Berlusconi also privatised industries, reduced bureaucracy and taxes which were strangling Italian small businesses and was probably the most recognised and influential Italian leader on the world stage since WW2.
Good article. I know some object but I like these longer articles you can get your teeth into. Some things need to be set out in a comprehensive and articulate manner.
Good article. I know some object but I like these longer articles you can get your teeth into. Some things need to be set out in a comprehensive and articulate manner.
Very good header cyclefree. I think this is the important point for the next few days - "Boris understands none of this. Nor do his supporters."
Clearly Boris does understand, clearly nearly all of his allies do too. The important thing for all of them is to work out quite how to row back a little (well a lot).
If Boris goes all Trump it'll be a very sad day in British politics, and we've had today which is quite sad enough.
The best thing about today's news was that it was unanimous. Whilst I, and no doubt others, and really most people, might suspect Harriet Harman of potentially having a mean streak, the same cannot be said of all members of the committee.
Also to be questioned here is Sunak's Accidental Hero routine. Politically, it looks like a good move, he has got some credit for kicking back against Boris. He wasn't honourable over Boris's honours list though, he sought merely to avoid by elections by knocking back the MPs, including the blameless Alok Sharma, whilst it appears another Katie Boulter lookalike that Boris was strangely garnering proferment for, got through unscathed (and through HOLAC). Some white knight Sunak.
You may not like the MPs, and Dorries has proven herself inappropriate again, but nominating former ministers, of whatever quality, for honours is not, per se, corrupt.
I think the key part of the header is about attacking the process rather than the outcome.
And the thing is it is not as though processes are beyond criticism. But Boris and co are not sincerely criticising the process - just as with the Paterson attempt the process is mischaracterised, or even simply made up. So you have the assertion Paterson hadn't been able to defend himself, that Boris was being expelled by a small group of MPs etc, in essence to attempt to present him as having no choice but to resign, rather than continue to fight along the terms of the process as he could have, and should have.
Disagreement with a judgement or outcome is presented as a failure of the process itself, eg you've ruled against me you must be biased/have ignored evidence/ignored law. Yes, if things had gone the other way some would have attacked an overly weak process, but we can only deal with the scenario in front of us - and Boris quitting shows he lacks confidence even his core supporters would judge him kindly. It enables him to pillory the process, without letting it reach its full conclusion, as he and supporters will for eternity claim he was forced out by an evil cabal of MPs when he was not. Or if he was, the people could have saved him.
Humza appears to just be so used to praising and backing Sturgeon he cannot stop, even if he hardly needed to come out against her, given the stage of the process and that it might all come to nothing, so proper caution in tone would be fine.
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that Huma Yousaf's comments were out of order. Firstly, they were made privately. That they are in the public domain is not, it would seem, the work of his allies. Secondly, the comments were about an internal party matters. There's nothing about the legal process that says someone should or shold not be suspended from their political party whilst there is an investigation. Clearly opinions within the SNP appear to diverge on whether that should happen, but it is emphatically not a legal question.
So private comments made as the leader of a political party about the suspension or otherwise of party membership, is a long, long way away from public comments about the guilt or innocence from the First Minister.
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that Huma Yousaf's comments were out of order. Firstly, they were made privately. That they are in the public domain is not, it would seem, the work of his allies. Secondly, the comments were about an internal party matters. There's nothing about the legal process that says someone should or shold not be suspended from their political party whilst there is an investigation. Clearly opinions within the SNP appear to diverge on whether that should happen, but it is emphatically not a legal question.
So private comments made as the leader of a political party about the suspension or otherwise of party membership, is a long, long way away from public comments about the guilt or innocence from the First Minister.
A long way away, but on the same kind of path. Given the state of the party those private comments were bound to become public, and even if they weren't, a smidgeon of caution whilst still backing her would probably not be amiss. Why would things being private be better than being public anyway? Sometimes it might even be the reverse.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that Huma Yousaf's comments were out of order. Firstly, they were made privately. That they are in the public domain is not, it would seem, the work of his allies. Secondly, the comments were about an internal party matters. There's nothing about the legal process that says someone should or shold not be suspended from their political party whilst there is an investigation. Clearly opinions within the SNP appear to diverge on whether that should happen, but it is emphatically not a legal question.
So private comments made as the leader of a political party about the suspension or otherwise of party membership, is a long, long way away from public comments about the guilt or innocence from the First Minister.
I disagree. It is naive to think his comments would not be made public. He should not have made any comment at all about whether or not his colleagues should support Sturgeon or not. The proper course was to say nothing other than (a) there is a live investigation; (b) the police and prosecution authorities should do their job without any commentary from politicians; and (c) no-one in the SNP will be saying anything until that process has concluded and a decision made.
The question of suspension is different. I note only that Sturgeon was quick to suspend but her allies now expect her to be treated differently. How very like Boris.
One issue parties with leaders who are seen as embodying that issue - whether Brexit or independence - are a cancer in our body politic. It leads to arrogance, hubris and very bad governance. Scotland under the SNP has been as badly governed as Britain has under the Tories.
demanding fealty for a potential criminal. Dangerously stupid
It's the trendy thing thesedays - parties really want to push the limits of partisan support.
I don't think she will end up being charged (or anyone for that matter), but it'd be worth it (even if then dropped), just to see whether he would pull back at that formal stage, or double down. After all, as some of Salmond's mob could tell us, you can be 'vindicated' in the end.
Good article. I know some object but I like these longer articles you can get your teeth into. Some things need to be set out in a comprehensive and articulate manner.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Perfect - 300 MPs can descend on Uxbridge, avoid voting on the report and let the big man know they are on his side really, then insist they would have voted against him but they were so busy fighting hard for the party.
Tellingly, Tory whips have offered “slips” (permission to skip the Commons) for Monday to MPs willing to go and campaign in the by-election seats, I'm told
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that Huma Yousaf's comments were out of order. Firstly, they were made privately. That they are in the public domain is not, it would seem, the work of his allies. Secondly, the comments were about an internal party matters. There's nothing about the legal process that says someone should or shold not be suspended from their political party whilst there is an investigation. Clearly opinions within the SNP appear to diverge on whether that should happen, but it is emphatically not a legal question.
So private comments made as the leader of a political party about the suspension or otherwise of party membership, is a long, long way away from public comments about the guilt or innocence from the First Minister.
A long way away, but on the same kind of path. Given the state of the party those private comments were bound to become public, and even if they weren't, a smidgeon of caution whilst still backing her would probably not be amiss. Why would things being private be better than being public anyway? Sometimes it might even be the reverse.
If the First Minister was exerting pressure on an ongoing legal case, I'd want it out in the public because he'd deserve to be hauled over the coals for it. Since it appears that the meeting in question was about party membership and party discipline, I don't think it's anywhere near as interesting as Cyclefree wants it to be.
Er no - I could have added much more about how the police are being attacked for doing their job, that this is all a conspiracy against the blessed Nicola etc.,. The SNP are I'm afraid behaving in a similar way to the Boris backers and Yousaf's explanation makes it worse. He should have said the bare minimum.
There is absolutely no reason - for party discipline - to make any comments on a live police investigation. I take the same approach on this as I would do were this a police investigation of a senior manager in, say, a financial institution.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
It should not have been dismissed as vociferously as some in the world did, at such an early stage. Even something later revealed to be a complete conspiracy might be plausible at its outset, as at least a possibility.
Though if they are beta I dread to think what might come below.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
You don’t seem to be aware that nothing marks you as Gamma as much as labelling people as Beta etc.
Somewhat like pontificating on how hard or cool you are.
The row between Twitter and the music publishers has been running for years. Who goes to Twitter to find music?
Indeed. Like creators acting like people go to 20 seconds of an hour long youtube video to enjoy their work, and prevent people sampling that tiny part for a throwaway gag.
demanding fealty for a potential criminal. Dangerously stupid
It's the trendy thing thesedays - parties really want to push the limits of partisan support.
I don't think she will end up being charged (or anyone for that matter), but it'd be worth it (even if then dropped), just to see whether he would pull back at that formal stage, or double down. After all, as some of Salmond's mob could tell us, you can be 'vindicated' in the end.
It's an insane move by Yousaf, even if Sturgeon is entirely exonerated. It's the sort of shit that happens in totalitarian countries, as @Cyclefree implies
The Leader is above Critique. The Caudillo is never wrong. How dare you say that about the Tsar
Yousaf was doing OK, I thought (against very low expectations admittedly), but he has managed to surprise on the downside on this, and in an explosive way
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
You don’t seem to be aware that nothing marks you as Gamma as much as labelling people as Beta etc.
Somewhat like pontificating on how hard or cool you are.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Saw a claim Boris allies were moaning about the vindictiveness of the committee report. That's another good one people use a lot, which at its base comes down to the previously mentioned 'You found against me, therefore you hate me, and therefore your decision was flawed'.
In part I think its done in hope criticisms are couched in more general, technical terms, thereby allowing the guilty party to act as though their conduct was benign and its all over the top reaction, or confuse the issue around what it is about at all.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Yebbut Coldplay are shite, like.
They really aren't
Viva La Vida is one of the most stirring pop songs of the 21st century. It is impossible to listen to it without thinking Oooh, yeah, as you clock those brilliant opening bars
They've written three or four other classic songs, as well. Along with lots of crud, for sure
But that is three or four classics more than most pop music acts
OK my lunchtime trolling in the By the By Coffeeshop, in Staunton Virginia, is done, and I am disturbingly attracted to a Milfy blonde sat right down next to me, and to avoid looking at her legs and being labelled a sick, ageing British perv I am going to get in my car and drive to Monticello
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
Nor do I. It is a really weird mental syndrome. And most (not all) of the mad anti lab leakers seem to be on the left - here and elsewhere
Why this political division on a subject of basic science?! Is it Trump? Still? Really??
Is it coz "lab leak" is deemed racist? How is it less racist than saying it came from cruel Chinese with filthy eating habits guzzling bat soup in a squalid market?
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
I an not offended by it as a Hypothesis, just someone pretending that it is proven.
I don't know the origin of covid, and it may well be that no-one knows. I suspect that we will never know for sure as it is not a neutral subject, and vested interests are not objective in how they look at evidence.
The row between Twitter and the music publishers has been running for years. Who goes to Twitter to find music?
Indeed. Like creators acting like people go to 20 seconds of an hour long youtube video to enjoy their work, and prevent people sampling that tiny part for a throwaway gag.
Copyright is a bit of a dog's breakfast.
The worst thing about copyright at the moment, in music specifically, is the proliferation of lawsuits picking apart pop music to find certain sequences of notes in songs, the use of which apparently can constitute plagiarism because that the same sequence can be found in another song - even if barely anyone had ever heard it before.
I'm not a fan of Ed Sheeran's music at all, but I have found a lot of respect for him given the amount of time he's spent in court to explain music and songwriting, and not just leaving it to his lawyers.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Any person with judgement and independence of thought could see that Johnson was a wrong’un from the start. As I have told you several times based on the half day I spent with him in 2011.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Yebbut Coldplay are shite, like.
They really aren't
Viva La Vida is one of the most stirring pop songs of the 21st century. It is impossible to listen to it without thinking Oooh, yeah, as you clock those brilliant opening bars
They've written three or four other classic songs, as well. Along with lots of crud, for sure
But that is three or four classics more than most pop music acts
OK my lunchtime trolling in the By the By Coffeeshop, in Staunton Virginia, is done, and I am disturbingly attracted to a Milfy blonde sat right down next to me, and to avoid looking at her legs and being labelled a sick, ageing British perv I am going to get in my car and drive to Monticello
Later!
Disagree; it's boring middlebrow toss. Opinions innit. But enjoy your trip to Monticello!
I feel like this was one of the real killer parts of the Summary from the Committee report - it's such a common political tactic, all of them will have seen it before and probably used it before, but in the context of misleading the House (the only question was whether it will willful) such a tactic was probably doomed.
You just cannot pretend to be incredibly stupid but also completely on top of everything, or to be completely clear in your own mind on what you meant but unable to communicate that in a way without appearing to mean something completely different. Not credibly - if anything, if someone has some respect for Boris's abilities his defence on this one is more likely to fail. When you are reliant on twisting the meaning, people will cry foul.
[Boris] was deliberately disingenuous when he tried to reinterpret his statements to the House to avoid their plain meaning and reframe the clear impression that he intended to give, namely i) when he advanced unsustainable interpretations of the Rules and Guidance to advance the argument that the lack of social distancing at gatherings was permissible within the exceptions which allowed for gatherings, and ii) when he advanced legally impermissible reasons to justify the gatherings.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Yebbut Coldplay are shite, like.
They really aren't
Viva La Vida is one of the most stirring pop songs of the 21st century. It is impossible to listen to it without thinking Oooh, yeah, as you clock those brilliant opening bars
They've written three or four other classic songs, as well. Along with lots of crud, for sure
But that is three or four classics more than most pop music acts
OK my lunchtime trolling in the By the By Coffeeshop, in Staunton Virginia, is done, and I am disturbingly attracted to a Milfy blonde sat right down next to me, and to avoid looking at her legs and being labelled a sick, ageing British perv I am going to get in my car and drive to Monticello
Later!
Disagree; it's boring middlebrow toss. Opinions innit. But enjoy your trip to Monticello!
I agree. Coldplay are dreary and boring, but clearly have some fans out there. There are people that like Mrs Brown's Boys and 13 Crimes too. It takes all sorts.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
Nor do I. It is a really weird mental syndrome. And most (not all) of the mad anti lab leakers seem to be on the left - here and elsewhere
Why this political division on a subject of basic science?! Is it Trump? Still? Really??
Is it coz "lab leak" is deemed racist? How is it less racist than saying it came from cruel Chinese with filthy eating habits guzzling bat soup in a squalid market?
One of the oddities of the age
As Michael Moore says, I don't believe in conspiracy theories, apart from the ones that are true.
I've never been satisfied that David Kelly really did take his own life, for example.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Yebbut Coldplay are shite, like.
They are no Radiohead.
They're both just late era shoegaze . They're no Chapterhouse!
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
The row between Twitter and the music publishers has been running for years. Who goes to Twitter to find music?
Indeed. Like creators acting like people go to 20 seconds of an hour long youtube video to enjoy their work, and prevent people sampling that tiny part for a throwaway gag.
Copyright is a bit of a dog's breakfast.
The worst thing about copyright at the moment, in music specifically, is the proliferation of lawsuits picking apart pop music to find certain sequences of notes in songs, the use of which apparently can constitute plagiarism because that the same sequence can be found in another song - even if barely anyone had ever heard it before.
I'm not a fan of Ed Sheeran's music at all, but I have found a lot of respect for him given the amount of time he's spent in court to explain music and songwriting, and not just leaving it to his lawyers.
From a more innocent age the film 'Raising the Wind' - still worth watching, and very funny, has music copyright and imitation as one of its unlikely themes.
One of the most joyous and uplifting pop songs of the age. I see it has 825 MILLION views - so the world seems to agree with me rather than with the PB beta cucks
demanding fealty for a potential criminal. Dangerously stupid
It's the trendy thing thesedays - parties really want to push the limits of partisan support.
I don't think she will end up being charged (or anyone for that matter), but it'd be worth it (even if then dropped), just to see whether he would pull back at that formal stage, or double down. After all, as some of Salmond's mob could tell us, you can be 'vindicated' in the end.
It's an insane move by Yousaf, even if Sturgeon is entirely exonerated. It's the sort of shit that happens in totalitarian countries, as @Cyclefree implies
The Leader is above Critique. The Caudillo is never wrong. How dare you say that about the Tsar
Yousaf was doing OK, I thought (against very low expectations admittedly), but he has managed to surprise on the downside on this, and in an explosive way
One could almost say it is one law for Nicola, one law for Boris.
Now personally I think Yousaf is probably right not to suspend Sturgeon for now, especially as Sturgeon was only arrested and has not yet been charged let alone convicted.
However it is notable while the SNP were trashing Boris today on the report's conclusions and being fined in lockdown as the Devil incarnate, the SNP activists have been sending bunches of flowers to Sturgeon's home
I do envy the authors of the Committee report - like a fun legal judgement you get to have a bit of entertainment skewering the more ridiculous propositions put before the body/court, in impeccable committee speak. One example (don't worry, not going to spam).
It is inevitable that Ministers make mistakes and inadvertently mislead, and when they do, they are expected to correct the record at the earliest opportunity. This happens routinely. When a Minister makes an honest mistake and then corrects it, that is democracy working as it should. There is no basis for any fear that the requirement to be truthful with the House has a “chilling” effect on the ability of Ministers to be candid with the House. The House will also be understanding if a Minister declines to answer, for example, on matters which relate to national security or market sensitivity. But misleading intentionally or recklessly, refusing to answer legitimate questions, or failing to correct misleading statements, impedes or frustrates the functioning of the House and is a contempt
The row between Twitter and the music publishers has been running for years. Who goes to Twitter to find music?
Indeed. Like creators acting like people go to 20 seconds of an hour long youtube video to enjoy their work, and prevent people sampling that tiny part for a throwaway gag.
Copyright is a bit of a dog's breakfast.
The worst thing about copyright at the moment, in music specifically, is the proliferation of lawsuits picking apart pop music to find certain sequences of notes in songs, the use of which apparently can constitute plagiarism because that the same sequence can be found in another song - even if barely anyone had ever heard it before.
I'm not a fan of Ed Sheeran's music at all, but I have found a lot of respect for him given the amount of time he's spent in court to explain music and songwriting, and not just leaving it to his lawyers.
From a more innocent age the film 'Raising the Wind' - still worth watching, and very funny, has music copyright and imitation as one of its unlikely themes.
A while back I had an email from someone claiming copyright for a photo on my website, saying I had a certain amount of time to come to a settlement, legal action, etc, etc.
It was a photo I'd taken of the front of York Minster whilst I was on a walk. They had a link to the photo they thought I was infringing, and they were similar. Except theirs had an effing big lampost right in front of, and central to, the frame, whilst mine did not.
Evidently some algorithm had flagged the pictures up as being similar.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
Nor do I. It is a really weird mental syndrome. And most (not all) of the mad anti lab leakers seem to be on the left - here and elsewhere
Why this political division on a subject of basic science?! Is it Trump? Still? Really??
Is it coz "lab leak" is deemed racist? How is it less racist than saying it came from cruel Chinese with filthy eating habits guzzling bat soup in a squalid market?
One of the oddities of the age
It is absolutely still Trump IMHO. Because Trump can’t say anything with even an iota of merit ever.
The man appalls me but he did have the occasional genuine truth to power moments, often drowned out by his conspiracy bullshittery.
One of the most joyous and uplifting pop songs of the age. I see it has 825 MILLION views - so the world seems to agree with me rather than with the PB beta cucks
I’m not sure that’s quite the conclusive evidence you’re seeking. The 2009 Crazy Frog version of “Axel F” has over 3 billion views and the most viewed video ever on YouTube is the Baby Shark Dance with over 12 billion. So the word thinks a ringtone and a children’s a children's dance involving hand movements are better than Coldplay.
The New Statesman is, in the link, predicting the results at a GE not at a by-election where different factors are at play.
That is far more plausible then. Mid Beds looks like an obvious case where a stuunniingn win at a by-election would be reversed. Frankly. Selby looks a bit tight if that is a subsequent GE, it and Mid Beds are both very large majorities in normal circumstances.
A good piece by @Cyclefree in the main, though I don't think dragging in Starmer or Hamza add anything. Sure, they have as many questions to answer as any politician, but those are very different to Berlasconi or Johnson.
I think we have seen the end of Johnson this week, but I thought that of Berlesconi too, yet he seemed to come back regularly in Italian politics for far too long.
Populism on both right and left tends to burn itself out as it encompasses too many incompatible policies, and eventually is caught out by its own contraindications. It takes a long time though, and it seems quite likely that we are going to see a revival next year when Trump gets re-elected.
The row between Twitter and the music publishers has been running for years. Who goes to Twitter to find music?
Indeed. Like creators acting like people go to 20 seconds of an hour long youtube video to enjoy their work, and prevent people sampling that tiny part for a throwaway gag.
Copyright is a bit of a dog's breakfast.
The worst thing about copyright at the moment, in music specifically, is the proliferation of lawsuits picking apart pop music to find certain sequences of notes in songs, the use of which apparently can constitute plagiarism because that the same sequence can be found in another song - even if barely anyone had ever heard it before.
I'm not a fan of Ed Sheeran's music at all, but I have found a lot of respect for him given the amount of time he's spent in court to explain music and songwriting, and not just leaving it to his lawyers.
From a more innocent age the film 'Raising the Wind' - still worth watching, and very funny, has music copyright and imitation as one of its unlikely themes.
A while back I had an email from someone claiming copyright for a photo on my website, saying I had a certain amount of time to come to a settlement, legal action, etc, etc.
It was a photo I'd taken of the front of York Minster whilst I was on a walk. They had a link to the photo they thought I was infringing, and they were similar. Except theirs had an effing big lampost right in front of, and central to, the frame, whilst mine did not.
Evidently some algorithm had flagged the pictures up as being similar.
Bloody parasites. Like those patent trolls - get a rather broad patent, threaten to sue a bunch of people, some number will pay up and settle just to make it go away, and rake it in.
Good article. I know some object but I like these longer articles you can get your teeth into. Some things need to be set out in a comprehensive and articulate manner.
Thanks to @Cyclefree for yet another thought-provoking piece.
One of Johnson's greatest failings, in my view, was his determination to take proper accounting and scrutiny from Parliament and keep it with Ministers - HIS Ministers, Ministers who would serve at his discretion and whim. Too much has gone from Westminster to Whitehall and to the Cabinet table.
Depressingly, but not surprisingly given their track record, Labour are showing no interest in rolling any of this back but will simply enjoy the freedom from scrutiny, accountability and control which Boris Johnson and a pliant Party will provide. As we've seen with the right to protest, the only party more adept at authoritarianism than the Conservatives is Labour.
@Cyclefree may claim there is no requirement for constitutional change - I disagree. I believe there's a huge requirement for power to be returned from the Executive to the Legislature and for a rapid and comprehensive decentralisation and devolution of powers and responsibilities from Westminster to the directly elected local authorities which currently exist.
Ok, last one, but this paragraph truly is a laugher.
Mr Johnson has provided, under a statement of truth, explanations of the 16 events referred to in the recent material submitted to us by the Government. We have no evidence conflicting with his account. We do not wish to incur the further delay to our inquiry that would result from a detailed investigation of these events, and therefore we treat Mr Johnson’s explanations as prima facie true. If for any reasons it subsequently emerges that Mr Johnson’s explanations are not true, then he may have committed a further contempt.
Perfect - 300 MPs can descend on Uxbridge, avoid voting on the report and let the big man know they are on his side really, then insist they would have voted against him but they were so busy fighting hard for the party.
Tellingly, Tory whips have offered “slips” (permission to skip the Commons) for Monday to MPs willing to go and campaign in the by-election seats, I'm told
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
Nor do I. It is a really weird mental syndrome. And most (not all) of the mad anti lab leakers seem to be on the left - here and elsewhere
Why this political division on a subject of basic science?! Is it Trump? Still? Really??
Is it coz "lab leak" is deemed racist? How is it less racist than saying it came from cruel Chinese with filthy eating habits guzzling bat soup in a squalid market?
One of the oddities of the age
As Michael Moore says, I don't believe in conspiracy theories, apart from the ones that are true.
I've never been satisfied that David Kelly really did take his own life, for example.
That’s certainly an odd one. Some of the evidence seemed weak. I would ask though, who benefitted? His death mainly caused problems for Blair and the odious spinner from Burnley. He probably felt awful that he had been used or compromised, as he certainly was, by the BBC. He feared for his reputation and for his wife’s future if he lost his pension. All too plausible that he took his own life, sadly. And if he didn’t, who did and why?
One of the most joyous and uplifting pop songs of the age. I see it has 825 MILLION views - so the world seems to agree with me rather than with the PB beta cucks
A good piece by @Cyclefree in the main, though I don't think dragging in Starmer or Hamza add anything. Sure, they have as many questions to answer as any politician, but those are very different to Berlasconi or Johnson...
They are - but in Starmer's case in particular, he's claiming to offer a better alternative. We're entitled to judge him on that basis.
The New Statesman is, in the link, predicting the results at a GE not at a by-election where different factors are at play.
That is far more plausible then. Mid Beds looks like an obvious case where a stuunniingn win at a by-election would be reversed. Frankly. Selby looks a bit tight if that is a subsequent GE, it and Mid Beds are both very large majorities in normal circumstances.
If they're working on the new boundaries for Selby then it looks plausible enough to me for a GE. I've said before that the new boundaries make Selby a more interesting constituency, though probably still Tory leaning on the whole.
Thanks to @Cyclefree for yet another thought-provoking piece.
One of Johnson's greatest failings, in my view, was his determination to take proper accounting and scrutiny from Parliament and keep it with Ministers - HIS Ministers, Ministers who would serve at his discretion and whim. Too much has gone from Westminster to Whitehall and to the Cabinet table.
Depressingly, but not surprisingly given their track record, Labour are showing no interest in rolling any of this back but will simply enjoy the freedom from scrutiny, accountability and control which Boris Johnson and a pliant Party will provide. As we've seen with the right to protest, the only party more adept at authoritarianism than the Conservatives is Labour.
@Cyclefree may claim there is no requirement for constitutional change - I disagree. I believe there's a huge requirement for power to be returned from the Executive to the Legislature and for a rapid and comprehensive decentralisation and devolution of powers and responsibilities from Westminster to the directly elected local authorities which currently exist.
I agree to a certain extent but do not think you go nearly far enough. Personally I think politicians of all levels have forgotten they serve us....we don't serve them.
According to tonight's Standard, Nadine Dorries is delaying her resignation to prolong Sunak's problems with by elections. This means the LDs can concentrate on trying to achieve what I think would be a wholly remarkable success in Selby & Ainsty.
It would be a bigger triumph than David Austick's in Ripon in 1973 were it to come off. Austick managed a 25% swing to beat the Conservatives but the candidate now needs just over 26% to move past the Conservatives and I suspect there will be a Green candidate pushing hard to build on their 2022 success in Ouseburn.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
I an not offended by it as a Hypothesis, just someone pretending that it is proven.
I don't know the origin of covid, and it may well be that no-one knows. I suspect that we will never know for sure as it is not a neutral subject, and vested interests are not objective in how they look at evidence.
There is an accumulating amount of evidence that suggests plausibility to the lab leak theory for sure. Where I draw the line is the idea that it’s somehow been proven, or 99% so. At the start of the pandemic there was every reason to believe a natural origin, as virtually every other pandemic has had natural origins. Unless there is evidence of bubonic plague coming out of some mad alchemists lab out east? People will now say, ah, but the WIV is right there as if that’s the slam dunk. Yet MERS, SARS and the rest all started somewhere that wasn’t a lab.
We don’t know for sure. We probably never will be certain. And that’s a scientific stand point, not a hack travel reporter.
Perfect - 300 MPs can descend on Uxbridge, avoid voting on the report and let the big man know they are on his side really, then insist they would have voted against him but they were so busy fighting hard for the party.
Tellingly, Tory whips have offered “slips” (permission to skip the Commons) for Monday to MPs willing to go and campaign in the by-election seats, I'm told
I wouldn't be surprised to see Rishi spend most of Monday afternoon in Uxbridge too with the vast majority of his MPs along with a standard school and hospital visit.
In fact I doubt more than 50 Tory MPs will even turn up for the Boris report vote if that and those that do will be his hardcore fans like Mogg and Dorries or Boris haters like May and Davis.
The Report will be approved by the Commons but almost entirely only Opposition MPs will vote for it
I'm late to the party, having been out all day enjoying food and wine. However, I've now read Johnson's lengthy statement in response to the Privilege Committee's Report.
It is a deeply unpleasant, nasty, sneering, mendacious piece of work. It ought to make all those who still think that Boris is "a bit of laugh" think again. He really shows his true, vindictive colours throughout, but especially in his assault on Harman (who clearly didn't even need to use her Chair's casting vote given the unanimity of the Committee).
The bloke really is a complete shit, and that's my last word on the matter (possibly).
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
I an not offended by it as a Hypothesis, just someone pretending that it is proven.
I don't know the origin of covid, and it may well be that no-one knows. I suspect that we will never know for sure as it is not a neutral subject, and vested interests are not objective in how they look at evidence.
There is an accumulating amount of evidence that suggests plausibility to the lab leak theory for sure. Where I draw the line is the idea that it’s somehow been proven, or 99% so. At the start of the pandemic there was every reason to believe a natural origin, as virtually every other pandemic has had natural origins. Unless there is evidence of bubonic plague coming out of some mad alchemists lab out east? People will now say, ah, but the WIV is right there as if that’s the slam dunk. Yet MERS, SARS and the rest all started somewhere that wasn’t a lab.
We don’t know for sure. We probably never will be certain. And that’s a scientific stand point, not a hack travel reporter.
The last foot and mouth outbreak in the uk came from a lab
Perfect - 300 MPs can descend on Uxbridge, avoid voting on the report and let the big man know they are on his side really, then insist they would have voted against him but they were so busy fighting hard for the party.
Tellingly, Tory whips have offered “slips” (permission to skip the Commons) for Monday to MPs willing to go and campaign in the by-election seats, I'm told
I wouldn't be surprised to see Rishi spend most of Monday afternoon in Uxbridge too with the vast majority of his MPs along with a standard school and hospital visit.
In fact I doubt more than 50 Tory MPs will even turn up for the Boris report vote if that and those that do will be his hardcore fans or haters.
The Report will be approved by the Commons but almost entirely only Opposition MPs will vote for it
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
I an not offended by it as a Hypothesis, just someone pretending that it is proven.
I don't know the origin of covid, and it may well be that no-one knows. I suspect that we will never know for sure as it is not a neutral subject, and vested interests are not objective in how they look at evidence.
There is an accumulating amount of evidence that suggests plausibility to the lab leak theory for sure. Where I draw the line is the idea that it’s somehow been proven, or 99% so. At the start of the pandemic there was every reason to believe a natural origin, as virtually every other pandemic has had natural origins. Unless there is evidence of bubonic plague coming out of some mad alchemists lab out east? People will now say, ah, but the WIV is right there as if that’s the slam dunk. Yet MERS, SARS and the rest all started somewhere that wasn’t a lab.
We don’t know for sure. We probably never will be certain. And that’s a scientific stand point, not a hack travel reporter.
The last foot and mouth outbreak in the uk came from a lab
It did, but it’s not a novel pathogen. I also did specifically say virtually every…
The New Statesman is, in the link, predicting the results at a GE not at a by-election where different factors are at play.
That is far more plausible then. Mid Beds looks like an obvious case where a stuunniingn win at a by-election would be reversed. Frankly. Selby looks a bit tight if that is a subsequent GE, it and Mid Beds are both very large majorities in normal circumstances.
If they're working on the new boundaries for Selby then it looks plausible enough to me for a GE. I've said before that the new boundaries make Selby a more interesting constituency, though probably still Tory leaning on the whole.
Selby was Labour throughout the 7 years we lived there.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
I an not offended by it as a Hypothesis, just someone pretending that it is proven.
I don't know the origin of covid, and it may well be that no-one knows. I suspect that we will never know for sure as it is not a neutral subject, and vested interests are not objective in how they look at evidence.
There is an accumulating amount of evidence that suggests plausibility to the lab leak theory for sure. Where I draw the line is the idea that it’s somehow been proven, or 99% so. At the start of the pandemic there was every reason to believe a natural origin, as virtually every other pandemic has had natural origins. Unless there is evidence of bubonic plague coming out of some mad alchemists lab out east? People will now say, ah, but the WIV is right there as if that’s the slam dunk. Yet MERS, SARS and the rest all started somewhere that wasn’t a lab.
We don’t know for sure. We probably never will be certain. And that’s a scientific stand point, not a hack travel reporter.
The last foot and mouth outbreak in the uk came from a lab
It did, but it’s not a novel pathogen. I also did specifically say virtually every…
No but it is proof that lab leaks can happen and I suspect our facilities here are somewhat more tightly controlled than the one in wuhan. Whether a pathogen is novel or not has no bearing on can a pathogen get leaked from a lab
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
Nor do I. It is a really weird mental syndrome. And most (not all) of the mad anti lab leakers seem to be on the left - here and elsewhere
Why this political division on a subject of basic science?! Is it Trump? Still? Really??
Is it coz "lab leak" is deemed racist? How is it less racist than saying it came from cruel Chinese with filthy eating habits guzzling bat soup in a squalid market?
One of the oddities of the age
So, lab leak...
Yes, it's possible, it's always been possible. But the reaction against it has been mostly a reaction against the loons who were certain about it in the face of a complete lack of evidence.
Person 1: it came from the lab! There's a fucking lab right there! Person 2: that's not evidence, other viruses have come from a animals on the wild.
Person 1 hears themselves saying they're open minded, not convinced, waiting for evidence Person 2 hears person 1 saying no way is it a lab leak (which, given the lack of evidence either way, would also be ridiculous)
I'm still open minded, as there's no compelling evidence either way. Natural source is possible, lab leak is possible. But I suspect you'll accuse me of being a lab leak denier
If it is a lab leak, I do think we'll probably get the proof some day. Someone knows or strongly suspects of that's the case. The not from the lab angle is harder/near impossible to prove, absent discovery of earliest infections far from the lab, which is of course great for the lab leak fans.
The New Statesman is, in the link, predicting the results at a GE not at a by-election where different factors are at play.
That is far more plausible then. Mid Beds looks like an obvious case where a stuunniingn win at a by-election would be reversed. Frankly. Selby looks a bit tight if that is a subsequent GE, it and Mid Beds are both very large majorities in normal circumstances.
If they're working on the new boundaries for Selby then it looks plausible enough to me for a GE. I've said before that the new boundaries make Selby a more interesting constituency, though probably still Tory leaning on the whole.
Selby was Labour throughout the 7 years we lived there.
Yep, different boundaries again, I think? Although I don't know what they were. And at the height of new labour, was it?
A good piece by @Cyclefree in the main, though I don't think dragging in Starmer or Hamza add anything. Sure, they have as many questions to answer as any politician, but those are very different to Berlasconi or Johnson.
I think we have seen the end of Johnson this week, but I thought that of Berlesconi too, yet he seemed to come back regularly in Italian politics for far too long.
Populism on both right and left tends to burn itself out as it encompasses too many incompatible policies, and eventually is caught out by its own contraindications. It takes a long time though, and it seems quite likely that we are going to see a revival next year when Trump gets re-elected.
I think there are rather more similarities between the SNP under Sturgeon and the Tories under Boris than the SNP and its supporters care to admit.
I mentioned Starmer because he promises integrity and good judgment, trades on his DPP experience endlessly and, yet, when asked to make a judgment call, makes a truly repellent one. It is not a good start.
I do envy the authors of the Committee report - like a fun legal judgement you get to have a bit of entertainment skewering the more ridiculous propositions put before the body/court, in impeccable committee speak. One example (don't worry, not going to spam).
It is inevitable that Ministers make mistakes and inadvertently mislead, and when they do, they are expected to correct the record at the earliest opportunity. This happens routinely. When a Minister makes an honest mistake and then corrects it, that is democracy working as it should. There is no basis for any fear that the requirement to be truthful with the House has a “chilling” effect on the ability of Ministers to be candid with the House. The House will also be understanding if a Minister declines to answer, for example, on matters which relate to national security or market sensitivity. But misleading intentionally or recklessly, refusing to answer legitimate questions, or failing to correct misleading statements, impedes or frustrates the functioning of the House and is a contempt
Thanks to @Cyclefree for yet another thought-provoking piece.
One of Johnson's greatest failings, in my view, was his determination to take proper accounting and scrutiny from Parliament and keep it with Ministers - HIS Ministers, Ministers who would serve at his discretion and whim. Too much has gone from Westminster to Whitehall and to the Cabinet table.
Depressingly, but not surprisingly given their track record, Labour are showing no interest in rolling any of this back but will simply enjoy the freedom from scrutiny, accountability and control which Boris Johnson and a pliant Party will provide. As we've seen with the right to protest, the only party more adept at authoritarianism than the Conservatives is Labour.
@Cyclefree may claim there is no requirement for constitutional change - I disagree. I believe there's a huge requirement for power to be returned from the Executive to the Legislature and for a rapid and comprehensive decentralisation and devolution of powers and responsibilities from Westminster to the directly elected local authorities which currently exist.
I'm ok with the right sort of constitutional change but without the necessary cultural change it will mean little. I certainly think there needs to be a rolling back of powers seized by the Executive but I don't really see Labour doing this. There is an authoritarian streak within Labour and Starmer I think is not the one to push back against it. He will enable it I suspect.
Random question: If a close member of your family was murdered would you within a couple of days want to be attending big public events and making speeches etc?
It's the last thing on earth I would want to do.
Several years ago my Uncle died in hospital after being hit by a car when crossing the road. The police came and had a long meeting with me and my mother (we were next of kin). I was astonished that one question on their checklist was "Would this be of interest to the media? Do we need to contact the media?"
It was as if they thought it was their job to feed stuff to the media.
I appreciate that what happened in Nottingham is much higher profile but the same principles apply.
Random question: If a close member of your family was murdered would you within a couple of days want to be attending big public events and making speeches etc?
It's the last thing on earth I would want to do.
Several years ago my Uncle died in hospital after being hit by a car when crossing the road. The police came and had a long meeting with me and my mother (we were next of kin). I was astonished that one question on their checklist was "Would this be of interest to the media? Do we need to contact the media?"
It was as if they thought it was their job to feed stuff to the media.
I appreciate that what happened in Nottingham is much higher profile but the same principles apply.
I’m not sure there is a right or wrong thing to do in this awful situation.
I do envy the authors of the Committee report - like a fun legal judgement you get to have a bit of entertainment skewering the more ridiculous propositions put before the body/court, in impeccable committee speak. One example (don't worry, not going to spam).
It is inevitable that Ministers make mistakes and inadvertently mislead, and when they do, they are expected to correct the record at the earliest opportunity. This happens routinely. When a Minister makes an honest mistake and then corrects it, that is democracy working as it should. There is no basis for any fear that the requirement to be truthful with the House has a “chilling” effect on the ability of Ministers to be candid with the House. The House will also be understanding if a Minister declines to answer, for example, on matters which relate to national security or market sensitivity. But misleading intentionally or recklessly, refusing to answer legitimate questions, or failing to correct misleading statements, impedes or frustrates the functioning of the House and is a contempt
Bunch of bloody weasels.
It is a pretty good read. Boris's last ditch letter is pretty risible. He is supposedly under the impression that if someone says something under oath, it is not permissable for people not to be persuaded by it, it must simply be accepted as the truth. Quite what he thinks happens when contradictory evidence is provided under oath by different parties, or by their own actions and other statements, I do not know.
It boils down to (paraphrased) "I said I believed X, it is not allowed to not accept my word".
As the committee responds, it is entitled to conclude otherwise. People may disagree with that conclusion, but that is not an issue of process, as Boris claims it is.
The New Statesman is, in the link, predicting the results at a GE not at a by-election where different factors are at play.
That is far more plausible then. Mid Beds looks like an obvious case where a stuunniingn win at a by-election would be reversed. Frankly. Selby looks a bit tight if that is a subsequent GE, it and Mid Beds are both very large majorities in normal circumstances.
If they're working on the new boundaries for Selby then it looks plausible enough to me for a GE. I've said before that the new boundaries make Selby a more interesting constituency, though probably still Tory leaning on the whole.
Selby was Labour throughout the 7 years we lived there.
Yep, different boundaries again, I think? Although I don't know what they were. And at the height of new labour, was it?
Ainsty wasn't in the name before 2010. Not sure how significant the boundary changes were. May have notionally shifted the seat from Lab to Con in 2005.
Not a good look for Sunak to miss the vote on Monday . That would look pretty spineless .
He *is* pretty spineless. He kept Braverman as Home Secretary.
Besides, he'll just be asked how he would have voted.
Unless he plans to hide in a tiny fridge for eighteen months.
TBF, hiding in a fridge is not the worst plan in this weather.
Thing is, like Starmer when he has had to make a big call on personnel or indeed policy rather too often he seems to get it wrong. If anything, rather more so than Starmer.
I suppose the key difference between Starmer and Sunak as against Johnson and Corbyn is you can at least make an arguable (if not necessarily correct) case they are acting with honourable motives.
Random question: If a close member of your family was murdered would you within a couple of days want to be attending big public events and making speeches etc?
It's the last thing on earth I would want to do.
Several years ago my Uncle died in hospital after being hit by a car when crossing the road. The police came and had a long meeting with me and my mother (we were next of kin). I was astonished that one question on their checklist was "Would this be of interest to the media? Do we need to contact the media?"
It was as if they thought it was their job to feed stuff to the media.
I appreciate that what happened in Nottingham is much higher profile but the same principles apply.
A few years ago I was told by a senior City of London detective that one of the things which ensured faster promotion was getting their cases into the media. So yes some do think it's their job. It was the bit in the Leveson Inquiry which got canned and should not have been. The press got stick for some of the stories they published but no-one inquired closely into who was feeding them these stories. See for instance the landlord in that awful Bristol murder. The police should have been disciplined over what they did to him.
As for Nottingham, I simply cannot imagine the pain they must be going through. Maybe being with the other families and seeing how much their children were valued helps in some way. I don't think of us can know how we might react. In the aftermath of any death I think many are in a sort of shock and doing something - anything - helps. Hence the rituals that have built up. A vigil is a sort of ritual. And saying someone's name helps keep the person real somehow. Maybe.
I only pray that the families can get through this and find some comfort.
I am guilty of this sort of 'sophisticated contempt' myself on occasion, and in political terms it does me think I might sometimes be a bit harsh on those genuinely enthusiastic about a political ideology, rather than some condescending centrist fudge. Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
You also see this with difficult or uncomfortable truths. Any neutral observer could see Lab Leak was entirely plausible as an explanation for Covid, and is now highly likely, or near certain
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
I still don't understand why a certain type of person was so offended by the lab leak hypothesis.
I an not offended by it as a Hypothesis, just someone pretending that it is proven.
I don't know the origin of covid, and it may well be that no-one knows. I suspect that we will never know for sure as it is not a neutral subject, and vested interests are not objective in how they look at evidence.
There is an accumulating amount of evidence that suggests plausibility to the lab leak theory for sure. Where I draw the line is the idea that it’s somehow been proven, or 99% so. At the start of the pandemic there was every reason to believe a natural origin, as virtually every other pandemic has had natural origins. Unless there is evidence of bubonic plague coming out of some mad alchemists lab out east? People will now say, ah, but the WIV is right there as if that’s the slam dunk. Yet MERS, SARS and the rest all started somewhere that wasn’t a lab.
We don’t know for sure. We probably never will be certain. And that’s a scientific stand point, not a hack travel reporter.
Lol. You’ve been adamantly pro wet market from the start, and you’ve had to be dragged like an angry toddler to some reluctant acceptance that maybe - just maybe - just possibly maybe - it came from the lab. Pitiful
Speaking of travel hacks, I see that ex PBer @Seant pretty much nailed the truth way back in early 2021: it came from the lab - and was confident enough to write it and publish it rather than make squeaking noises on an anonymous website
I do envy the authors of the Committee report - like a fun legal judgement you get to have a bit of entertainment skewering the more ridiculous propositions put before the body/court, in impeccable committee speak. One example (don't worry, not going to spam).
It is inevitable that Ministers make mistakes and inadvertently mislead, and when they do, they are expected to correct the record at the earliest opportunity. This happens routinely. When a Minister makes an honest mistake and then corrects it, that is democracy working as it should. There is no basis for any fear that the requirement to be truthful with the House has a “chilling” effect on the ability of Ministers to be candid with the House. The House will also be understanding if a Minister declines to answer, for example, on matters which relate to national security or market sensitivity. But misleading intentionally or recklessly, refusing to answer legitimate questions, or failing to correct misleading statements, impedes or frustrates the functioning of the House and is a contempt
Bunch of bloody weasels.
It is a pretty good read. Boris's last ditch letter is pretty risible. He is supposedly under the impression that if someone says something under oath, it is not permissable for people not to be persuaded by it, it must simply be accepted as the truth. Quite what he thinks happens when contradictory evidence is provided under oath by different parties, or by their own actions and other statements, I do not know.
It boils down to (paraphrased) "I said I believed X, it is not allowed to not accept my word".
As the committee responds, it is entitled to conclude otherwise. People may disagree with that conclusion, but that is not an issue of process, as Boris claims it is.
Also, even taking him at his word, he contradicts himself. As the committee noted,
Simply declaring 'I am honest' is not persuasive (cf Blair, 'pretty straight kind of guy').
The New Statesman is, in the link, predicting the results at a GE not at a by-election where different factors are at play.
That is far more plausible then. Mid Beds looks like an obvious case where a stuunniingn win at a by-election would be reversed. Frankly. Selby looks a bit tight if that is a subsequent GE, it and Mid Beds are both very large majorities in normal circumstances.
If they're working on the new boundaries for Selby then it looks plausible enough to me for a GE. I've said before that the new boundaries make Selby a more interesting constituency, though probably still Tory leaning on the whole.
Selby was Labour throughout the 7 years we lived there.
Yep, different boundaries again, I think? Although I don't know what they were. And at the height of new labour, was it?
Ainsty wasn't in the name before 2010. Not sure how significant the boundary changes were. May have notionally shifted the seat from Lab to Con in 2005.
An area near York was shunted to York Outer and replaced by several strongly Tory areas from Vale of York.
Interestingly the very end of the Boris report I see includes minutes where a couple of the members did indeed propose inclusion of a line about expulsion from the House (notwithstanding this was after he'd left, as the length of potential sanction was increased due to his actions in response to the draft, including attacking them), but that did not pass - bit of a silly thing to have included, because now even though they were not proposing to Boris to expel him when he resigned, now the report includes reference to expulsion withou it needing to.
Comments
Clearly Boris does understand, clearly nearly all of his allies do too. The important thing for all of them is to work out quite how to row back a little (well a lot).
If Boris goes all Trump it'll be a very sad day in British politics, and we've had today which is quite sad enough.
The best thing about today's news was that it was unanimous. Whilst I, and no doubt others, and really most people, might suspect Harriet Harman of potentially having a mean streak, the same cannot be said of all members of the committee.
You may not like the MPs, and Dorries has proven herself inappropriate again, but nominating former ministers, of whatever quality, for honours is not, per se, corrupt.
And the thing is it is not as though processes are beyond criticism. But Boris and co are not sincerely criticising the process - just as with the Paterson attempt the process is mischaracterised, or even simply made up. So you have the assertion Paterson hadn't been able to defend himself, that Boris was being expelled by a small group of MPs etc, in essence to attempt to present him as having no choice but to resign, rather than continue to fight along the terms of the process as he could have, and should have.
Disagreement with a judgement or outcome is presented as a failure of the process itself, eg you've ruled against me you must be biased/have ignored evidence/ignored law. Yes, if things had gone the other way some would have attacked an overly weak process, but we can only deal with the scenario in front of us - and Boris quitting shows he lacks confidence even his core supporters would judge him kindly. It enables him to pillory the process, without letting it reach its full conclusion, as he and supporters will for eternity claim he was forced out by an evil cabal of MPs when he was not. Or if he was, the people could have saved him.
Humza appears to just be so used to praising and backing Sturgeon he cannot stop, even if he hardly needed to come out against her, given the stage of the process and that it might all come to nothing, so proper caution in tone would be fine.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/15/music-publishers-sue-twitter-copyright-elon-musk-tweets?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Loved this column from @j_amesmarriott on why enthusiasm > snark
https://twitter.com/mrianleslie/status/1669292587868467200/photo/1
Though I still think the execreble conduct you see in defence of a person or ideology which is of the 'correct' tribe justifies that distance.
But as far as cultural criticis go, absolutely.
The question of suspension is different. I note only that Sturgeon was quick to suspend but her allies now expect her to be treated differently. How very like Boris.
One issue parties with leaders who are seen as embodying that issue - whether Brexit or independence - are a cancer in our body politic. It leads to arrogance, hubris and very bad governance. Scotland under the SNP has been as badly governed as Britain has under the Tories.
I have not had Internet access here all day (Isle of Man) but as usual @Cyclefree hits the nail on the head
There can be no way back for Johnson as a conservative mp and time to end his association with the conservative party going forward
Anything else will see the end of the conservative party as we know it
Boris is gone and Berlusconi is dead
Yousaf is FM demanding fealty for a potential criminal. Dangerously stupid
I don't think she will end up being charged (or anyone for that matter), but it'd be worth it (even if then dropped), just to see whether he would pull back at that formal stage, or double down. After all, as some of Salmond's mob could tell us, you can be 'vindicated' in the end.
Yet there is a kind of world weary middlebrow PB-er who preferred (and some still prefer) to accept the easier, comforting, received opinion, rather than risk looking ridiculous. I know I bang on obnoxiously about IQ but it really is the mid range PBers (in terms of intellect) who do this. @Foxy, @kinabalu et al - the Quintessentially Beta People- just as it is the mid range critics who resist enthusiasm in music or art, for fear of having their intense mediocrity revealed
Tellingly, Tory whips have offered “slips” (permission to skip the Commons) for Monday to MPs willing to go and campaign in the by-election seats, I'm told
Sounds like quite a few MPs will seize the chance to miss the (unwhipped) vote on privileges cmtte report on Boris Johnson
https://twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/1669322727310729217?cxt=HHwWgoC9jaKL0KouAAAA
There is absolutely no reason - for party discipline - to make any comments on a live police investigation. I take the same approach on this as I would do were this a police investigation of a senior manager in, say, a financial institution.
Uxbridge
Lab 47.5%
Con 37.5%
Mid Beds
Con 41.6%
Lab 33.8%
LD 11.6%
Selby
Con 41.6%
Lab 37.7%
https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2023/02/britain-predicts-who-would-win-election-held-today
Though if they are beta I dread to think what might come below.
Somewhat like pontificating on how hard or cool you are.
Copyright is a bit of a dog's breakfast.
The Leader is above Critique. The Caudillo is never wrong. How dare you say that about the Tsar
Yousaf was doing OK, I thought (against very low expectations admittedly), but he has managed to surprise on the downside on this, and in an explosive way
In part I think its done in hope criticisms are couched in more general, technical terms, thereby allowing the guilty party to act as though their conduct was benign and its all over the top reaction, or confuse the issue around what it is about at all.
Viva La Vida is one of the most stirring pop songs of the 21st century. It is impossible to listen to it without thinking Oooh, yeah, as you clock those brilliant opening bars
They've written three or four other classic songs, as well. Along with lots of crud, for sure
But that is three or four classics more than most pop music acts
OK my lunchtime trolling in the By the By Coffeeshop, in Staunton Virginia, is done, and I am disturbingly attracted to a Milfy blonde sat right down next to me, and to avoid looking at her legs and being labelled a sick, ageing British perv I am going to get in my car and drive to Monticello
Later!
Why this political division on a subject of basic science?! Is it Trump? Still? Really??
Is it coz "lab leak" is deemed racist? How is it less racist than saying it came from cruel Chinese with filthy eating habits guzzling bat soup in a squalid market?
One of the oddities of the age
I don't know the origin of covid, and it may well be that no-one knows. I suspect that we will never know for sure as it is not a neutral subject, and vested interests are not objective in how they look at evidence.
I'm not a fan of Ed Sheeran's music at all, but I have found a lot of respect for him given the amount of time he's spent in court to explain music and songwriting, and not just leaving it to his lawyers.
You just cannot pretend to be incredibly stupid but also completely on top of everything, or to be completely clear in your own mind on what you meant but unable to communicate that in a way without appearing to mean something completely different. Not credibly - if anything, if someone has some respect for Boris's abilities his defence on this one is more likely to fail. When you are reliant on twisting the meaning, people will cry foul.
[Boris] was deliberately disingenuous when he tried to reinterpret his statements to the House to avoid their plain meaning and reframe the clear impression that he intended to give, namely i) when he advanced unsustainable interpretations of the Rules and Guidance to advance the argument that the lack of social distancing at gatherings was permissible within the exceptions which allowed for gatherings, and
ii) when he advanced legally impermissible reasons to justify the gatherings.
I've never been satisfied that David Kelly really did take his own life, for example.
One of the most joyous and uplifting pop songs of the age. I see it has 825 MILLION views - so the world seems to agree with me rather than with the PB beta cucks
https://youtu.be/dvgZkm1xWPE
Now personally I think Yousaf is probably right not to suspend Sturgeon for now, especially as Sturgeon was only arrested and has not yet been charged let alone convicted.
However it is notable while the SNP were trashing Boris today on the report's conclusions and being fined in lockdown as the Devil incarnate, the SNP activists have been sending bunches of flowers to Sturgeon's home
It is inevitable that Ministers make mistakes and inadvertently mislead, and when they do, they are expected to correct the record at the earliest opportunity. This happens routinely. When a Minister makes an honest mistake and then corrects it, that is democracy working as it should. There is no basis for any fear that the requirement to be truthful with the House has a “chilling” effect on the ability of Ministers to be candid with the House. The House will also be understanding if a Minister declines to answer, for example, on matters which relate to national security or market sensitivity. But misleading intentionally or recklessly, refusing to answer legitimate questions, or failing to correct misleading statements, impedes or frustrates the functioning of the House and is a contempt
It was a photo I'd taken of the front of York Minster whilst I was on a walk. They had a link to the photo they thought I was infringing, and they were similar. Except theirs had an effing big lampost right in front of, and central to, the frame, whilst mine did not.
Evidently some algorithm had flagged the pictures up as being similar.
The man appalls me but he did have the occasional genuine truth to power moments, often drowned out by his conspiracy bullshittery.
You think the outcomes would be different in the other two, or proportions?
Uxbridge I think could be a shock Tory hold.
I think we have seen the end of Johnson this week, but I thought that of Berlesconi too, yet he seemed to come back regularly in Italian politics for far too long.
Populism on both right and left tends to burn itself out as it encompasses too many incompatible policies, and eventually is caught out by its own contraindications. It takes a long time though, and it seems quite likely that we are going to see a revival next year when Trump gets re-elected.
Thanks to @Cyclefree for yet another thought-provoking piece.
One of Johnson's greatest failings, in my view, was his determination to take proper accounting and scrutiny from Parliament and keep it with Ministers - HIS Ministers, Ministers who would serve at his discretion and whim. Too much has gone from Westminster to Whitehall and to the Cabinet table.
Depressingly, but not surprisingly given their track record, Labour are showing no interest in rolling any of this back but will simply enjoy the freedom from scrutiny, accountability and control which Boris Johnson and a pliant Party will provide. As we've seen with the right to protest, the only party more adept at authoritarianism than the Conservatives is Labour.
@Cyclefree may claim there is no requirement for constitutional change - I disagree. I believe there's a huge requirement for power to be returned from the Executive to the Legislature and for a rapid and comprehensive decentralisation and devolution of powers and responsibilities from Westminster to the directly elected local authorities which currently exist.
Mr Johnson has provided, under a statement of truth, explanations of the 16 events
referred to in the recent material submitted to us by the Government. We have no evidence
conflicting with his account. We do not wish to incur the further delay to our inquiry
that would result from a detailed investigation of these events, and therefore we treat Mr
Johnson’s explanations as prima facie true. If for any reasons it subsequently emerges that
Mr Johnson’s explanations are not true, then he may have committed a further contempt.
Here's the version of the video as Coldplay's tribute to Depeche Mode's Enjoy the Silence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kVxpsi1XQ4
We're entitled to judge him on that basis.
It would be a bigger triumph than David Austick's in Ripon in 1973 were it to come off. Austick managed a 25% swing to beat the Conservatives but the candidate now needs just over 26% to move past the Conservatives and I suspect there will be a Green candidate pushing hard to build on their 2022 success in Ouseburn.
Lol
We don’t know for sure. We probably never will be certain. And that’s a scientific stand point, not a hack travel reporter.
In fact I doubt more than 50 Tory MPs will even turn up for the Boris report vote if that and those that do will be his hardcore fans like Mogg and Dorries or Boris haters like May and Davis.
The Report will be approved by the Commons but almost entirely only Opposition MPs will vote for it
It is a deeply unpleasant, nasty, sneering, mendacious piece of work. It ought to make all those who still think that Boris is "a bit of laugh" think again. He really shows his true, vindictive colours throughout, but especially in his assault on Harman (who clearly didn't even need to use her Chair's casting vote given the unanimity of the Committee).
The bloke really is a complete shit, and that's my last word on the matter (possibly).
Yes, it's possible, it's always been possible. But the reaction against it has been mostly a reaction against the loons who were certain about it in the face of a complete lack of evidence.
Person 1: it came from the lab! There's a fucking lab right there!
Person 2: that's not evidence, other viruses have come from a animals on the wild.
Person 1 hears themselves saying they're open minded, not convinced, waiting for evidence
Person 2 hears person 1 saying no way is it a lab leak (which, given the lack of evidence either way, would also be ridiculous)
I'm still open minded, as there's no compelling evidence either way. Natural source is possible, lab leak is possible. But I suspect you'll accuse me of being a lab leak denier
If it is a lab leak, I do think we'll probably get the proof some day. Someone knows or strongly suspects of that's the case. The not from the lab angle is harder/near impossible to prove, absent discovery of earliest infections far from the lab, which is of course great for the lab leak fans.
I mentioned Starmer because he promises integrity and good judgment, trades on his DPP experience endlessly and, yet, when asked to make a judgment call, makes a truly repellent one. It is not a good start.
It's the last thing on earth I would want to do.
Several years ago my Uncle died in hospital after being hit by a car when crossing the road. The police came and had a long meeting with me and my mother (we were next of kin). I was astonished that one question on their checklist was "Would this be of interest to the media? Do we need to contact the media?"
It was as if they thought it was their job to feed stuff to the media.
I appreciate that what happened in Nottingham is much higher profile but the same principles apply.
Unless he plans to hide in a tiny fridge for eighteen months.
It boils down to (paraphrased) "I said I believed X, it is not allowed to not accept my word".
As the committee responds, it is entitled to conclude otherwise. People may disagree with that conclusion, but that is not an issue of process, as Boris claims it is.
Thing is, like Starmer when he has had to make a big call on personnel or indeed policy rather too often he seems to get it wrong. If anything, rather more so than Starmer.
I suppose the key difference between Starmer and Sunak as against Johnson and Corbyn is you can at least make an arguable (if not necessarily correct) case they are acting with honourable motives.
As for Nottingham, I simply cannot imagine the pain they must be going through. Maybe being with the other families and seeing how much their children were valued helps in some way. I don't think of us can know how we might react. In the aftermath of any death I think many are in a sort of shock and doing something - anything - helps. Hence the rituals that have built up. A vigil is a sort of ritual. And saying someone's name helps keep the person real somehow. Maybe.
I only pray that the families can get through this and find some comfort.
Speaking of travel hacks, I see that ex PBer @Seant pretty much nailed the truth way back in early 2021: it came from the lab - and was confident enough to write it and publish it rather than make squeaking noises on an anonymous website
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-id-write-covid-the-thriller/
They seem to be equally condemned, and in both cases rather blurrily.
Interested as to others thoughts.
Simply declaring 'I am honest' is not persuasive (cf Blair, 'pretty straight kind of guy').
The Tories won't be too unhappy with only being 10% behind in Uxbridge because it would give them an outside chance if the campaign goes well.
The Radical Strategy Behind Trump’s Promise to ‘Go After’ Biden
Conservatives with close ties to Donald J. Trump are laying out a “paradigm-shifting” legal rationale to erase the Justice Department’s independence from the president.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/15/us/politics/trump-indictment-justice-department.html
That is the road to fascism.