Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
The other day, an empty oil tanker, the Pablo, exploded off the Malaysian coast. Because it was empty, the risks of pollution are relatively minor (though the damage to the ship was very extensive).The Pablo is part of the dark fleet, and was probably involved with ship-to-ship transfers for oil deliveries to China.
Whether that oil came from Venezuela, Iran, or Russia, it highlights this trade, the sanctions-busting that is going on, and the generally lawlessness of much international shipping.
How have I not read this ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mummy! The Mummy! A Tale of the Twenty-Second Century is an 1827 three-volume novel written by Jane Webb (later Jane C. Loudon). It concerns the Egyptian mummy of Cheops, who is brought back to life in the year 2126. The novel describes a future filled with advanced technology,[1] and was the first English-language story to feature a reanimated mummy...
Will put that right on my fortuitously free Monday.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
I am sick of hearing.about Chelsea success. Let them spend billions and fail. The schadenfreude is and will be almost equal to that of seeing the SNP being brought to.book.
At last, one of your visceral dislikes I share. We can bond over Chelsphobia.
Republican former attorney general defending the indefensible.
Mukasey: If I were a district judge and somebody wanted to fly me on his private plane on a vacation with his family, I were friendly with that person, would I have refused and endangered the friendship? I’m not sure that I would’ve https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1653449028326117376
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
So we reduce our Head of State to a bake-off vote, and someone no-one would even know of remember whilst flushing 1,500 years of history down the drain.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
If the monarchists are right then King Charles III would win an election for head of state.
What are the monarchists are afraid of?
Ah, now you've reverted again after a good pen gag.
I for one don't think Charles would win an election for Head of State, nor any of the royals. Once you introduce the element of election to it there'd be no real reason too. I'd not bother at that point. Some do think he or another royal would win, but I think they are wrong on that.
But seriously though, do you actually think 'Monachists, who don't support electing a head of state, are afraid to have an election for the head of state' is a cutting point? Because it really is not, it doesn't even make any sense - why would supporters of any position be tested to prove that by doing the opposite of what they support?
It'd make more sense to say why are they afraid of a referendum on the death of a monarch in order to confirm people do indeed still want to continue with the system - it'd be confirmatory, and they'd be confident of winning, but it also would still genuinely test public sentiment and apathy.
The swing in the R&W "Red Wall" polling from Conservative to Labour is 13.5% so pretty close to the England-wide 14% suggesting a uniformity across constituencies which we may or may not see played out on Thursday.
Looking at last night's numbers and taking out London, Wales and Scotland, I get Labour 46%, Conservatives 29%, Liberal Democrats 11%, Reform 8%, Green 5%.
That will include other areas with no votes such as Cornwall and is only indicative - nothing more.
We may be a lot wiser on Friday but somehow I doubt it.
I hope this locals election doesn’t distract too much from the coronation build up.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
So we reduce our Head of State to a bake-off vote, and someone no-one would even know of remember whilst flushing 1,500 years of history down the drain.
What a stupid idea.
France has a similar historic longevity. Italy even longer.
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
So we reduce our Head of State to a bake-off vote, and someone no-one would even know of remember whilst flushing 1,500 years of history down the drain.
What a stupid idea.
France has a similar historic longevity. Italy even longer.
France I'll grant you, on one way or another. Italy seems highly quesitonable given its fracturing for very long periods.
Why not? He hasn't really done anything too terrible. He's just pissed off the RedTops.
If we had King Harry, I and SSI have composed the Coronation Ode:
" I weep for Harry's Penis—it is dead! Oh, weep for the frost-bitten penis! though our tears Thaw not the frost which binds so dear a head! And thou, sad Hour, selected from all years To mourn our loss, rouse thy obscure compeers, And teach them thine own sorrow, say: "With me Died Harry's Penis"; till the Future dares Forget the Past, its fate and fame shall be An echo and a light unto eternity.
But, hark! What wonder do these yearning eyes behold If only in my own mind's eye! And more reflected in The gleaming orbs of a dusky consort from a far-flung Sun-kissed strand. Yea, the very squalls and squeals Of near-royal brats testify that the Princely knob Is fully thawed, newly risen, greatly driven ever forward, Onward for Harry, St George and Santa Barbara!”
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Actually LHG has a reasonably nice stately charm to it.
OTOH, Rule Britannia is the height of pretentiousness.
Republican former attorney general defending the indefensible.
Mukasey: If I were a district judge and somebody wanted to fly me on his private plane on a vacation with his family, I were friendly with that person, would I have refused and endangered the friendship? I’m not sure that I would’ve https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1653449028326117376
Jesus Christ, putting a position ahead of your personal interests is meant to be the whole point of public service.
How have I not read this ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mummy! The Mummy! A Tale of the Twenty-Second Century is an 1827 three-volume novel written by Jane Webb (later Jane C. Loudon). It concerns the Egyptian mummy of Cheops, who is brought back to life in the year 2126. The novel describes a future filled with advanced technology,[1] and was the first English-language story to feature a reanimated mummy...
Will put that right on my fortuitously free Monday.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
It's our equivalent of the Marseiilaise, which you can imagine the legions of Napoloen belting out, as they marched into battle.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
The US is governed, in substantial part, by the Supreme Court. Which is, these days, an unelected legislative chamber.
"these days"? Take it you aren't quite old enough to remember the Warren Court, and accompanying "Impeach Earl Warren" bill-boards? Or the "Impeach Roger Tanney" bonfires?
OR criticism of John Marshall for legislating from the bench, in overturning Acts of Congress as Marbury v Madison?
In other words, though this may surprise modern journalists (with attention spans shorter than gnats) nothing new under the Potomoc sun.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
The other day, an empty oil tanker, the Pablo, exploded off the Malaysian coast. Because it was empty, the risks of pollution are relatively minor (though the damage to the ship was very extensive).The Pablo is part of the dark fleet, and was probably involved with ship-to-ship transfers for oil deliveries to China.
Whether that oil came from Venezuela, Iran, or Russia, it highlights this trade, the sanctions-busting that is going on, and the generally lawlessness of much international shipping.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
It's our equivalent of the Marseiilaise, which you can imagine the legions of Napoloen belting out, as they marched into battle.
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Indeed, even Labour voters want to retain the monarchy 42% to 38%, as do 65% of LDs. It is not just Tories (even if an overwhelming 81% of Tory voters want to keep the monarchy according to Ashcroft's new poll).
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Actually LHG has a reasonably nice stately charm to it.
OTOH, Rule Britannia is the height of pretentiousness.
Nothing better to sing out loud when you plant your flag though 🎶
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
How long will you be doing this? Will it stop after Saturday?
Why not? He hasn't really done anything too terrible. He's just pissed off the RedTops.
If we had King Harry, I and SSI have composed the Coronation Ode:
" I weep for Harry's Penis—it is dead! Oh, weep for the frost-bitten penis! though our tears Thaw not the frost which binds so dear a head! And thou, sad Hour, selected from all years To mourn our loss, rouse thy obscure compeers, And teach them thine own sorrow, say: "With me Died Harry's Penis"; till the Future dares Forget the Past, its fate and fame shall be An echo and a light unto eternity.
But, hark! What wonder do these yearning eyes behold If only in my own mind's eye! And more reflected in The gleaming orbs of a dusky consort from a far-flung Sun-kissed strand. Yea, the very squalls and squeals Of near-royal brats testify that the Princely knob Is fully thawed, newly risen, greatly driven ever forward, Onward for Harry, St George and Santa Barbara!”
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Republican former attorney general defending the indefensible.
Mukasey: If I were a district judge and somebody wanted to fly me on his private plane on a vacation with his family, I were friendly with that person, would I have refused and endangered the friendship? I’m not sure that I would’ve https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1653449028326117376
Jesus Christ, putting a position ahead of your personal interests is meant to be the whole point of public service.
Please note, that Democrats in Oregon, have just forced Democratic Secretary of State out of office for abject failure to put public service before private gain.
How have I not read this ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mummy! The Mummy! A Tale of the Twenty-Second Century is an 1827 three-volume novel written by Jane Webb (later Jane C. Loudon). It concerns the Egyptian mummy of Cheops, who is brought back to life in the year 2126. The novel describes a future filled with advanced technology,[1] and was the first English-language story to feature a reanimated mummy...
Will put that right on my fortuitously free Monday.
The classic Victorian three volume novel!
Sadly the late queen was not crowned until ten years after it was published. But yes, an early version of that.
"Anybody can write a three-volume novel, it merely requires a complete ignorance of both life and literature" (Wilde)
Could be political smart, to drag the whole thing out as long as possible?
Seeing as how it's a load of caterpillar poop anyway, and ultimate ruling likely to reflect that?
Its amazing. They want to block the SueGray appointment to spite Starmer, and in Case's sake spite Gray.
Except that if as they now suggest Gray is compromised and therefore the Johnson enquiry (which cleared him...) was a political smear job, then surely Johnson should still be PM?
And the thing that really upsets civil servants who aren't Simon Case - a one year moratorium on their next job would rather screw up the career prospects of senior civil servants.
So having got very excited and lined up their client Officially-Not-News channels to provide news entertainment reporting about it, they have to pack up their tents. As going through with it would be far worse than the quick knee-trembler in the lift they were all excited about.
But I do get the vibe the government haven’t found much probing Suegate, and are backing off a bit. Nothing there for the papers to make a meal of to distract from the big coronation build up.
The swing in the R&W "Red Wall" polling from Conservative to Labour is 13.5% so pretty close to the England-wide 14% suggesting a uniformity across constituencies which we may or may not see played out on Thursday.
Looking at last night's numbers and taking out London, Wales and Scotland, I get Labour 46%, Conservatives 29%, Liberal Democrats 11%, Reform 8%, Green 5%.
That will include other areas with no votes such as Cornwall and is only indicative - nothing more.
We may be a lot wiser on Friday but somehow I doubt it.
I hope this locals election doesn’t distract too much from the coronation build up.
To be honest I have seen more union jacks, Crosses of Saint George and pictures of the King outside houses driving around campaigning than local election posters. Even if the yellow peril are trying their hardest to get their 'demand better!' diamonds up
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Just as "Singing in the Rain" is never the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange", "Land of Hope and Glory" is never the same after you've seen Ken Russell's "Elgar".
Could be political smart, to drag the whole thing out as long as possible?
Seeing as how it's a load of caterpillar poop anyway, and ultimate ruling likely to reflect that?
Its amazing. They want to block the SueGray appointment to spite Starmer, and in Case's sake spite Gray.
Except that if as they now suggest Gray is compromised and therefore the Johnson enquiry (which cleared him...) was a political smear job, then surely Johnson should still be PM?
And the thing that really upsets civil servants who aren't Simon Case - a one year moratorium on their next job would rather screw up the career prospects of senior civil servants.
So having got very excited and lined up their client Officially-Not-News channels to provide news entertainment reporting about it, they have to pack up their tents. As going through with it would be far worse than the quick knee-trembler in the lift they were all excited about.
When I was working with a civil service body, we couldn’t publish something with zero political or policy element because of purdah. Who on Earth thought they could publish something like this during purdah?
This government are committing murder in purdah.
Who enforces purdah? Just down to manners and respect of sitting government to rules for fairness and protect our democracy?
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Actually LHG has a reasonably nice stately charm to it.
OTOH, Rule Britannia is the height of pretentiousness.
Nothing better to sing out loud when you plant your flag though 🎶
How have I not read this ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mummy! The Mummy! A Tale of the Twenty-Second Century is an 1827 three-volume novel written by Jane Webb (later Jane C. Loudon). It concerns the Egyptian mummy of Cheops, who is brought back to life in the year 2126. The novel describes a future filled with advanced technology,[1] and was the first English-language story to feature a reanimated mummy...
Will put that right on my fortuitously free Monday.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
So we reduce our Head of State to a bake-off vote, and someone no-one would even know of remember whilst flushing 1,500 years of history down the drain.
What a stupid idea.
France has a similar historic longevity. Italy even longer.
France I'll grant you, on one way or another. Italy seems highly quesitonable given its fracturing for very long periods.
Yes, many of the apparent "oldest" countries and traditions are very questionable. Royal Britain is 300 years old, a recapitulation of a Brythonic concept that hadn't existed for 1000 years. France was a Viking-Med-Gaulish stew at first over-run by English aristocrats, even if many of them were still at least partially French by ancestry ; plus more than one form of royalist, or at least imperialist restoration - Napoleon, Louis Philippe, Louis Napoleon. Italy was a French-Spanish-Austrian-run patchwork for centuries. Greece lost control of its culture for almost five centuries, and the ancient Byzantine monarchy disappeared.
Interestingly, I think Germany and Japan had various shades of longer unbroken monarchical history than most, and look how that worked out.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Just as "Singing in the Rain" is never the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange".
Republican former attorney general defending the indefensible.
Mukasey: If I were a district judge and somebody wanted to fly me on his private plane on a vacation with his family, I were friendly with that person, would I have refused and endangered the friendship? I’m not sure that I would’ve https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1653449028326117376
Jesus Christ, putting a position ahead of your personal interests is meant to be the whole point of public service.
The idea that one might endanger a friendship by declining an annual bung of around half a million dollars travel benefits is an exceedingly odd one. Or the friendship is.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Just as "Singing in the Rain" is never the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange", "Land of Hope and Glory" is never the same after you've seen Ken Russell's "Elgar".
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
How long will you be doing this? Will it stop after Saturday?
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Pathetic.
Only the most credulous, buy it.
The Conservative Party is a barrier towards right wing policies, rather than an implementer of them. You should be careful what you wish for.
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Just as "Singing in the Rain" is never the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange", "Land of Hope and Glory" is never the same after you've seen Ken Russell's "Elgar".
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Pathetic.
Only the most credulous, buy it.
The Conservative Party is a barrier towards right wing policies, rather than an implementer of them. You should be careful what you wish for.
Yes, the only real replacement for the Tories would be a Farage led rightwing populist party like RefUK.
Though it would have less reach to the centre than the Tories do so would likely still need the rump Tories to form a government (remember in 2015 Tories and UKIP and DUP combined had 50% of the UK vote, 50.4% with the UUP)
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Pathetic.
Only the most credulous, buy it.
The Conservative Party is a barrier towards right wing policies, rather than an implementer of them. You should be careful what you wish for.
I used to think that. Now I’m not so sure.
I think it’s bullshit.
True right wing believers are <25% of voters. They can be safely ignored, under fptp.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Just as "Singing in the Rain" is never the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange".
Beethoven's 9th!
Yes, actually quite of a lot of things are not the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange". The William Tell Overture is another.
The swing in the R&W "Red Wall" polling from Conservative to Labour is 13.5% so pretty close to the England-wide 14% suggesting a uniformity across constituencies which we may or may not see played out on Thursday.
Looking at last night's numbers and taking out London, Wales and Scotland, I get Labour 46%, Conservatives 29%, Liberal Democrats 11%, Reform 8%, Green 5%.
That will include other areas with no votes such as Cornwall and is only indicative - nothing more.
We may be a lot wiser on Friday but somehow I doubt it.
I hope this locals election doesn’t distract too much from the coronation build up.
To be honest I have seen more union jacks, Crosses of Saint George and pictures of the King outside houses driving around campaigning than local election posters. Even if the yellow peril are trying their hardest to get their 'demand better!' diamonds up
Just consider every Union flag flyer a Conservative voter. Consider all the flag wavers of St George, voters lost to Reform.
I wonder if any surreptitiously republican organists will dare play the arrangement of God Save The King from Common Praise (the 2000 edition of Hymns Ancient & Modern) this weekend.
It's Elgar. An Elgar arrangement of the National Anthem. What could be more English. Who could possibly object to this?
Republican former attorney general defending the indefensible.
Mukasey: If I were a district judge and somebody wanted to fly me on his private plane on a vacation with his family, I were friendly with that person, would I have refused and endangered the friendship? I’m not sure that I would’ve https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1653449028326117376
Jesus Christ, putting a position ahead of your personal interests is meant to be the whole point of public service.
The idea that one might endanger a friendship by declining an annual bung of around half a million dollars travel benefits is an exceedingly odd one. Or the friendship is.
Harlan Crow is certainly a very odd man.
He's also a very powerful man. Not everyone owns one-ninth of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Garryowen would be a good anthem. “The best military tune in the world”, as Teddy Roosevelt put it.
Association with US 7th Cavalry and George Armstrong Custer makes it problematic as anthem, in these wokish times.
Of course, that's what the Rough Rider liked about it - musical accompaniment for empire and genocide. (TR had his good points, but this was NOT one of 'em).
That was sort of why I was recommending it.
The same way people want to replace God Save The King with Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory.
Plenty of modern regiments have Garryowen, though.
I'd consider Land of Hope and Glory an upgrade.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
Just as "Singing in the Rain" is never the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange".
Beethoven's 9th!
Yes, actually quite of a lot of things are not the same after you've seen "A Clockwork Orange". The William Tell Overture is another.
"No time for the old Monarchism, luv! I've just come to read the meter!"
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar thing with our Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Sure, but for me a ceremonial president is also pretentious - I don't see the need for such ceremony if you are just electing another politician, even one who will generally not stoop (at least in theory).
So elect a president with a deeper purpose, and lower the pretention that way.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
I actually think our monarchy, or rather our culture which will determine how the monarchy changes, is a bit more adaptible.
Republican former attorney general defending the indefensible.
Mukasey: If I were a district judge and somebody wanted to fly me on his private plane on a vacation with his family, I were friendly with that person, would I have refused and endangered the friendship? I’m not sure that I would’ve https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1653449028326117376
Jesus Christ, putting a position ahead of your personal interests is meant to be the whole point of public service.
The idea that one might endanger a friendship by declining an annual bung of around half a million dollars travel benefits is an exceedingly odd one. Or the friendship is.
Harlan Crow is certainly a very odd man.
He's also a very powerful man. Not everyone owns one-ninth of the Supreme Court of the United States.
The quote honestly gets worse the more I think about it. I mean, it's basically 'You wouldn't want to upset a man offering you such huge financial goodies would you?'
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Well as leftwingers like you are generally embarassed about being British anyway, except in terms of the NHS, why should we care that you feel the same about our monarchy?
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. Beautiful ,but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but different world.
I recall Bill Bryson's description essentially being it's the most grand and imperial city possible. Sounds nice for a visit, though I can see the point it might see a little out of place now.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Well as leftwingers like you are generally embarassed about being British anyway, except in terms of the NHS, why should we care that you feel the same about our monarchy?
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Well as leftwingers like you are generally embarassed about being British anyway, except in terms of the NHS, why should we care that you feel the same about our monarchy?
The USA is a left-wing country?
The only thing most leftwingers like about the USA is it is a republic
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar thing with our Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Sure, but for me a ceremonial president is also pretentious - I don't see the need for such ceremony if you are just electing another politician, even one who will generally not stoop (at least in theory).
So elect a president with a deeper purpose, and lower the pretention that way.
Not so dated and embarrassing and inappropriate if it's scaled down and head of state only for the UK not for umpteen former colonies.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. Beautiful ,but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but different world.
I recall Bill Bryson's description essentially being it's the most grand and imperial city possible. Sounds nice for a visit, though I can see the point it might see a little out of place now.
Budapest cheaper, and nicer. Even infested by Viktor Orban.
I vow to thee my country, needs to make an appearance too.
Zadok is a given, but will be sublime - as it always is.
Always? Were you around last time? I was and sang it in a choir.
The Scottish Chamber Orchestra and chorus performed it at the Edinburgh Festival Fireworks Concert in 2008.
It was incredible, but sadly the rehearsal was better than the show
Because of the weather?
No, the performance. Maybe it was just the expectation, but at the rehearsal when the chorus joined in the effect was awesome (literally) but during the show it was merely great
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar thing with our Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Sure, but for me a ceremonial president is also pretentious - I don't see the need for such ceremony if you are just electing another politician, even one who will generally not stoop (at least in theory).
So elect a president with a deeper purpose, and lower the pretention that way.
Not so dated and embarrassing and inappropriate if it's scaled down and head of state only for the UK not for umpteen former colonies.
To be honest I would rather have an executive President Johnson or President Blair than some nonentity ex politician who only becomes a ceremonial President as a consolation prize after losing a general election, like Steinmeier in Germany after Merkel beat him in 2009. Keeping our constitutional monarchy best of all however
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
I actually think our monarchy, or rather our culture which will determine how the monarchy changes, is a bit more adaptible.
It is. Great to visit but to live in as a foreigner ... challenging.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2 it is remarkably well preserved.
There is a melancholy of post imperial decline about its palaces and churches, beautifully described by Stefan Zweig in his "The World of Yesterday".
Comments
Pensive, in fact
😀
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
Maybe he got them confused with fountain pen cartridges ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mummy!
The Mummy! A Tale of the Twenty-Second Century is an 1827 three-volume novel written by Jane Webb (later Jane C. Loudon). It concerns the Egyptian mummy of Cheops, who is brought back to life in the year 2126. The novel describes a future filled with advanced technology,[1] and was the first English-language story to feature a reanimated mummy...
Will put that right on my fortuitously free Monday.
But, if that were ever likely, the Wokies would have a meltdown.
I can't think of anything more tub-thumping and ball-bustingly patriotic than it on earth.
“The best thing I can do to support the people of this agency is to resign.”
https://www.wweek.com/news/2023/05/02/oregon-secretary-of-state-shemia-fagan-resigns/
SSI - Not the first politico, whose fool head the Willamette Week has put on the chopping block.
Mukasey: If I were a district judge and somebody wanted to fly me on his private plane on a vacation with his family, I were friendly with that person, would I have refused and endangered the friendship? I’m not sure that I would’ve
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1653449028326117376
What a stupid idea.
I for one don't think Charles would win an election for Head of State, nor any of the royals. Once you introduce the element of election to it there'd be no real reason too. I'd not bother at that point. Some do think he or another royal would win, but I think they are wrong on that.
But seriously though, do you actually think 'Monachists, who don't support electing a head of state, are afraid to have an election for the head of state' is a cutting point? Because it really is not, it doesn't even make any sense - why would supporters of any position be tested to prove that by doing the opposite of what they support?
It'd make more sense to say why are they afraid of a referendum on the death of a monarch in order to confirm people do indeed still want to continue with the system - it'd be confirmatory, and they'd be confident of winning, but it also would still genuinely test public sentiment and apathy.
" I weep for Harry's Penis—it is dead!
Oh, weep for the frost-bitten penis! though our tears
Thaw not the frost which binds so dear a head!
And thou, sad Hour, selected from all years
To mourn our loss, rouse thy obscure compeers,
And teach them thine own sorrow, say: "With me
Died Harry's Penis"; till the Future dares
Forget the Past, its fate and fame shall be
An echo and a light unto eternity.
But, hark! What wonder do these yearning eyes behold
If only in my own mind's eye! And more reflected in
The gleaming orbs of a dusky consort from a far-flung
Sun-kissed strand. Yea, the very squalls and squeals
Of near-royal brats testify that the Princely knob
Is fully thawed, newly risen, greatly driven ever forward,
Onward for Harry, St George and Santa Barbara!”
OTOH, Rule Britannia is the height of pretentiousness.
OR criticism of John Marshall for legislating from the bench, in overturning Acts of Congress as Marbury v Madison?
In other words, though this may surprise modern journalists (with attention spans shorter than gnats) nothing new under the Potomoc sun.
Who is wronger, republicans or Roger?
It's a tough one.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/2023/05/02/footage-captures-moment-oil-tanker-explodes-off-coast-of-malaysia/
Indeed the only main party voters who want a republic are SNP voters but even their supporters are only 51% in favour of a republic
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-12034755/Majority-British-republicans-motivated-principle-new-poll-finds.html
https://twitter.com/BenKearns6/status/1613609451063214085/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1613609451063214085¤tTweetUser=BenKearns6
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Pathetic.
Only the most credulous, buy it.
But yes, an early version of that.
"Anybody can write a three-volume novel, it merely requires a complete ignorance of both life and literature"
(Wilde)
Who enforces purdah? Just down to manners and respect of sitting government to rules for fairness and protect our democracy?
Interestingly, I think Germany and Japan had various shades of longer unbroken monarchical history than most, and look how that worked out.
Harlan Crow is certainly a very odd man.
I can't watch that scene.
Get some rest.
Go to bed.
LAB: 44% (+1)
CON: 29% (-1)
LDEM: 11% (+2)
GRN: 4% (-1)
REF: 4% (-1)
Back to a 15-point lead for Labour and the LDs sweeping all before them (to a couple of points).
Try harder.
And in the case of Thomas, I think you might be surprised.
Zadok is a given, but will be sublime - as it always is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-nRObY1uFs&ab_channel=QuentinTarantinoFanClub
Though it would have less reach to the centre than the Tories do so would likely still need the rump Tories to form a government (remember in 2015 Tories and UKIP and DUP combined had 50% of the UK vote, 50.4% with the UUP)
I think it’s bullshit.
True right wing believers are <25% of voters. They can be safely ignored, under fptp.
The Sex Pistols and Punk Rock being another example of radicalism in Britain, and something to be proud of.
It's Elgar. An Elgar arrangement of the National Anthem. What could be more English. Who could possibly object to this?
The Conservative Party is a barrier towards right wing policies, rather than an implementer of them. You should be careful what you wish for.
I used to think that. Now I’m not so sure.
I think it’s bullshit.
True right wing believers are <25% of voters. They can be safely ignored, under fptp.</p>
I think you're kidding yourself that the 75% are Republicans who loathe Brexit. That is a common delusion on here.
So elect a president with a deeper purpose, and lower the pretention that way.
I actually think our monarchy, or rather our culture which will determine how the monarchy changes, is a bit more adaptible.
Well, no, and that's the point!
It was incredible, but sadly the rehearsal was better than the show
"Lloyd George Knew My Father, Father Knew Lloyd George!"
My other, more serious nominations:
"Ferry Cross the Mersey" and "To Sir, With Love"
I think it’s bullshit.
True right wing believers are <25% of voters. They can be safely ignored, under fptp.</p>
I think you're kidding yourself that the 75% are Republicans who loathe Brexit. That is a common delusion on here.'
The Republicans who loathe Brexit are also <25%, even most Remainers back the monarchy
There is a melancholy of post imperial decline about its palaces and churches, beautifully described by Stefan Zweig in his "The World of Yesterday".