Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
I expect dusillusion with Starmerism will be quick to appear, but we have to go back 50 years to get a single term government. He will be PM for a decade or more.
He could be but that's taking current trends are projecting them way into the future.
Things can change so so quickly. People were talking about Boris being in office for 10-15 years barely 3 years ago.
18 months ago in fact. Hartlepool. He looked poltically stronger then than ever. Incredible pace of change. But I don't see Starmer imploding like that. If he slides it will be gradual and due to economic stagnation not his personal foibles.
Starmer has his own weaknesses - relative political inexperience, shallow support among the party and MPs, lack of an ideological mission to act as a guiding principle, probably others I haven't thought of.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
He withdrew from the last leadership contest having realized he had insufficient MP support to form a government. Can't see why that would have changed.
The ballooons-are-ET story is still given credence by the Guardian tonight. This is quite remarkable in itself
If aliens managed to cross galactic distances to get here, they almost certainly have faster than light technology, making them order of magnitudes technologically superior to us.
i.e. they won't have crude floating machines that can be shot down by simple rockets.
They're aliens with a sense of humour. Maybe they've come him to dump their waste which they are letting drift slowly to earth.
The idea buying some AirPods for work is in anyway comparable to the Tories and their continued sleaze is laughable
True but Labour are not shy of sleaze themselves. Never forget Ecclestone, thrice sacked Mandelson etc.
I suspect, but cannot prove, that the level of sleaze increases in proportion to time in office. The tories have been there for 13 long years and once again sleaze is consuming them. If/when labour serve a similar term, it will happen to them too. Boundaries get blurred.
I don't subscribe to the view of politics that Labour are more virtuous. It was interesting on The Last Leg to see Adam Hill's suggestion that Labour should give their MP's pay rise to charity utterly dismissed by Dara O'Brain.
Ecclestone is nearly 30 years ago. I know the Tories penchant for living in the past but that's ridiculous
That’s stretching it a bit. But ok, no more talk of Tory sleaze up to 1997 then.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
He’s not “centre” anything.
Sunak is a balance the books, keep spending 40%ish, no strong views on social issues moderate. You have just been driven insane by Brexit.
I always thought he was meant to be pretty darn right wing, just smoother talking.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
It has to be said, though...
When two of the top politicians who pushed for Brexit before it was fashionable are being called "not proper leavers"... It's a rum do, isn't it?
Interesting to see someone actually taking libel actions over social media claims of cash in brown envelopes changing hands. I have seen so many of these allegations in local politics that I'd given up on anyone actually standing up for their reputation...
Even on here people are remarkably quick to assume outright bribery and corruption at local levels, and most public are much freer in claiming it, without even a second's thought as to standard rule about just how many people would need to be involved, for what is usually a pretty low level thing.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
Boris won't have learned any lessons or fixed any flaws. I don't think it is in his nature to do so. However, it wouldn't be impossible for him to do a passable impression of 'school boy given six of the best by the Headmaster' - contrite Boris (still with a sideways unrepentant wink to the faithful). He could do something like appoint Dame Elizabeth Filkin (or our very own @Cyclefree) as his ethics advisor. Matron keeping things on the ward in order.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
He’s not “centre” anything.
Sunak is a balance the books, keep spending 40%ish, no strong views on social issues moderate. You have just been driven insane by Brexit.
I always thought he was meant to be pretty darn right wing, just smoother talking.
Rishi voted for May's deal 3 times, is relatively socially liberal and has increased benefits, the state pension and minimum wage by 10% and reversed Truss' cut to the 45% top income tax rate and corporation tax. He is firmly on the centrist wing of today's Conservative Party
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
He’s not “centre” anything.
Sunak is a balance the books, keep spending 40%ish, no strong views on social issues moderate. You have just been driven insane by Brexit.
I always thought he was meant to be pretty darn right wing, just smoother talking.
Economically right wing, socially fairly centrist is my view of Sunak.
Friendship with and links to Modi are perhaps his dodgiest social views.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
I expect dusillusion with Starmerism will be quick to appear, but we have to go back 50 years to get a single term government. He will be PM for a decade or more.
He could be but that's taking current trends are projecting them way into the future.
Things can change so so quickly. People were talking about Boris being in office for 10-15 years barely 3 years ago.
18 months ago in fact. Hartlepool. He looked poltically stronger then than ever. Incredible pace of change. But I don't see Starmer imploding like that. If he slides it will be gradual and due to economic stagnation not his personal foibles.
Starmer has his own weaknesses - relative political inexperience, shallow support among the party and MPs, lack of an ideological mission to act as a guiding principle, probably others I haven't thought of.
It's not very long ago that wise people on here were saying that Labour was unelectable, consigned to oblivion for at least 2 GEs, and that Starmer was a complete dud.
In this thread, people of the same ilk are now wondering whether Starmer will be PM for 2, 5 or 10 years. And the main, facile and repetitive charge against him is "he's no Tony Blair". Well, quite - if that's the best dirt that can be thrown at him, good luck.
(I didn't actually vote for him as leader, so I've no axe to grind. But the lack of credit he's given for what he's achieved in less than three years seems rather churlish).
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
It is very strange. The most awful thing would be if we shot down ET! It could just be some bod in his back garden with some helium.
My money is on back yard/high school science projects.
Oh yeah - not a chance in hell it's ET. On the other hand I definitely don't want the US government to presume that they can shoot down stuff without either it being a clear threat or it being clearly hostile and known.
Some of the rationale is that the ‘objects’ may pose a threat to commercial air liners.
France has told its citizens to leave Belarus immediately. By road. What do they know?
Nuke incoming on Lviv is my guess.
USA issued similar warnings this morning for its citizens in Russia, not for the first time.
Belarus must surely collapse at some point soon, one way or other. That Lukashenko has managed to stay the course so far without either triggering revolution at home or Russian de facto annexation has been quite impressive and surprising. But their economy is way more sensitive than Russia’s to being shut off from the rest of Europe.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
This really does hit the nail on the head. After he won the vote of no confidence they tried to claim he had learned his lesson, and it was an obvious lie because they never thought he'd done anything wrong. They still think that.
But if that is all true, then the greatest politician of our age was brought down by his own side, who for unknown reasons despised him, which proves he cannot be so great after all since they succeeded.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
Boris won't have learned any lessons or fixed any flaws. I don't think it is in his nature to do so. However, it wouldn't be impossible for him to do a passable impression of 'school boy given six of the best by the Headmaster' - contrite Boris (still with a sideways unrepentant wink to the faithful). He could do something like appoint Dame Elizabeth Filkin (or our very own @Cyclefree) as his ethics advisor. Matron keeping things on the ward in order.
Reading The Wind in the Willows and you realise just how similar he is to Toad.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
He’s not “centre” anything.
Sunak is a balance the books, keep spending 40%ish, no strong views on social issues moderate. You have just been driven insane by Brexit.
I always thought he was meant to be pretty darn right wing, just smoother talking.
Rishi voted for May's deal 3 times, is relatively socially liberal and has increased benefits, the state pension and minimum wage by 10% and reversed Truss' cut to the 45% top income tax rate and corporation tax. He is firmly on the centrist wing of today's Conservative Party
France has told its citizens to leave Belarus immediately. By road. What do they know?
Nuke incoming on Lviv is my guess.
Yes. The first thing anyone would do when an incoming nuclear missile is detected is send out an advisory for citizens to get out of the house and into their cars. Makes all the sense in the world.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
It has to be said, though...
When two of the top politicians who pushed for Brexit before it was fashionable are being called "not proper leavers"... It's a rum do, isn't it?
I will never get over Sunak being called a remainer traitor (far beyond not just being a proper leaver) when up against Truss.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
Boris won't have learned any lessons or fixed any flaws. I don't think it is in his nature to do so. However, it wouldn't be impossible for him to do a passable impression of 'school boy given six of the best by the Headmaster' - contrite Boris (still with a sideways unrepentant wink to the faithful). He could do something like appoint Dame Elizabeth Filkin (or our very own @Cyclefree) as his ethics advisor. Matron keeping things on the ward in order.
Reading The Wind in the Willows and you realise just how similar he is to Toad.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
This really does hit the nail on the head. After he won the vote of no confidence they tried to claim he had learned his lesson, and it was an obvious lie because they never thought he'd done anything wrong. They still think that.
But if that is all true, then the greatest politician of our age was brought down by his own side, who for unknown reasons despised him, which proves he cannot be so great after all since they succeeded.
After the VonC, Boris learned the same lesson he has always learned. Namely:
I can get away with stuff, because I am Boris Johnson.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
I expect dusillusion with Starmerism will be quick to appear, but we have to go back 50 years to get a single term government. He will be PM for a decade or more.
He could be but that's taking current trends are projecting them way into the future.
Things can change so so quickly. People were talking about Boris being in office for 10-15 years barely 3 years ago.
18 months ago in fact. Hartlepool. He looked poltically stronger then than ever. Incredible pace of change. But I don't see Starmer imploding like that. If he slides it will be gradual and due to economic stagnation not his personal foibles.
Starmer has his own weaknesses - relative political inexperience, shallow support among the party and MPs, lack of an ideological mission to act as a guiding principle, probably others I haven't thought of.
Hmm not sure I agree with any of those. He's had a crash course in politics and seems to be passing it so far. And that's on a platform of senior level public service. The party? He owns it now. Really has a grip on the levers. Ideology, ok, you might have a point here. But let's just see how he is in Office. I'm prepared to be disappointed but I'm not resigned to it.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
It has to be said, though...
When two of the top politicians who pushed for Brexit before it was fashionable are being called "not proper leavers"... It's a rum do, isn't it?
Not really. It means they've simply caved to the various external and internal pressures. Gove and Sunak's personal views on Brexit are irrelevant. Don't forget we have a Chancellor who believes the best rate of corporation tax is 15%, but who is soon to put it up from 19% to 25%.
France has told its citizens to leave Belarus immediately. By road. What do they know?
Nuke incoming on Lviv is my guess.
Hasn't this advice been issued by various Western governments repeatedly since at least the February invasion?
Reminds me of years ago when there was an advisory or some such for americans in Yemen, with a comic going something like "They said all american personnel would leave, and if you are an american tourist in Yemen...what the f*ck were you doing in Yemen? Big mistake!"
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
It has to be said, though...
When two of the top politicians who pushed for Brexit before it was fashionable are being called "not proper leavers"... It's a rum do, isn't it?
Not really. It means they've simply caved to the various external and internal pressures. Gove and Sunak's personal views on Brexit are irrelevant. Don't forget we have a Chancellor who believes the best rate of corporation tax is 15%, but who is soon to put it up from 19% to 25%.
Whilst it is true sometimes you need to stand a little firm in the face of some pressure in order to enact a needed change, where is the line between 'I do not cave to pressure' and 'I ignore reality'.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Enlighten me on these “forbidden” tax cuts?
VAT on home heating is the obvious one. Tax generally was the preserve of the individual members but VAT is the one area where they could make a difference.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
He’s not “centre” anything.
Sunak is a balance the books, keep spending 40%ish, no strong views on social issues moderate. You have just been driven insane by Brexit.
I always thought he was meant to be pretty darn right wing, just smoother talking.
Rishi voted for May's deal 3 times, is relatively socially liberal and has increased benefits, the state pension and minimum wage by 10% and reversed Truss' cut to the 45% top income tax rate and corporation tax. He is firmly on the centrist wing of today's Conservative Party
How many times voting for May's deal is acceptable, since JRM did once too.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
He’s not “centre” anything.
Sunak is a balance the books, keep spending 40%ish, no strong views on social issues moderate. You have just been driven insane by Brexit.
Bollocks.
Anderson sounds like the kind of person the government is well rid of.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
I expect dusillusion with Starmerism will be quick to appear, but we have to go back 50 years to get a single term government. He will be PM for a decade or more.
He could be but that's taking current trends are projecting them way into the future.
Things can change so so quickly. People were talking about Boris being in office for 10-15 years barely 3 years ago.
18 months ago in fact. Hartlepool. He looked poltically stronger then than ever. Incredible pace of change. But I don't see Starmer imploding like that. If he slides it will be gradual and due to economic stagnation not his personal foibles.
Starmer has his own weaknesses - relative political inexperience, shallow support among the party and MPs, lack of an ideological mission to act as a guiding principle, probably others I haven't thought of.
It's not very long ago that wise people on here were saying that Labour was unelectable, consigned to oblivion for at least 2 GEs, and that Starmer was a complete dud.
In this thread, people of the same ilk are now wondering whether Starmer will be PM for 2, 5 or 10 years. And the main, facile and repetitive charge against him is "he's no Tony Blair". Well, quite - if that's the best dirt that can be thrown at him, good luck.
(I didn't actually vote for him as leader, so I've no axe to grind. But the lack of credit he's given for what he's achieved in less than three years seems rather churlish).
I don't think Starmer is a complete dud, but the situation facing a new government in 2024 will be exceptionally difficult.
And, really, in what way are we to credit Starmer for the Tory self-destruction by way of Paterson, Covid Lockdown Party Time, Pincher and the Truss Fiasco?
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
But Sunak isn't centre right, is he? He's standard issue Thatcherite Dry; Peter Lilley with better PR and less tendency to go into Gilbert and Sullivan rewrites.
That some see Sunak as wishy washy centre right just shows how far the Conservatives have drifted.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
Boris won't have learned any lessons or fixed any flaws. I don't think it is in his nature to do so. However, it wouldn't be impossible for him to do a passable impression of 'school boy given six of the best by the Headmaster' - contrite Boris (still with a sideways unrepentant wink to the faithful). He could do something like appoint Dame Elizabeth Filkin (or our very own @Cyclefree) as his ethics advisor. Matron keeping things on the ward in order.
Reading The Wind in the Willows and you realise just how similar he is to Toad.
Toad wasn't a total cnut, had genuine friends and ended up in the jail, none of which can be applied to BJ (unfortunately in the last case).
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Claiming Gove is not a proper leaver just because he wants to try and make things work rather than Johnson and Rees Mogg's bull in a china shop approach is just plain dumb. He is one of the few Ministers who actually tried to start doing something positive around post Brexit reforms, particularly at DEFRA. The idea that the only 'pure and proper' Brexit is one that sweeps away every last vestige of EU law in as short a time as possible is really, really stupid.
France has told its citizens to leave Belarus immediately. By road. What do they know?
(snip)
Nuke incoming on Lviv is my guess.
There are allegations that Russia is questioning people *on entry* to Russian airports and examining their phones, and whilst some are being allowed in, others are going elsewhere. The supposition that *elsewhere* is training camps for the front.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
The funniest bit about that post is that you still think the Tories are “centre-right”.
Sunak is undoubtedly centre-right.
So you’re a comedian too.
Well, he’s not centre-left.
He’s not “centre” anything.
Sunak is a balance the books, keep spending 40%ish, no strong views on social issues moderate. You have just been driven insane by Brexit.
I always thought he was meant to be pretty darn right wing, just smoother talking.
Rishi voted for May's deal 3 times, is relatively socially liberal and has increased benefits, the state pension and minimum wage by 10% and reversed Truss' cut to the 45% top income tax rate and corporation tax. He is firmly on the centrist wing of today's Conservative Party
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
I expect dusillusion with Starmerism will be quick to appear, but we have to go back 50 years to get a single term government. He will be PM for a decade or more.
He could be but that's taking current trends are projecting them way into the future.
Things can change so so quickly. People were talking about Boris being in office for 10-15 years barely 3 years ago.
18 months ago in fact. Hartlepool. He looked poltically stronger then than ever. Incredible pace of change. But I don't see Starmer imploding like that. If he slides it will be gradual and due to economic stagnation not his personal foibles.
Starmer has his own weaknesses - relative political inexperience, shallow support among the party and MPs, lack of an ideological mission to act as a guiding principle, probably others I haven't thought of.
It's not very long ago that wise people on here were saying that Labour was unelectable, consigned to oblivion for at least 2 GEs, and that Starmer was a complete dud.
In this thread, people of the same ilk are now wondering whether Starmer will be PM for 2, 5 or 10 years. And the main, facile and repetitive charge against him is "he's no Tony Blair". Well, quite - if that's the best dirt that can be thrown at him, good luck.
(I didn't actually vote for him as leader, so I've no axe to grind. But the lack of credit he's given for what he's achieved in less than three years seems rather churlish).
I don't think Starmer is a complete dud, but the situation facing a new government in 2024 will be exceptionally difficult.
And, really, in what way are we to credit Starmer for the Tory self-destruction by way of Paterson, Covid Lockdown Party Time, Pincher and the Truss Fiasco?
Sure, it's self destruction. But his ratings are also pretty good. His 'masterly inactivity' approach has made him appear acceptable to a lot of people.
The Tories would still be doing badly now with a more radical seeming Labour leader, a less professional one, because they have inflicted a lot of their own wounds. But they'd be doing less badly if Labour were repulsing more people. Just as Boris would have not have done so well in 2019 had he not attracted some people, not merely that Corbyn repulsed many (and that the combination of those two outnumbered those he himself repulsed).
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
Boris won't have learned any lessons or fixed any flaws. I don't think it is in his nature to do so. However, it wouldn't be impossible for him to do a passable impression of 'school boy given six of the best by the Headmaster' - contrite Boris (still with a sideways unrepentant wink to the faithful). He could do something like appoint Dame Elizabeth Filkin (or our very own @Cyclefree) as his ethics advisor. Matron keeping things on the ward in order.
Reading The Wind in the Willows and you realise just how similar he is to Toad.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Enlighten me on these “forbidden” tax cuts?
VAT on home heating is the obvious one. Tax generally was the preserve of the individual members but VAT is the one area where they could make a difference.
Highlights the problem from where I'm standing.
Yes, it's unpopular and yes, exempting domestic fuel from VAT couldn't happen under EU rules.
But the Major government introduced that tax because it really needed the money to pay its bills. And no subsequent government (or imaginable future government) has been or looks likely to be comfortable enough fiscally to do differently.
So that's a specific Brexit freedom that is locked off to us by other factors. Question is- what else falls in that category, or the neighbouring one of "we could exercise that freedom, but the costs would outweigh the benefits"?
France has told its citizens to leave Belarus immediately. By road. What do they know?
Nuke incoming on Lviv is my guess.
Your guess is that France knows this?
A former neighbour of mine who works (still I believe) for one of the UK security agencies, was always getting posted to countries a few months before they had a coup. Over the decade we lived next to him this must have happened 6 or 8 times. The most unusual was Fiji. Of course we used to joke with him that he was responsible for the coups but the reality was far more prosaic (and relevant I think to this discussion). His actual job was to act as the immediate threat security advisor to the embassy in the country and to brief both the ambassador and the foreign office as to the level of threat and, most importantly, if and when it was time to get British nationals out of the country. I am sure every country has people doing this all the time and this looks like France has been told by their people on the ground that things are going south rapidly in Belarus.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
The ballooons-are-ET story is still given credence by the Guardian tonight. This is quite remarkable in itself
Octagonal with strings hanging down? Surely the strings were observed visually? Don't US airforce pilots wear camera goggles?
What happened to the Colombia balloon?
If the Montana object didn't exist, what caused the radar malfunction or misinterpretation, bearing in mind the report that the Alaska object affected sensors? Montana isn't quite Nevada but it has a long history of meep meep UFO sightings.
I will watch "The Wandering Earth" tonight to get more of a handle on the Chinese side of this. Then the prequel if I can find an English dub. F*** subtitles.
The US military are deliberately giving the impression they don't know what's going on. Which doesn't mean it's false. But they are deliberately doing it. They didn't have to say "Some pilots reported sensor influence. Some didn't" - unless they wanted to.
Unlikely that none of the three smaller objects have been recovered.
The ballooons-are-ET story is still given credence by the Guardian tonight. This is quite remarkable in itself
Octagonal with strings hanging down? Surely the strings were observed visually? Don't US airforce pilots wear camera goggles?
What happened to the Colombia balloon?
If the Montana object didn't exist, what caused the radar malfunction or misinterpretation, bearing in mind the report that the Alaska object affected sensors? Montana isn't quite Nevada but it has a long history of meep meep UFO sightings.
I will watch "The Wandering Earth" tonight to get more of a handle on the Chinese side of this. Then the prequel if I can find an English dub. F*** subtitles.
The US military are deliberately giving the impression they don't know what's going on. Which doesn't mean it's false. But they are deliberately doing it.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Enlighten me on these “forbidden” tax cuts?
VAT on home heating is the obvious one. Tax generally was the preserve of the individual members but VAT is the one area where they could make a difference.
Highlights the problem from where I'm standing.
Yes, it's unpopular and yes, exempting domestic fuel from VAT couldn't happen under EU rules.
But the Major government introduced that tax because it really needed the money to pay its bills. And no subsequent government (or imaginable future government) has been or looks likely to be comfortable enough fiscally to do differently.
So that's a specific Brexit freedom that is locked off to us by other factors. Question is- what else falls in that category, or the neighbouring one of "we could exercise that freedom, but the costs would outweigh the benefits"?
Of course they could do it if they were wiling to raise taxes elsewhere. And plenty of people including me think it would be a good move. Fuel poverty is one area where the Government can make at least some difference and they do now have the legal ability to do it. I would fully expect Starmer, as part of his realignment of the tax burden, to do this.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
The ballooons-are-ET story is still given credence by the Guardian tonight. This is quite remarkable in itself
Octagonal with strings hanging down? Surely the strings were observed visually? Don't US airforce pilots wear camera goggles?
What happened to the Colombia balloon?
If the Montana object didn't exist, what caused the radar malfunction or misinterpretation, bearing in mind the report that the Alaska object affected sensors? Montana isn't quite Nevada but it has a long history of meep meep UFO sightings.
I will watch "The Wandering Earth" tonight to get more of a handle on the Chinese side of this. Then the prequel if I can find an English dub. F*** subtitles.
The US military are deliberately giving the impression they don't know what's going on. Which doesn't mean it's false. But they are deliberately doing it.
Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has denied that her decision to expense hundreds of pounds on Apple electronics is the same as Whitehall’s use of government procurement cards on luxury items.
Labour's answer to Sharon Stone was notably awful this morning on R4 Today.
She was horrifically poor. Is that really, really the best Labour can do? Really?
Good question. At the moment all parties have weaknesses varying from extinction level events to individuals at the top that just aren't the calibre.
Even the impregnable SNP seems to have developed a death wish. As for Labour, Angela Rayner (for whom I have a real bias in favour) has not being doing well - her job is to make sure that Labour voters vote Labour and that Tory voters who want to vote Labour aren't put off by her. And, though I am in a minority here, Rachel Reeves, as shadow CoE is just not a heavyweight.
None of this surely can stop Labour coming top; best result by far will be Labour needing LD support.
It's possible that GE2024 will be viewed as a giant by-election rather than a general election.
I know you could say this of all general elections, in a way, but what I mean is the electorate passing sweeping judgment in each seat on sleaze, incompetence, venality and criminality to clear out the barn, following which normal politics will resume again.
Politically, this could mean the milk rapidly turns sour for the new Labour administration followed by a rapid centre-right recovery- in whatever form that takes.
I expect dusillusion with Starmerism will be quick to appear, but we have to go back 50 years to get a single term government. He will be PM for a decade or more.
He could be but that's taking current trends are projecting them way into the future.
Things can change so so quickly. People were talking about Boris being in office for 10-15 years barely 3 years ago.
18 months ago in fact. Hartlepool. He looked poltically stronger then than ever. Incredible pace of change. But I don't see Starmer imploding like that. If he slides it will be gradual and due to economic stagnation not his personal foibles.
Starmer has his own weaknesses - relative political inexperience, shallow support among the party and MPs, lack of an ideological mission to act as a guiding principle, probably others I haven't thought of.
It's not very long ago that wise people on here were saying that Labour was unelectable, consigned to oblivion for at least 2 GEs, and that Starmer was a complete dud.
In this thread, people of the same ilk are now wondering whether Starmer will be PM for 2, 5 or 10 years. And the main, facile and repetitive charge against him is "he's no Tony Blair". Well, quite - if that's the best dirt that can be thrown at him, good luck.
(I didn't actually vote for him as leader, so I've no axe to grind. But the lack of credit he's given for what he's achieved in less than three years seems rather churlish).
I don't think Starmer is a complete dud, but the situation facing a new government in 2024 will be exceptionally difficult.
And, really, in what way are we to credit Starmer for the Tory self-destruction by way of Paterson, Covid Lockdown Party Time, Pincher and the Truss Fiasco?
Of course the Tories have self-destructed. But you still have to take advantage of it. If Starmer hadn't been doing fine, the polls would show much higher LD ratings. But they don't. It's Labour benefiting.
Starmer also deserves credit for what he's achieved within the party, including the very good party discipline, though that's of no interest to voters, understandably.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
We have a case study of having a bad Labour leader when the Tories implode. Corbyn in 2018/2019.
Starmer is polling 48% because he’s seen as competent and electable. Nobody else who actually ran for the leadership would be doing as well as him.
Or people want to suggest that RLB would?
The goalposts will forever be shifted. People just cannot accept that he is good.
Mate, who are you railing against? Are you having a discussion on altlabourleft or something? I think most on PB accept that Starmer has done a good job, but also that he’s been handed a set of open goals. He’s not been truly tested by the fire of a general election, where policy will be scrutinised. But I don’t think people are saying he’s rubbish.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Claiming Gove is not a proper leaver just because he wants to try and make things work rather than Johnson and Rees Mogg's bull in a china shop approach is just plain dumb. He is one of the few Ministers who actually tried to start doing something positive around post Brexit reforms, particularly at DEFRA. The idea that the only 'pure and proper' Brexit is one that sweeps away every last vestige of EU law in as short a time as possible is really, really stupid.
I didn't notice a 'bull in the china shop' approach to uncoupling with the EU from Boris - as far as I can see we made very little progress in that area at all during his tenure. We must all speak as we find. I am sure some of Gove's DEFRA reforms have been positive, but during our time within the CAP, we had farmers making money from such things as set aside, we had orchards ripped up, we were the only EU country with a milk quota lower than its population needs. Environmental concerns are hugely important, but I would have hoped that any post-Brexit agricultural strategy would have had increasing the production of good quality domestic food as a core aim. Subsidising things like re-wilding efforts seems to me very much in line with current EU policy, whether or not the policies match precisely. I could be very wrong and I freely admit that is a surface surmise.
I don't agree with sweeping away EU law for the sake of it either, but I absolutely agree that it should be done where it is clear that there is an advantage in doing so. Hopefully you would agree.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
The ballooons-are-ET story is still given credence by the Guardian tonight. This is quite remarkable in itself
Octagonal with strings hanging down? Surely the strings were observed visually? Don't US airforce pilots wear camera goggles?
What happened to the Colombia balloon?
If the Montana object didn't exist, what caused the radar malfunction or misinterpretation, bearing in mind the report that the Alaska object affected sensors? Montana isn't quite Nevada but it has a long history of meep meep UFO sightings.
I will watch "The Wandering Earth" tonight to get more of a handle on the Chinese side of this. Then the prequel if I can find an English dub. F*** subtitles.
The US military are deliberately giving the impression they don't know what's going on. Which doesn't mean it's false. But they are deliberately doing it.
What's wrong with subtitles?
Nothing. Just not to my personal taste.
Sure, I was just curious as it can be a real divide thesedays, some people are vehemently anti-dub as it is offensive, which is also silly.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
Why are these aliens mostly interested in Canada and Canada adjacent adjacent parts of the US? Is the rest of the planet too boring or are they into Ice Hockey on Alpha Centurai?
If you had a reasonable case for asylum under Intergalactic law and were able to get there, Canada would be among the top choices. Persecution on the basis of having two green heads instead of the more usual three blue ones is quite common in the Andromeda galaxy.
Some Boris fans (particularly in the Conservative Party) seem to be trying a 'we wuz robbed' approach to Boris - he should never have had to resign. The problem for them is that the things that caused him to resign are his own character flaws, flaws that have been visible throughout his public life.
A big question is why they think he has suddenly learnt the lessons and fixed those flaws. I really, really doubt he has.
Boris won't have learned any lessons or fixed any flaws. I don't think it is in his nature to do so. However, it wouldn't be impossible for him to do a passable impression of 'school boy given six of the best by the Headmaster' - contrite Boris (still with a sideways unrepentant wink to the faithful). He could do something like appoint Dame Elizabeth Filkin (or our very own @Cyclefree) as his ethics advisor. Matron keeping things on the ward in order.
Reading The Wind in the Willows and you realise just how similar he is to Toad.
The ballooons-are-ET story is still given credence by the Guardian tonight. This is quite remarkable in itself
Octagonal with strings hanging down? Surely the strings were observed visually? Don't US airforce pilots wear camera goggles?
What happened to the Colombia balloon?
If the Montana object didn't exist, what caused the radar malfunction or misinterpretation, bearing in mind the report that the Alaska object affected sensors? Montana isn't quite Nevada but it has a long history of meep meep UFO sightings.
I will watch "The Wandering Earth" tonight to get more of a handle on the Chinese side of this. Then the prequel if I can find an English dub. F*** subtitles.
The US military are deliberately giving the impression they don't know what's going on. Which doesn't mean it's false. But they are deliberately doing it. They didn't have to say "Some pilots reported sensor influence. Some didn't" - unless they wanted to.
Unlikely that none of the three smaller objects have been recovered.
No aliens in TWE its the 3 body problem trilogy you want. Not filmed yet afaik
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Enlighten me on these “forbidden” tax cuts?
VAT on home heating is the obvious one. Tax generally was the preserve of the individual members but VAT is the one area where they could make a difference.
Highlights the problem from where I'm standing.
Yes, it's unpopular and yes, exempting domestic fuel from VAT couldn't happen under EU rules.
But the Major government introduced that tax because it really needed the money to pay its bills. And no subsequent government (or imaginable future government) has been or looks likely to be comfortable enough fiscally to do differently.
So that's a specific Brexit freedom that is locked off to us by other factors. Question is- what else falls in that category, or the neighbouring one of "we could exercise that freedom, but the costs would outweigh the benefits"?
It absolutely isn't locked off to us by other factors. How can you say that removing a tax on domestic fuel is fiscally impossible, when at the same moment, we are spending billions subsidising peoples' domestic fuel because it's unaffordable? We can't afford not to tax it but we can afford to subsidise it?
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Yes. Agree. His 'main' message, SFAICS, was about something called 'The Kingdom of God'.
People who think they are believers in biblical authority, infallibility etc - in the Protestant tradition mostly called evangelicals - tend to have a rather strained and selective approach when you look at: money, wealth, war, and the contrast between rules for heteros (remarriage OK) and rules for gays (go away).
Well fancy that. Why on earth could this be? The degree of self interest creeping in is to say the least disheartening.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Are widow/ers allowed to remarry by the NT?
I don’t think the National Trust has a firm position
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
Not many I suppose. Among PBers there are very few who will come to their defence in any coherent, holistic or consistent way. I think that's because it can't be done. Not even the Speccie is really trying, and the Telegraph wouldn't understand the question.
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Claiming Gove is not a proper leaver just because he wants to try and make things work rather than Johnson and Rees Mogg's bull in a china shop approach is just plain dumb. He is one of the few Ministers who actually tried to start doing something positive around post Brexit reforms, particularly at DEFRA. The idea that the only 'pure and proper' Brexit is one that sweeps away every last vestige of EU law in as short a time as possible is really, really stupid.
I didn't notice a 'bull in the china shop' approach to uncoupling with the EU from Boris - as far as I can see we made very little progress in that area at all during his tenure. We must all speak as we find. I am sure some of Gove's DEFRA reforms have been positive, but during our time within the CAP, we had farmers making money from such things as set aside, we had orchards ripped up, we were the only EU country with a milk quota lower than its population needs. Environmental concerns are hugely important, but I would have hoped that any post-Brexit agricultural strategy would have had increasing the production of good quality domestic food as a core aim. Subsidising things like re-wilding efforts seems to me very much in line with current EU policy, whether or not the policies match precisely. I could be very wrong and I freely admit that is a surface surmise.
I don't agree with sweeping away EU law for the sake of it either, but I absolutely agree that it should be done where it is clear that there is an advantage in doing so. Hopefully you would agree.
Yes I would agree with removing EU law as necessary. But setting an arbitrary date for that without really worrying about what will replace it is Blair levels of stupidity (remembering he tried to get rid of the Lord Chancellor in 2003 without realising that without the post no laws could be promulgated by Parliament)
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Are widow/ers allowed to remarry by the NT?
I don’t think the National Trust has a firm position
No rule against it in the New Testament. For the contrary view see Oliver Goldsmith's 'The Vicar of Wakefield'.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
It's not the complete answer, but there is a thread from elite public schools to the higher profile conservative evangelical end of the Church of England; Bash Camps and all that.
Some of the quirks of sexual ethics come from there.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Are widow/ers allowed to remarry by the NT?
Nothing springs to mind immediately.
We do know that the Samaritan woman at the well had had 5 previous husbands and was living unmarried with another man. Jesus offers her the water of life, so clearly is not put off by this knowledge. We don't know whether she was serially widowed or divorced, or a bit of both.
Either way, and fortunately for KC3 and the QC, he doesn't seem bothered.
Since a few of you are interested in the whole UFO thing, I'll mention a possibility I haven't seen here, this one from Larry Niven's short story, "War Movie". (You can find the story in his "Limits" collection.)
Some alien qarasht have been observing earth since World War II, and made a profitable movie of that conflict. Inspired by that success, they set up many more recording devices -- at great expense -- and waited for World War III. And the war didn't come, and didn't come, partly because of technology that humans have been getting from other alien species.
And so the qarasht in this company (as I suppose we can call it) are bankrupt. Their society has rather strict rules on bankruptcy, so when they return home, as they must, they will go into organ banks, in pieces, to be given to more successful qarasht who need transplants.
(Do I think there is anything to this? No, but it seems as plasuible as some of the other suggestions I've seen here, though less plausible than a UFO short story by Poul Anderson, "Peek! I See You!".)
A state of emergency has been declared across the northern half of the North Island and Mrs Stodge is concerned about her mother in Napier where the power was cut off at 6.45pm (UK, 7.45am local). Hopefully all over there will get through this safe.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Are widow/ers allowed to remarry by the NT?
Nothing springs to mind immediately.
Matthew 19 also appears to speak favourably of emasculation. Not a vastly popular evangelical custom.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
It's not the complete answer, but there is a thread from elite public schools to the higher profile conservative evangelical end of the Church of England; Bash Camps and all that.
Some of the quirks of sexual ethics come from there.
Indeed. But the arrogance of claiming to believe that you hold the bible as being a particular sort of final authority when you don't apply it when inconvenient to you and your posh friends but do apply it to gay riff raff is a bit off, even if they did all go to Eton and Radley.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
A shame more of his acolytes have not taken on board that message.
Countess Felicity Cunliffe Lister, who lives in a castle, gains a North Yorkshire County Council seat for the Liberal Democrats from the Conservatives.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
“The Pentagon is yet to recover debris from the three UFOs shot down this weekend over Alaska, Canada and Michigan and is yet to offer any kind of explanation as to what they are, how they were able to fly, or whether they pose a genuine threat to America.”
...so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.
The White House however has just said "there is no evidence of aliens or extra terrestrial activity".
“so says that authoritative source the Daily Mail.“
The Mail’s front page today shows how badly they are losing it. That arch remainers will meet in a country house and go through a PowerPoint slide pack is not a news story - that arch brexiteers like Gove joined them is a news story, but not the angle the mail is reporting on - arch remainers plot against Brexit is how they splashing it you have to read down to find the incendiary facts Gove and other leader brexiteers were there. 😆
Brexit has really gone super-exclusive if Gove is no longer deemed a 'proper' Leaver.
Proper Leaverdom is very loosely correlated with reality. Remainer Truss is a Proper Leaver, passionate leaver Sunak is not.
I don't think we need such abstract concepts as personality/'connection to reality' (as defined by remainers naturally) to judge 'proper' leaverdom. Proper leavers wish us to use the flexibility afforded by Brexit for the benefit of the UK. That may involve actually repealing some EU laws, stepping away from some EU projects, tax cuts that were hitherto forbidden, institutional changes away from harmonised administration across the bloc etc. Some want all of those, some just some. A 'not-proper' leaver may speak through gritted teeth about 'the opportunities of Brexit' but will oppose any moves like those above that would make hiccoughs on the road to rejoining. That's why it is difficult to call Sunak or Gove 'proper leavers' at this time.
Claiming Gove is not a proper leaver just because he wants to try and make things work rather than Johnson and Rees Mogg's bull in a china shop approach is just plain dumb. He is one of the few Ministers who actually tried to start doing something positive around post Brexit reforms, particularly at DEFRA. The idea that the only 'pure and proper' Brexit is one that sweeps away every last vestige of EU law in as short a time as possible is really, really stupid.
I didn't notice a 'bull in the china shop' approach to uncoupling with the EU from Boris - as far as I can see we made very little progress in that area at all during his tenure. We must all speak as we find. I am sure some of Gove's DEFRA reforms have been positive, but during our time within the CAP, we had farmers making money from such things as set aside, we had orchards ripped up, we were the only EU country with a milk quota lower than its population needs. Environmental concerns are hugely important, but I would have hoped that any post-Brexit agricultural strategy would have had increasing the production of good quality domestic food as a core aim. Subsidising things like re-wilding efforts seems to me very much in line with current EU policy, whether or not the policies match precisely. I could be very wrong and I freely admit that is a surface surmise.
I don't agree with sweeping away EU law for the sake of it either, but I absolutely agree that it should be done where it is clear that there is an advantage in doing so. Hopefully you would agree.
Yes I would agree with removing EU law as necessary. But setting an arbitrary date for that without really worrying about what will replace it is Blair levels of stupidity (remembering he tried to get rid of the Lord Chancellor in 2003 without realising that without the post no laws could be promulgated by Parliament)
Before that date (31 December 2023), Government Departments and the devolved Administrations will determine which retained EU law can be reformed to benefit the UK, which can expire, and which needs to be preserved and incorporated into domestic law in modified form. They will also decide if retained EU law needs to be codified as it is preserved, in order to preserve specific policy effects which are beneficial to keep.
The Bill includes an extension mechanism for the sunset of specified pieces of retained EU law until 2026. Should it be required, this will allow Departments additional time where necessary to implement more complex reforms to specific pieces of retained EU law, including any necessary legislation.
I agree that EU law that is right, must be retained and added to the domestic statute book, but that is the plan. It just won't have special status under the law by being 'EU law' any more. That is fair, and I can't see why anyone who is actually in favour of Brexit would disagree.
France has told its citizens to leave Belarus immediately. By road. What do they know?
Nuke incoming on Lviv is my guess.
Your guess is that France knows this?
A former neighbour of mine who works (still I believe) for one of the UK security agencies, was always getting posted to countries a few months before they had a coup. Over the decade we lived next to him this must have happened 6 or 8 times. The most unusual was Fiji. Of course we used to joke with him that he was responsible for the coups but the reality was far more prosaic (and relevant I think to this discussion). His actual job was to act as the immediate threat security advisor to the embassy in the country and to brief both the ambassador and the foreign office as to the level of threat and, most importantly, if and when it was time to get British nationals out of the country. I am sure every country has people doing this all the time and this looks like France has been told by their people on the ground that things are going south rapidly in Belarus.
Perhaps. But didn't France already advise its citizens to leave Belarus on February 27th 2022?
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
Are widow/ers allowed to remarry by the NT?
Nothing springs to mind immediately.
Matthew 19 also appears to speak favourably of emasculation. Not a vastly popular evangelical custom.
All forms of biblicism and fundamentalism are flawed and doomed. You end up in denial about why and how you self interestedly select.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
Jesus (unlike the OT) didn't speak out against gays, while did against re-marriage.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
A shame more of his acolytes have not taken on board that message.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
It's not the complete answer, but there is a thread from elite public schools to the higher profile conservative evangelical end of the Church of England; Bash Camps and all that.
Some of the quirks of sexual ethics come from there.
Leading Church of England evangelicals tend to be sporty, ex public school and Oxbridge and other top universities HTB types.
Leading Church of England liberal Catholics and Anglo Catholics tend to be ex public school and grammar school humanities and arts graduates from Oxbridge and other top universities who like dressing up and proper BCP and incense filled communion
My guess is Sunak's election strategy away-day in Chequers has resulted in a decision for a defensive strat, which explains the above. Anti-woke will trigger the Left (hugely and vociferously) and rally some votes to his side. He wouldn't do it without focus groups and polling to support it.
But, it's telling in itself, of course. Means he knows he can no longer win.
Since a few of you are interested in the whole UFO thing, I'll mention a possibility I haven't seen here, this one from Larry Niven's short story, "War Movie". (You can find the story in his "Limits" collection.)
Some alien qarasht have been observing earth since World War II, and made a profitable movie of that conflict. Inspired by that success, they set up many more recording devices -- at great expense -- and waited for World War III. And the war didn't come, and didn't come, partly because of technology that humans have been getting from other alien species.
And so the qarasht in this company (as I suppose we can call it) are bankrupt. Their society has rather strict rules on bankruptcy, so when they return home, as they must, they will go into organ banks, in pieces, to be given to more successful qarasht who need transplants.
(Do I think there is anything to this? No, but it seems as plasuible as some of the other suggestions I've seen here, though less plausible than a UFO short story by Poul Anderson, "Peek! I See You!".)
I love early sci-fi, but it does have a bad habit of anthropomorphising aliens.
My guess is Sunak's election strategy away-day in Chequers has resulted in a decision for a defensive strat, which explains the above. Anti-woke will trigger the Left (hugely and vociferously) and rally some votes to his side. He wouldn't do it without focus groups and polling to support it.
But, it's telling in itself, of course. Means he knows he can no longer win.
As has been noted there is a danger here as well - when they lose, which they probably will in some fashion, the argument will be that all those things they raised against must not bother the electorate that much, or are in fact supported.
Very interesting. There is one question most evangelicals in the CoE are not wanting to address.
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
It's not the complete answer, but there is a thread from elite public schools to the higher profile conservative evangelical end of the Church of England; Bash Camps and all that.
Some of the quirks of sexual ethics come from there.
Indeed. But the arrogance of claiming to believe that you hold the bible as being a particular sort of final authority when you don't apply it when inconvenient to you and your posh friends but do apply it to gay riff raff is a bit off, even if they did all go to Eton and Radley.
To be fair, attitudes to Biblical verses as final authority do vary across Christian sects. In this High Anglicans tend to follow Church tradition rather than Biblical liberality.
Comments
https://order-order.com/2023/02/13/douglas-ross-responds-to-celtic-banner-i-dont-think-anyone-could-have-missed-it/
I'd have said: "at least I know the difference between a person with a **** and a person without one."
https://twitter.com/ceecuk/status/1624886239059910658?s=20&t=7XIOA6SWz-ALi6KMNjbJxA
When two of the top politicians who pushed for Brexit before it was fashionable are being called "not proper leavers"... It's a rum do, isn't it?
Friendship with and links to Modi are perhaps his dodgiest social views.
In this thread, people of the same ilk are now wondering whether Starmer will be PM for 2, 5 or 10 years. And the main, facile and repetitive charge against him is "he's no Tony Blair". Well, quite - if that's the best dirt that can be thrown at him, good luck.
(I didn't actually vote for him as leader, so I've no axe to grind. But the lack of credit he's given for what he's achieved in less than three years seems rather churlish).
But if that is all true, then the greatest politician of our age was brought down by his own side, who for unknown reasons despised him, which proves he cannot be so great after all since they succeeded.
I can get away with stuff, because I am Boris Johnson.
Technically, it's a lesson of sorts.
And, really, in what way are we to credit Starmer for the Tory self-destruction by way of Paterson, Covid Lockdown Party Time, Pincher and the Truss Fiasco?
The Tories would still be doing badly now with a more radical seeming Labour leader, a less professional one, because they have inflicted a lot of their own wounds. But they'd be doing less badly if Labour were repulsing more people. Just as Boris would have not have done so well in 2019 had he not attracted some people, not merely that Corbyn repulsed many (and that the combination of those two outnumbered those he himself repulsed).
On the whole evangelicals accept as a fact among their membership divorce and remarriage, and quite often perform remarriages and blessings thereof.
Jesus bans all or most divorce (depends which gospel) and all remarriage without exception. Paul bans all remarriage.
The contrast between this and their attitude to gays in stark and interesting. Despite the rhetoric it appears to be little to do with a consistent line on the bible.
28 July 2010
https://www.whatsonstage.com/west-end-theatre/news/boris-johnson-turned-into-toad-next-to-city-hall_12527.html
Yes, it's unpopular and yes, exempting domestic fuel from VAT couldn't happen under EU rules.
But the Major government introduced that tax because it really needed the money to pay its bills. And no subsequent government (or imaginable future government) has been or looks likely to be comfortable enough fiscally to do differently.
So that's a specific Brexit freedom that is
locked off to us by other factors. Question is- what else falls in that category, or the neighbouring one of "we could exercise that freedom, but the costs would outweigh the benefits"?
Starmer is polling 48% because he’s seen as competent and electable. Nobody else who actually ran for the leadership would be doing as well as him.
Or people want to suggest that RLB would?
The goalposts will forever be shifted. People just cannot accept that he is good.
Neither were his main message though. He was much tougher on Pharisees and hypocrites who profess piety yet persecute others.
What happened to the Colombia balloon?
If the Montana object didn't exist, what caused the radar malfunction or misinterpretation, bearing in mind the report that the Alaska object affected sensors? Montana isn't quite Nevada but it has a long history of meep meep UFO sightings.
I will watch "The Wandering Earth" tonight to get more of a handle on the Chinese side of this. Then the prequel if I can find an English dub. F*** subtitles.
The US military are deliberately giving the impression they don't know what's going on. Which doesn't mean it's false. But they are deliberately doing it. They didn't have to say "Some pilots reported sensor influence. Some didn't" - unless they wanted to.
Unlikely that none of the three smaller objects have been recovered.
Further proof the LDs are now the posh party, not the Tories
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/02/13/countess-castle-steeped-tory-history-wins-blue-wall-council/
Starmer also deserves credit for what he's achieved within the party, including the very good party discipline, though that's of no interest to voters, understandably.
I don't agree with sweeping away EU law for the sake of it either, but I absolutely agree that it should be done where it is clear that there is an advantage in doing so. Hopefully you would agree.
Rishi Sunak has vowed to review the Equalities Act to stop the "woke nonsense" he claims is "permeating public life".
People who think they are believers in biblical authority, infallibility etc - in the Protestant tradition mostly called evangelicals - tend to have a rather strained and selective approach when you look at: money, wealth, war, and the contrast between rules for heteros (remarriage OK) and rules for gays (go away).
Well fancy that. Why on earth could this be? The degree of self interest creeping in is to say the least disheartening.
Some of the quirks of sexual ethics come from there.
The Telegraph has clearly accepted defeat.
This titled also, how to avoid tax and paying for our public services - fuck the poor
Either way, and fortunately for KC3 and the QC, he doesn't seem bothered.
Some alien qarasht have been observing earth since World War II, and made a profitable movie of that conflict. Inspired by that success, they set up many more recording devices -- at great expense -- and waited for World War III. And the war didn't come, and didn't come, partly because of technology that humans have been getting from other alien species.
And so the qarasht in this company (as I suppose we can call it) are bankrupt. Their society has rather strict rules on bankruptcy, so when they return home, as they must, they will go into organ banks, in pieces, to be given to more successful qarasht who need transplants.
(Do I think there is anything to this? No, but it seems as plasuible as some of the other suggestions I've seen here, though less plausible than a UFO short story by Poul Anderson, "Peek! I See You!".)
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/weather-news/300806079/live-state-of-national-emergency-declared-gabrielle-smashes-nz
A state of emergency has been declared across the northern half of the North Island and Mrs Stodge is concerned about her mother in Napier where the power was cut off at 6.45pm (UK, 7.45am local). Hopefully all over there will get through this safe.
Not a vastly popular evangelical custom.
This passage seems particularly relevant:
Before that date (31 December 2023), Government Departments and the devolved Administrations will determine which retained EU law can be reformed to benefit the UK, which can expire, and which needs to be preserved and incorporated into domestic law in modified form. They will also decide if retained EU law needs to be codified as it is preserved, in order to preserve specific policy effects which are beneficial to keep.
The Bill includes an extension mechanism for the sunset of specified pieces of retained EU law until 2026. Should it be required, this will allow Departments additional time where necessary to implement more complex reforms to specific pieces of retained EU law, including any necessary legislation.
I agree that EU law that is right, must be retained and added to the domestic statute book, but that is the plan. It just won't have special status under the law by being 'EU law' any more. That is fair, and I can't see why anyone who is actually in favour of Brexit would disagree.
Leading Church of England liberal Catholics and Anglo Catholics tend to be ex public school and grammar school humanities and arts graduates from Oxbridge and other top
universities who like dressing up and proper BCP and incense filled communion
But, it's telling in itself, of course. Means he knows he can no longer win.
Radical socialist Jesus who doesn’t care what people do in bed is as anachronistic as the Jesus who blesses the missiles on their way to Beijing.