I will be happy to turn off my no gas non-supply. For the nation.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
They weren't behind closed doors. That's why we know about it. They could perfectly well have gone to a Travelodge in their lunch hour if they really couldn't wait. I'd say the same if it was his wife.
It was yet another sign of his "don't care, I'm special, always have been" mentality.
Yes, I'm a bit disappointed he didn't go into the City. I'd have enjoyed interviewing him, reading his emails and reviewing his hard drive (yes, yes, I know). The investigation report would have been fun to write.
Johnson wouldn't have lasted two minutes in finance. The days of the posh boy bluffer are long behind us.
Oh, I think there are still quite a few of them around.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
Maybe, maybe not. They're currently not looking likely to survive either way anyway.
But they sure won't survive uncontrolled blackouts. The public are in extremes a lot more forgiving of controlled rationing, than they are uncontrolled failures.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
I think we're entitled not to have to make that choice. I would expect the Foreign Secretary to be working tirelessly to advance Britain's national interest, not getting gobbled off by someone who was also employed by the taxpayer to do a job. It says it all as far as I am concerned. We need to get rid, and just do our best forget this gruesome twosome ever darkened the doors of No. 10.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
Maybe, maybe not. They're currently not looking likely to survive either way anyway.
But they sure won't survive uncontrolled blackouts. The public are in extremes a lot more forgiving of controlled rationing, than they are uncontrolled failures.
Indications are labour lead by approx 6% average, but time for you to accept that Johnson is toxic for the conservative party
On another note I have taken part in a ConHome survey with head to heads of Wallace and Hunt, Sunak, Truss, Tugendhat etc which should be out next week. If and when Boris goes would be a clear early indication of the likely successor
When considering how people will vote in the next mid-terms, that is the key number.
Are you sure of that? Is it not the case that the electorate might be more sophisticated than that and vote in the mid terms based on issues other than the popularity of a President who they are not actually voting for?
I still hold that the recent SCOTUS rulings will have just as much, if not more, impact on the midterms than Biden's popularity.
ICYMI last night Channel 4 started a new drama series, The Undeclared War, about GCHQ and cyber-attacks. Set in 2024, the Conservative Prime Minister was said to have ousted Boris Johnson in a bloody coup. The whole series is available for downstreaming from https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-undeclared-war
Sex at work has always seemed to me, like most fantasies, something better kept as a fantasy.
Well, I ended up marrying someone who worked for me on a couple of projects. I'd like to think we handled the start of our relationship maturely; although we dd not want it to be common knowledge, we both told our immediate superiors. They put in place some non-onerous restrictions.
You have to allow relationships to form at work, especially if the people involved are single. It is a company's duty to try to ensure that the relationships formed at work don't become abusive or exploitative - even if it involves shuffling people about between departments.
What's worse IMO is when someone has an affair with a colleague's spouse. I've seen the fallout from that, and it isn't pretty.
I met my wife at work.
But, we had the common decency to go to a hotel on D-Day - we didn't shag on the bosses desk.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
There's no way they should survive it either! Government is there to secure its own population, that includes keeping them warm and giving them light - how on EARTH we've got to the stage where prancing around the world stage being 'tough on Putin' is considered more important for the Government of the UK than ensuring we have power, is beyond me.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
There's no way they should survive it either! Government is there to secure its own population, that includes keeping them warm and giving them light - how on EARTH we've got to the stage where prancing around the world stage being 'tough on Putin' is considered more important for the Government of the UK than ensuring we have power, is beyond me.
Because it is.
Security is the first responsibility of the state, not light and warmth. You would have been prancing around objecting to rationing saying why we are being "tough on Hitler" eighty years ago.
Indications are labour lead by approx 6% average, but time for you to accept that Johnson is toxic for the conservative party
On another note I have taken part in a ConHome survey with head to heads of Wallace and Hunt, Sunak, Truss, Tugendhat etc which should be out next week. If and when Boris goes would be a clear early indication of the likely successor
Frost's towering article in the Telegraph is the best way forward for the conservative party.
Sex at work has always seemed to me, like most fantasies, something better kept as a fantasy.
Well, I ended up marrying someone who worked for me on a couple of projects. I'd like to think we handled the start of our relationship maturely; although we dd not want it to be common knowledge, we both told our immediate superiors. They put in place some non-onerous restrictions.
You have to allow relationships to form at work, especially if the people involved are single. It is a company's duty to try to ensure that the relationships formed at work don't become abusive or exploitative - even if it involves shuffling people about between departments.
What's worse IMO is when someone has an affair with a colleague's spouse. I've seen the fallout from that, and it isn't pretty.
I met my wife at work.
But, we had the common decency to go to a hotel on D-Day - we didn't shag on the bosses desk.
I met my wife on an onshore oil rig. Working nights. It was fun.
ICYMI last night Channel 4 started a new drama series, The Undeclared War, about GCHQ and cyber-attacks. Set in 2024, the Conservative Prime Minister was said to have ousted Boris Johnson in a bloody coup. The whole series is available for downstreaming from https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-undeclared-war
Watched the first epsode last night, okayish.
Couldn't work out how metaphorical the bloody coup was, really hoping for literal gore on the expensively crappy wallpaper, with flashbacks.
Two people I used to work with lost their jobs for an incident similar to that for which Sir Gav's alleged witnessing allegedly led to his knighthood.
Parliament and politics is indeed a different sort of workplace with different expected standards of personal conduct. The expression 'Hollywood for ugly people' feels apt.
I am pleased to announce that Brits can use the same e-passport gates at Rome airport as the locals.
There are, therefore, exactly no queues.
Doesn't that prove that Brexit isn't causing airport/travel queues?
Any country could be doing this; if they're not, how is it Brexit's fault?
Things that are Brexit's fault include things caused by Brexit that are actually happening even if they are solvable by other countries. It may not be permanent damage or it may be out of spite from other countries, but they are still a negative and real consequence of Brexit.
I am pleased to announce that Brits can use the same e-passport gates at Rome airport as the locals.
There are, therefore, exactly no queues.
Doesn't that prove that Brexit isn't causing airport/travel queues?
Any country could be doing this; if they're not, how is it Brexit's fault?
Everything is Brexit's fault on here.
It's the go-to scapegoat because it's much easier to blame everything on that and feel good about yourself than face up to the true complexity of intricate problems in the real world.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
At work? Give over.
Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.
If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly
I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?
OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
You're really not getting very much at the moment, are you?
Starvation rations, mate, starvation rations
But not actually STARVING
Doesn't Tinder (or equivalent) work for meeting women in Montenegro as well?
I'm assuming you're single again..so why not try meeting someone?
Thanks (sincerely) for your concern, but I am fine!
I'm rather enjoying being single and moderately but not entirely celibate. It's a calm moment in my life after several years of extreme turbulence. I have the odd liaison, which keeps me going, otherwise I am floating around the world, eating seabass and observing, and it is indeed pleasant. I chat with my kids, I tipple wine at sundown, I read about Balkan bandits
I'm honestly not sure I want another full on marriage-type relationship - ever. They can be fun but they are also stressful. And bloody expensive
Sounds like you are in a happy calm place. But surely marriage kind of relationships are anything but expensive? You get to share the accommodation costs two ways, it's cheaper to cook for two, you will stay in more of an evening... The whole thing basically pays for itself.
It is of course the early exit fee that is expensive. If someone's temperament is not suited to spending a lifetime or at least 20+ years together then it is indeed more expensive than being single. For those with a lifetime match it is cheaper. You are both correct.
Not necessarily. My first wife could have taken me to the cleaners but didn't.
That is a funny old saying. Did dry cleaners really used to be so expensive?
- means "rinsed" I guess.
But only now I think about it, which I never had before. So thanks for that.
ICYMI last night Channel 4 started a new drama series, The Undeclared War, about GCHQ and cyber-attacks. Set in 2024, the Conservative Prime Minister was said to have ousted Boris Johnson in a bloody coup. The whole series is available for downstreaming from https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-undeclared-war
Watched the first epsode last night, okayish.
Couldn't work out how metaphorical the bloody coup was, really hoping for literal gore on the expensively crappy wallpaper, with flashbacks.
The climbing and other Crystal Maze-like metaphors confused me at first (especially why Saara threw away each tool after use).
ETA the Channel 4 episode descriptions are very spoilery!
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
If you are a social conservative, you would prefer Bush, no question.
Even Jimmy Carter was a better President for social conservatives than Bill Clinton
England squad for T20 series: Jos Buttler (capt, wk), Moeen Ali, Harry Brook, Sam Curran, Richard Gleeson, Chris Jordan, Liam Livingstone, Dawid Malan, Tymal Mills, Matthew Parkinson, Jason Roy, Phil Salt, Reece Topley, David Willey.
England squad for ODI series: Jos Buttler (capt, wk), Moeen Ali, Jonny Bairstow, Harry Brook, Brydon Carse, Sam Curran, Liam Livingstone, Craig Overton, Matthew Parkinson, Joe Root, Jason Roy, Phil Salt, Ben Stokes, Reece Topley, David Willey.
No Ginger wizards in the T20? Really don't understand England love of Craig Overton, seems worse bowler and batter than his brother.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
They weren't behind closed doors. That's why we know about it. They could perfectly well have gone to a Travelodge in their lunch hour if they really couldn't wait. I'd say the same if it was his wife.
It was yet another sign of his "don't care, I'm special, always have been" mentality.
Yes, I'm a bit disappointed he didn't go into the City. I'd have enjoyed interviewing him, reading his emails and reviewing his hard drive (yes, yes, I know). The investigation report would have been fun to write.
Johnson wouldn't have lasted two minutes in finance. The days of the posh boy bluffer are long behind us.
Oh, I think there are still quite a few of them around.
Sex at work has always seemed to me, like most fantasies, something better kept as a fantasy.
Well, I ended up marrying someone who worked for me on a couple of projects. I'd like to think we handled the start of our relationship maturely; although we dd not want it to be common knowledge, we both told our immediate superiors. They put in place some non-onerous restrictions.
You have to allow relationships to form at work, especially if the people involved are single. It is a company's duty to try to ensure that the relationships formed at work don't become abusive or exploitative - even if it involves shuffling people about between departments.
What's worse IMO is when someone has an affair with a colleague's spouse. I've seen the fallout from that, and it isn't pretty.
I met my wife at work.
But, we had the common decency to go to a hotel on D-Day - we didn't shag on the bosses desk.
ICYMI last night Channel 4 started a new drama series, The Undeclared War, about GCHQ and cyber-attacks. Set in 2024, the Conservative Prime Minister was said to have ousted Boris Johnson in a bloody coup. The whole series is available for downstreaming from https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-undeclared-war
Watched the first epsode last night, okayish.
Couldn't work out how metaphorical the bloody coup was, really hoping for literal gore on the expensively crappy wallpaper, with flashbacks.
What happened to the dog? And Dilyn for that matter.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
They weren't behind closed doors. That's why we know about it. They could perfectly well have gone to a Travelodge in their lunch hour if they really couldn't wait. I'd say the same if it was his wife.
It was yet another sign of his "don't care, I'm special, always have been" mentality.
Yes, I'm a bit disappointed he didn't go into the City. I'd have enjoyed interviewing him, reading his emails and reviewing his hard drive (yes, yes, I know). The investigation report would have been fun to write.
Johnson wouldn't have lasted two minutes in finance. The days of the posh boy bluffer are long behind us.
Oh, I think there are still quite a few of them around.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
They weren't behind closed doors. That's why we know about it. They could perfectly well have gone to a Travelodge in their lunch hour if they really couldn't wait. I'd say the same if it was his wife.
It was yet another sign of his "don't care, I'm special, always have been" mentality.
Yes, I'm a bit disappointed he didn't go into the City. I'd have enjoyed interviewing him, reading his emails and reviewing his hard drive (yes, yes, I know). The investigation report would have been fun to write.
Johnson wouldn't have lasted two minutes in finance. The days of the posh boy bluffer are long behind us.
Oh, I think there are still quite a few of them around.
Oh being a posh boy certainly helps for some jobs, especially on the sales side. And the network is useful too - the only OE I know well works for another OE, for instance, which I am sure didn't hurt his prospects. But you also have to meet a minimum competence and reliability threshold that Johnson self evidently doesn't. Journalism and politics have lower standards.
Well if Covid is just a cold I must be unlucky as it's by far and away the worst cold I have ever had. I vaguely remember having Flu when I was younger and I don't recall it was bad as this.
My line has gone from faint to a bright red now on the LFD (I don't have to test again until Tuesday and Wednesday to be able to return to work as I will need two consecutive negatives but I was curious).
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
Isn't this to do with the fact that the UK currently has plentiful gas supplies through LNG terminals but nowhere to store it, while continental Europe tends to have the opposite problem? So it makes sense for the UK to generate as much electricity as possible from gas and then export that electricity to the continent so that they don't have to burn so much of their gas and can hopefully build up stocks for the winter.
When considering how people will vote in the next mid-terms, that is the key number.
Are you sure of that? Is it not the case that the electorate might be more sophisticated than that and vote in the mid terms based on issues other than the popularity of a President who they are not actually voting for?
I still hold that the recent SCOTUS rulings will have just as much, if not more, impact on the midterms than Biden's popularity.
Certainly, all the precedents point to Presidential approval ratings as being the key determinant of mid-terms results.
For reasons that aren't clear to me, Democratic voters don't draw much of a connection between election results, and appointments to the Supreme Court, whereas Republican voters do.
And, we've had two post abortion ruling Generic polls putting the Republicans 3% and 5% ahead.
@NorthantsPolice We have received credible intelligence that a group of protestors are planning to disrupt the 2022 Formula 1 British Grand Prix and possibly invade the track on race day.
We want to appeal directly to this group of people.
We strongly urge you to not put yourselves, the drivers, as well as the many marshals, volunteers & members of the public, at risk.
Going onto a live racetrack is extremely dangerous – if you go ahead with this reckless plan you're jeopardising lives.
Protesting is of course everyone’s human right in this country & we are more than happy to speak with you to help you facilitate a peaceful protest at the circuit, we just please ask that you do not create a situation that puts lives in danger.
I just made a bunch of comments at the end of the last thread.
Sigh.
I spent over an hour effusing over why I thought Steve Bray was a nob the other day without realising everyone else was over 300 comments into a new thread.
It happens.
Steve Bray IS a knob, tho. That is the exact word. Knob
His entire life is dedicated to being an irritating prick
Exactly. If it hadn't been Brexit it would have been over something else.
He's divorced, estranged from his daughter, junked all his friends "because they voted Leave" and is always alone on Westminster green, despite millions agreeing with his views.
Tells you a lot.
He’s a deeply tragic figure, and I feel pity. And I resent him for making me feel that pity, when his troubles are all self-inflicted
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
There's no way they should survive it either! Government is there to secure its own population, that includes keeping them warm and giving them light - how on EARTH we've got to the stage where prancing around the world stage being 'tough on Putin' is considered more important for the Government of the UK than ensuring we have power, is beyond me.
Because it is.
Security is the first responsibility of the state, not light and warmth. You would have been prancing around objecting to rationing saying why we are being "tough on Hitler" eighty years ago.
The government isn't failing to supply light and warmth. Its policies are actively denying people light and warmth.
We could have as much light and warmth as we wanted at the price we wanted, but for their green dogma. Voters aren't stupid, they know this.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
They weren't behind closed doors. That's why we know about it. They could perfectly well have gone to a Travelodge in their lunch hour if they really couldn't wait. I'd say the same if it was his wife.
It was yet another sign of his "don't care, I'm special, always have been" mentality.
Yes, I'm a bit disappointed he didn't go into the City. I'd have enjoyed interviewing him, reading his emails and reviewing his hard drive (yes, yes, I know). The investigation report would have been fun to write.
Johnson wouldn't have lasted two minutes in finance. The days of the posh boy bluffer are long behind us.
Oh, I think there are still quite a few of them around.
In the "sales" and "wealth management" space.
Wealth management is basically a euphemism for money laundering.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
Isn't this to do with the fact that the UK currently has plentiful gas supplies through LNG terminals but nowhere to store it, while continental Europe tends to have the opposite problem? So it makes sense for the UK to generate as much electricity as possible from gas and then export that electricity to the continent so that they don't have to burn so much of their gas and can hopefully build up stocks for the winter.
Fascinating turn around, the UK has almost always been a net importer of electricity, but now we're almost always exporting it instead, precisely as you explain.
Sex at work has always seemed to me, like most fantasies, something better kept as a fantasy.
Well, I ended up marrying someone who worked for me on a couple of projects. I'd like to think we handled the start of our relationship maturely; although we dd not want it to be common knowledge, we both told our immediate superiors. They put in place some non-onerous restrictions.
You have to allow relationships to form at work, especially if the people involved are single. It is a company's duty to try to ensure that the relationships formed at work don't become abusive or exploitative - even if it involves shuffling people about between departments.
What's worse IMO is when someone has an affair with a colleague's spouse. I've seen the fallout from that, and it isn't pretty.
I met my wife at work.
But, we had the common decency to go to a hotel on D-Day - we didn't shag on the bosses desk.
I met my wife on an onshore oil rig. Working nights. It was fun.
I met Mrs DA in a SPb café where she was trying to teach herself English by doing the crossword in a three month old Daily Telegraph. I told her it was a crypto-fascist rag read only by braindead reactionaries and the chronically incontinent. From there, love blossomed.
When considering how people will vote in the next mid-terms, that is the key number.
Are you sure of that? Is it not the case that the electorate might be more sophisticated than that and vote in the mid terms based on issues other than the popularity of a President who they are not actually voting for?
I still hold that the recent SCOTUS rulings will have just as much, if not more, impact on the midterms than Biden's popularity.
Certainly, all the precedents point to Presidential approval ratings as being the key determinant of mid-terms results.
For reasons that aren't clear to me, Democratic voters don't draw much of a connection between election results, and appointments to the Supreme Court, whereas Republican voters do.
And, we've had two post abortion ruling Generic polls putting the Republicans 3% and 5% ahead.
Sex at work has always seemed to me, like most fantasies, something better kept as a fantasy.
Well, I ended up marrying someone who worked for me on a couple of projects. I'd like to think we handled the start of our relationship maturely; although we dd not want it to be common knowledge, we both told our immediate superiors. They put in place some non-onerous restrictions.
You have to allow relationships to form at work, especially if the people involved are single. It is a company's duty to try to ensure that the relationships formed at work don't become abusive or exploitative - even if it involves shuffling people about between departments.
What's worse IMO is when someone has an affair with a colleague's spouse. I've seen the fallout from that, and it isn't pretty.
I met my wife at work.
But, we had the common decency to go to a hotel on D-Day - we didn't shag on the bosses desk.
I met my wife on an onshore oil rig. Working nights. It was fun.
I met Mrs DA in a SPb café where she was trying to teach herself English by doing the crossword in a three month old Daily Telegraph. I told her it was a crypto-fascist rag read only by braindead reactionaries and the chronically incontinent. From there, love blossomed.
Wouldn't have imagined it went down any other way....always had you down as a true romantic at heart.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
At work? Give over.
Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.
If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly
I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?
OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
You're really not getting very much at the moment, are you?
Starvation rations, mate, starvation rations
But not actually STARVING
Doesn't Tinder (or equivalent) work for meeting women in Montenegro as well?
I'm assuming you're single again..so why not try meeting someone?
Thanks (sincerely) for your concern, but I am fine!
I'm rather enjoying being single and moderately but not entirely celibate. It's a calm moment in my life after several years of extreme turbulence. I have the odd liaison, which keeps me going, otherwise I am floating around the world, eating seabass and observing, and it is indeed pleasant. I chat with my kids, I tipple wine at sundown, I read about Balkan bandits
I'm honestly not sure I want another full on marriage-type relationship - ever. They can be fun but they are also stressful. And bloody expensive
Sounds like you are in a happy calm place. But surely marriage kind of relationships are anything but expensive? You get to share the accommodation costs two ways, it's cheaper to cook for two, you will stay in more of an evening... The whole thing basically pays for itself.
It is of course the early exit fee that is expensive. If someone's temperament is not suited to spending a lifetime or at least 20+ years together then it is indeed more expensive than being single. For those with a lifetime match it is cheaper. You are both correct.
Not necessarily. My first wife could have taken me to the cleaners but didn't.
That is a funny old saying. Did dry cleaners really used to be so expensive?
- means "rinsed" I guess.
But only now I think about it, which I never had before. So thanks for that.
Or from cleaned him out (won all his money off him). But since the metaphor is the same in all these variants, the question remains.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
There's no way they should survive it either! Government is there to secure its own population, that includes keeping them warm and giving them light - how on EARTH we've got to the stage where prancing around the world stage being 'tough on Putin' is considered more important for the Government of the UK than ensuring we have power, is beyond me.
Because it is.
Security is the first responsibility of the state, not light and warmth. You would have been prancing around objecting to rationing saying why we are being "tough on Hitler" eighty years ago.
The government isn't failing to supply light and warmth. Its policies are actively denying people light and warmth.
We could have as much light and warmth as we wanted at the price we wanted, but for their green dogma. Voters aren't stupid, they know this.
What cheap energy is being denied by green dogma?
Its fossil fuels that are expensive right now, that is why we are paying so much for electricity. Thankfully wind power etc is reducing our demands on gas, but if we needed to burn even more
You've fallen hook, line and sinker for the notion that fossil fuels are cheaper than green power, which was true a decade ago, but hasn't been true for a long time now. You keep parroting this line, despite the fact that fossil fuels are the expensive part of our electricity, getting off them would bring bills down not up now. Using more of them would drive bills up, not down.
Clean energy is now cheaper than fossil fuel energy, its just not always reliable and not always available at the required volumes at the minute.
When considering how people will vote in the next mid-terms, that is the key number.
Are you sure of that? Is it not the case that the electorate might be more sophisticated than that and vote in the mid terms based on issues other than the popularity of a President who they are not actually voting for?
I still hold that the recent SCOTUS rulings will have just as much, if not more, impact on the midterms than Biden's popularity.
Certainly, all the precedents point to Presidential approval ratings as being the key determinant of mid-terms results.
For reasons that aren't clear to me, Democratic voters don't draw much of a connection between election results, and appointments to the Supreme Court, whereas Republican voters do.
And, we've had two post abortion ruling Generic polls putting the Republicans 3% and 5% ahead.
Of the post SC ruling polls, Morning Consult and Marist have the Democrats ahead, the latest Yougov has the GOP ahead
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
@NorthantsPolice We have received credible intelligence that a group of protestors are planning to disrupt the 2022 Formula 1 British Grand Prix and possibly invade the track on race day.
We want to appeal directly to this group of people.
We strongly urge you to not put yourselves, the drivers, as well as the many marshals, volunteers & members of the public, at risk.
Going onto a live racetrack is extremely dangerous – if you go ahead with this reckless plan you're jeopardising lives.
Protesting is of course everyone’s human right in this country & we are more than happy to speak with you to help you facilitate a peaceful protest at the circuit, we just please ask that you do not create a situation that puts lives in danger.
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
Problem with Hamilton is he didn't confine his objection to Bernie or Piquet, he also claimed people like Jackie Stewart deploys micro-aggressions and unconscious bias towards him because Stewart has said he thinks Hamilton should retire because he is past his best and not in a competitive car.
Lumping the former in with the latter is nonsense.
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
I get you're (probably) joking, but what a completely stupid idea from Hamilton. Liberty means nothing if you don't have liberty for people you dislike.
Do I like nasty, old, gammony racists with ossified views they formed in the 1970s or earlier, like Jeremy Corbyn? Of course not. But the people I despise have the right to free speech, because if they don't, then I don't either.
If there were free speech restrictions then at one time or other the Lewis Hamilton's of this world would have been subject to them. If you take away Ecclestone's right to speak, then Ecclestone can try to turn around and take away Hamilton's rights away from him.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
There's no way they should survive it either! Government is there to secure its own population, that includes keeping them warm and giving them light - how on EARTH we've got to the stage where prancing around the world stage being 'tough on Putin' is considered more important for the Government of the UK than ensuring we have power, is beyond me.
Because it is.
Security is the first responsibility of the state, not light and warmth. You would have been prancing around objecting to rationing saying why we are being "tough on Hitler" eighty years ago.
Which part of degrading our own combat readiness to back one country against another (nuclear armed, commodities superpower) comes under the 'security' for which we should be expected to sacrifice light and heat? Unmitigated garbage from a Government that has ceased to function meaningfully as such.
Being one of the eco-fascist protestors planning on running onto the track, I hope Max ver-crashen isn't coming around the corner as we know how bad he is at avoiding an accident.
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
J G Ballard would love this place
The slightly older lady will be in the Ghislaine Maxwell role, there to ‘look after’ the younger ladies.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
There's no way they should survive it either! Government is there to secure its own population, that includes keeping them warm and giving them light - how on EARTH we've got to the stage where prancing around the world stage being 'tough on Putin' is considered more important for the Government of the UK than ensuring we have power, is beyond me.
Because it is.
Security is the first responsibility of the state, not light and warmth. You would have been prancing around objecting to rationing saying why we are being "tough on Hitler" eighty years ago.
Which part of degrading our own combat readiness to back one country against another (nuclear armed, commodities superpower) comes under the 'security' for which we should be expected to sacrifice light and heat? Unmitigated garbage from a Government that has ceased to function meaningfully as such.
I get that Putinist traitors like yourself that want to see Putin's agenda ahead of our own don't get this, but the part of 'security' where we have for seventy years since WWII ensured that there are not major wars of aggression in Europe with countries seeking to rewrite borders wholesale by invading other nations.
We have benefited handsomely from having a relatively peaceful, developed, western world to live in. Maintaining that security, globally, is far more important than any insignificant in comparison sacrifices we might have to be making.
It’s not that I won’t withdraw the whip from Chris Pincher, it’s just that I prefer the tried and trusted method of adopting the wrong stance for as long as possible before being forced into an embarrassing U-turn. https://twitter.com/Parody_PM/status/1542821361520967681
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
Problem with Hamilton is he didn't confine his objection to Bernie or Piquet, he also claimed people like Jackie Stewart deploys micro-aggressions and unconscious bias towards him because Stewart has said he thinks Hamilton should retire because he is past his best and not in a competitive car.
Lumping the former in with the latter is nonsense.
It might be had not Stewart been pushing that line for years.
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
J G Ballard would love this place
The slightly older lady will be in the Ghislaine Maxwell role, there to ‘look after’ the younger ladies.
It’s an entire ecosystem of sex. The whole place is built on the desirability of young women. Nubility is the ultimate currency, the right hip to waist ratio is the wartime dollar
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
J G Ballard would love this place
Bulgaria has lots of those. Several have ruined themselves by botoxing their lips for the Uber trout-pout and also balloon-inflated their breasts.
Who likes that?
Also, they all smoke. Doesn't bother some but a massive turnoff for me.
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
Problem with Hamilton is he didn't confine his objection to Bernie or Piquet, he also claimed people like Jackie Stewart deploys micro-aggressions and unconscious bias towards him (because Stewart has said he thinks Hamilton should retire because he is past his best and not in a competitive car).
Stewart exemplifies the problem in a way. He's been a hero for F1, but even if you count the time he ran a team, he has been out of the centre of the sport for decades. Many years ago he said that no driver that had driven over 100 races without a win would ever become champion. He was referring to Jenson Button, who won his first race after 113 attempts.
And three years later won the championship.
ISTR he's said similar stuff in the past, as if he still thinks there are only ten races in a season. The skills required by a driver are also very different nowadays, if only from the PR standpoint.
But I don't agree with Hamilton that they should be banned. Just that journalists and TV companies should understand that, whilst they were heroes in their day, the sport is very different nowadays, and ask whether their views hold much relevance.
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
Problem with Hamilton is he didn't confine his objection to Bernie or Piquet, he also claimed people like Jackie Stewart deploys micro-aggressions and unconscious bias towards him because Stewart has said he thinks Hamilton should retire because he is past his best and not in a competitive car.
Lumping the former in with the latter is nonsense.
I haven't heard enough from Jackie Stewart to say whether he'd meet the bar for "SOF" or not.
I last caught him in the news with that "F1 teams could teach the medical profession a thing or two" business during Covid.
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
J G Ballard would love this place
The slightly older lady will be in the Ghislaine Maxwell role, there to ‘look after’ the younger ladies.
My wife and I were enjoying a restaurant meal in Barcelona in 2018. At the table next to us were a group of 5 young Russian women, one older lady and two very muscular gentlemen on the table next to the door. One of the men escorted the girls whenever one or more went to the toilet. We suspected that they were being managed as a stable. Horrible.
There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?
That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.
Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.
But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.
So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?
The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
So what?
I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.
In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.
Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
You are rather missing the point.
I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.
Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.
Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?
And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.
People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.
Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.
What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.
The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
Why?
If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
They weren't behind closed doors. That's why we know about it. They could perfectly well have gone to a Travelodge in their lunch hour if they really couldn't wait. I'd say the same if it was his wife.
It was yet another sign of his "don't care, I'm special, always have been" mentality.
Yes, I'm a bit disappointed he didn't go into the City. I'd have enjoyed interviewing him, reading his emails and reviewing his hard drive (yes, yes, I know). The investigation report would have been fun to write.
Johnson wouldn't have lasted two minutes in finance. The days of the posh boy bluffer are long behind us.
Oh, I think there are still quite a few of them around.
In the "sales" and "wealth management" space.
Wealth management is basically a euphemism for money laundering.
Nah, it is about transferring half the future wealth of the investor to the broker.
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
Problem with Hamilton is he didn't confine his objection to Bernie or Piquet, he also claimed people like Jackie Stewart deploys micro-aggressions and unconscious bias towards him (because Stewart has said he thinks Hamilton should retire because he is past his best and not in a competitive car).
Stewart exemplifies the problem in a way. He's been a hero for F1, but even if you count the time he ran a team, he has been out of the centre of the sport for decades. Many years ago he said that no driver that had driven over 100 races without a win would ever become champion. He was referring to Jenson Button, who won his first race after 113 attempts.
And three years later won the championship.
ISTR he's said similar stuff in the past, as if he still thinks there are only ten races in a season. The skills required by a driver are also very different nowadays, if only from the PR standpoint.
But I don't agree with Hamilton that they should be banned. Just that journalists and TV companies should understand that, whilst they were heroes in their day, the sport is very different nowadays, and ask whether their views hold much relevance.
Its like Cricket Commentators like Michael Holding etc who view the game still as it was when they played. There is no problem in cricket that it seems Holding doesn't think can't be solved by "bowl faster" - let alone how some commentators can't comprehend why not taking the single might be a wise move, or why getting wides on occasion doesn't necessarily mean you're bowling badly.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 4h In the middle of the summer, when we should be saving as much natural gas as possible for winter, European nations are burning lots of gas for electricity generation.
The UK is now generating >60% of its electricity output burning gas. We will come to regret it this winter.
The prospect of Energy rationing is being mentioned more and more in the papers. Proper tory Frosty thinks its inevitable.
Whichever government presides over energy rationing.....boy, will they regret that.
Not as much as they'll regret it if they don't do it and rolling blackouts happen instead.
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
The conservatives could not survive energy rationing electorally. No way.
There's no way they should survive it either! Government is there to secure its own population, that includes keeping them warm and giving them light - how on EARTH we've got to the stage where prancing around the world stage being 'tough on Putin' is considered more important for the Government of the UK than ensuring we have power, is beyond me.
Because it is.
Security is the first responsibility of the state, not light and warmth. You would have been prancing around objecting to rationing saying why we are being "tough on Hitler" eighty years ago.
Which part of degrading our own combat readiness to back one country against another (nuclear armed, commodities superpower) comes under the 'security' for which we should be expected to sacrifice light and heat? Unmitigated garbage from a Government that has ceased to function meaningfully as such.
'Degrading our combat readiness' is bollocks, for a start. Simply untrue. And allowing an authoritarian dictator with self professed expansionist designs to invade and conquer a European neighbour doesn't come under 'security' either. Unmitigated garbage from you, IMO.
Re Lewis Hamilton, other than criticise him, what’s Jackie Stewart done wrong?
He’s always had a very thinly-veiled dislike of Hamilton. He’s firmly of the opinion that car racing is a sport for gentlemen of a certain class.
He’s never explicitly said anything racist as far as I know, more of a class thing. Others have a different view, and think he’s your typical racist old grandad, who’s sensible enough to be careful what he says when there’s a microphone pointed at him.
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
Problem with Hamilton is he didn't confine his objection to Bernie or Piquet, he also claimed people like Jackie Stewart deploys micro-aggressions and unconscious bias towards him (because Stewart has said he thinks Hamilton should retire because he is past his best and not in a competitive car).
Stewart exemplifies the problem in a way. He's been a hero for F1, but even if you count the time he ran a team, he has been out of the centre of the sport for decades. Many years ago he said that no driver that had driven over 100 races without a win would ever become champion. He was referring to Jenson Button, who won his first race after 113 attempts.
And three years later won the championship.
ISTR he's said similar stuff in the past, as if he still thinks there are only ten races in a season. The skills required by a driver are also very different nowadays, if only from the PR standpoint.
But I don't agree with Hamilton that they should be banned. Just that journalists and TV companies should understand that, whilst they were heroes in their day, the sport is very different nowadays, and ask whether their views hold much relevance.
I don't think LH is arguing for a ban - he's just asking tv companies to have a care about inviting these old fossils on to spout nonsense.
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
J G Ballard would love this place
Bulgaria has lots of those. Several have ruined themselves by botoxing their lips for the Uber trout-pout and also balloon-inflated their breasts.
Who likes that?
Also, they all smoke. Doesn't bother some but a massive turnoff for me.
Indeed.
Relying on your physical desirability for your self esteem - or your entire purpose and happiness - is a short path to intense UNhappiness
You’re literally better off relying on money, as Byron pointed out
Also what is that thing rich beautiful young-ish women do when they exaggeratedly droop the hand as they walk and gesture, like their fingers are made of lead? Like they are too elegant to do something as workmanlike as lifting their hand properly
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
I get you're (probably) joking, but what a completely stupid idea from Hamilton. Liberty means nothing if you don't have liberty for people you dislike.
Do I like nasty, old, gammony racists with ossified views they formed in the 1970s or earlier, like Jeremy Corbyn? Of course not. But the people I despise have the right to free speech, because if they don't, then I don't either.
If there were free speech restrictions then at one time or other the Lewis Hamilton's of this world would have been subject to them. If you take away Ecclestone's right to speak, then Ecclestone can try to turn around and take away Hamilton's rights away from him.
I think Hamilton's as much of a wanker as Ecclestone and Piquet. And, certainly Putin's fanboys should be allowed to express themselves, just as we can express the view that they're arseholes.
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
J G Ballard would love this place
The slightly older lady will be in the Ghislaine Maxwell role, there to ‘look after’ the younger ladies.
My wife and I were enjoying a restaurant meal in Barcelona in 2018. At the table next to us were a group of 5 young Russian women, one older lady and two very muscular gentlemen on the table next to the door. One of the men escorted the girls whenever one or more went to the toilet. We suspected that they were being managed as a stable. Horrible.
A few years back I was at the London boat show. I'd put on the special booties and was looking around one of the more expensive yachts. After a few minutes, a rep politely asked if we could all leave. We did, and a few minutes later this short, stocky middle-aged man in a bulky jacket was escorted on by a handful of salespeople. With him were two very leggy young women. None of their party had to put the booties on.
I wondered what they saw in the man who was evidently thinking of buying a very expensive yacht...
Comments
They call for "zero tolerance" and a "thorough investigation... in each and every case".
Anyone undergoing investigation "should not be allowed to sit as a Cons MP"
https://twitter.com/CatNeilan/status/1542824863718686721
The thing is, the don't care.
Sacre bleu!
[This is not party political. They've all been dire on energy.]
This is sloppy. For a start, UK exports have now recovered following an initial fall at the end of the transition period. At most, the “academic studies” suggest that exports are still lower than they might otherwise have been. But it is nonsense to imply that Brexit explains the sharp deterioration in trade performance at the start of 2022.
The rest of the FT story only briefly touched on the real issues. In particular, the surge in global commodity prices has increased the cost of imports, which also explains why the EU’s trade balance in goods has collapsed. Other potentially important factors behind the surge in the current account deficit include changes in the way that the UK’s trade data are collected, and a jump in outflows of investment income as UK firms start paying dividends again.
https://reaction.life/how-the-remainer-media-still-get-brexit-wrong-and-why-it-matters/
We had energy rationing when I lived overseas and there was a major gas explosion at the local facility. For a couple of weeks all homes in the area were ordered to turn their gas supply off completely so that it'd be rationed for just the vulnerable and essential services to use. Thankfully it was not winter, so it was mainly cold showers and microwave food that became the solution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfr50f6ZBvo
I don't think I have ever seen him give a long form interview. He doesn't think the Turing test is really relevant or a real test of intelligence.
He's divorced, estranged from his daughter, junked all his friends "because they voted Leave" and is always alone on Westminster green, despite millions agreeing with his views.
Tells you a lot.
Well I say failed to deliver. They gave a licence to print Yuan contract to the chinese government to build a power station that will eventually open in 2376, and cancelled a Forgemasters loan that kyboshed the nascent nuclear industry development.
Approve 40.1%
Disapprove 55.6%
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/voters/
There are, therefore, exactly no queues.
But they sure won't survive uncontrolled blackouts. The public are in extremes a lot more forgiving of controlled rationing, than they are uncontrolled failures.
Nobody panics when things go according to plan, even if the plan is horrifying . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0AXgaFqEas
Any country could be doing this; if they're not, how is it Brexit's fault?
Being unpopular and getting beat is one thing. Meltdown is quite another.
Looking at the enormous stack of problems facing the tories this winter, the latter is really not out of the question. It really isn't.
I still hold that the recent SCOTUS rulings will have just as much, if not more, impact on the midterms than Biden's popularity.
But, we had the common decency to go to a hotel on D-Day - we didn't shag on the bosses desk.
Security is the first responsibility of the state, not light and warmth. You would have been prancing around objecting to rationing saying why we are being "tough on Hitler" eighty years ago.
Correction: it is the only way.
Couldn't work out how metaphorical the bloody coup was, really hoping for literal gore on the expensively crappy wallpaper, with flashbacks.
I've met Aaron. He's a thoroughly decent and intelligent guy.
Parliament and politics is indeed a different sort of workplace with different expected standards of personal conduct. The expression 'Hollywood for ugly people' feels apt.
It's the go-to scapegoat because it's much easier to blame everything on that and feel good about yourself than face up to the true complexity of intricate problems in the real world.
But only now I think about it, which I never had before. So thanks for that.
ETA the Channel 4 episode descriptions are very spoilery!
Even Jimmy Carter was a better President for social conservatives than Bill Clinton
England squad for ODI series: Jos Buttler (capt, wk), Moeen Ali, Jonny Bairstow, Harry Brook, Brydon Carse, Sam Curran, Liam Livingstone, Craig Overton, Matthew Parkinson, Joe Root, Jason Roy, Phil Salt, Ben Stokes, Reece Topley, David Willey.
No Ginger wizards in the T20? Really don't understand England love of Craig Overton, seems worse bowler and batter than his brother.
'Shall we go Gold Beach or Omaha?'
My line has gone from faint to a bright red now on the LFD (I don't have to test again until Tuesday and Wednesday to be able to return to work as I will need two consecutive negatives but I was curious).
This is where the Russian oligarchs are. Just outside the EU, yet surrounded by European luxury outlets
The population consists mainly of notably beautiful women aged 22-25 and obviously rich men aged 45-70
Utterly sterile. The food is probably quite good
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimdobson/2018/07/22/porto-montenegro-is-becoming-the-ultimate-superyacht-sanctuary-along-the-adriatic-coast/
For reasons that aren't clear to me, Democratic voters don't draw much of a connection between election results, and appointments to the Supreme Court, whereas Republican voters do.
And, we've had two post abortion ruling Generic polls putting the Republicans 3% and 5% ahead.
We have received credible intelligence that a group of protestors are planning to disrupt the 2022 Formula 1 British Grand Prix and possibly invade the track on race day.
We want to appeal directly to this group of people.
We strongly urge you to not put yourselves, the drivers, as well as the many marshals, volunteers & members of the public, at risk.
Going onto a live racetrack is extremely dangerous – if you go ahead with this reckless plan you're jeopardising lives.
Protesting is of course everyone’s human right in this country & we are more than happy to speak with you to help you facilitate a peaceful protest at the circuit, we just please ask that you do not create a situation that puts lives in danger.
https://twitter.com/northantspolice/status/1542795067441745921
We could have as much light and warmth as we wanted at the price we wanted, but for their green dogma. Voters aren't stupid, they know this.
Fascinating turn around, the UK has almost always been a net importer of electricity, but now we're almost always exporting it instead, precisely as you explain.
Apparently with great power comes great responsibility.
Its fossil fuels that are expensive right now, that is why we are paying so much for electricity. Thankfully wind power etc is reducing our demands on gas, but if we needed to burn even more
You've fallen hook, line and sinker for the notion that fossil fuels are cheaper than green power, which was true a decade ago, but hasn't been true for a long time now. You keep parroting this line, despite the fact that fossil fuels are the expensive part of our electricity, getting off them would bring bills down not up now. Using more of them would drive bills up, not down.
Clean energy is now cheaper than fossil fuel energy, its just not always reliable and not always available at the required volumes at the minute.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/61999788
If the tv companies won’t play ball would it be possible to frame a legal ban on giving airtime to silly old farts?
One objection – esp for liberals like me - is it’d be a violation of free speech. But when you think about it properly it wouldn’t. The people impacted could still go around saying what they want. They just wouldn’t be on Good Morning Britain or Loose Women or whatever whilst they’re saying it. Friends and family would still have the pleasure. So, no problem there.
Next objection – this one particularly important for progressives (again like me) - is it would be ageist. However it wouldn’t, not if it’s framed right. We’re not talking about all people over 80 or anything like that. The likes of Attenborough and Judi Dench and OKC can have as much airtime as they like. The more the better in fact. Wisdom is needed more than ever these days. No, who we’re talking about are the Bernie Ecclestones, the Ken Livingstones, the David Starkeys, those possessing that distinct specific quality of sillyoldfartness.
Final potential objection. Can the attribute of sillyoldfartness be defined tightly enough to be included in a bill and sustain the scrutiny required for it to become law? I think it can. We all know what it is, we know it when we see it, so all you need is a parliamentary draughtsman to listen to us and turn it into the required text – a bit like the police do when sketching a photofit from an eye witness.
SOF Restrictions Act - bring it on.
It’s all marble or stone or crystal. They haven’t skimped
Who enjoys coming to a place like this? Who really wants to go shopping for couture in Alexander McQueen when they’re on holiday?
I’ve noticed a third type of inhabitant. Women in their early 30s with tiny dogs (ie refusing to have kids) who were obviously stunning when they were 21 but now they flash evil jealous nervous glances at the 22 year old women in tiny hot pants
J G Ballard would love this place
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_a_urdgrl2E
Anyone trying that stunt these days, will have a lot more than one angry marshal to deal with.
Lumping the former in with the latter is nonsense.
Do I like nasty, old, gammony racists with ossified views they formed in the 1970s or earlier, like Jeremy Corbyn? Of course not. But the people I despise have the right to free speech, because if they don't, then I don't either.
If there were free speech restrictions then at one time or other the Lewis Hamilton's of this world would have been subject to them. If you take away Ecclestone's right to speak, then Ecclestone can try to turn around and take away Hamilton's rights away from him.
We have benefited handsomely from having a relatively peaceful, developed, western world to live in. Maintaining that security, globally, is far more important than any insignificant in comparison sacrifices we might have to be making.
https://twitter.com/Parody_PM/status/1542821361520967681
I’ve ordered a wine
Who likes that?
Also, they all smoke. Doesn't bother some but a massive turnoff for me.
And three years later won the championship.
ISTR he's said similar stuff in the past, as if he still thinks there are only ten races in a season. The skills required by a driver are also very different nowadays, if only from the PR standpoint.
But I don't agree with Hamilton that they should be banned. Just that journalists and TV companies should understand that, whilst they were heroes in their day, the sport is very different nowadays, and ask whether their views hold much relevance.
I last caught him in the news with that "F1 teams could teach the medical profession a thing or two" business during Covid.
And allowing an authoritarian dictator with self professed expansionist designs to invade and conquer a European neighbour doesn't come under 'security' either.
Unmitigated garbage from you, IMO.
He’s never explicitly said anything racist as far as I know, more of a class thing. Others have a different view, and think he’s your typical racist old grandad, who’s sensible enough to be careful what he says when there’s a microphone pointed at him.
Relying on your physical desirability for your self esteem - or your entire purpose and happiness - is a short path to intense UNhappiness
You’re literally better off relying on money, as Byron pointed out
Also what is that thing rich beautiful young-ish women do when they exaggeratedly droop the hand as they walk and gesture, like their fingers are made of lead? Like they are too elegant to do something as workmanlike as lifting their hand properly
It’s the gestural equivalent of “ vocal fry”
I wondered what they saw in the man who was evidently thinking of buying a very expensive yacht...