Good post - also has the distinction of bringing facts with it.
I tend to be a bit more “well it’s the opposition’s job to oppose.. and if they won’t who will?” However, I think the difference is between thoughtful opposition and knee jerk opposition. Which is I think more what you are getting at here. And in some respects knee jerk opposition reflects the coarsening and infantile nature of mainstream politics in places like the UK and USA.
I often wonder how much the media (both social media and mainstream media) is to blame for this; arguments increase eyeballs. Gotcha moments can make a “journalist” and it is easy TV (and balance) to set one against the other. In that environment is it any wonder we get the politicians we do. Even the ok/good ones wisely just rigidly stick to the sound bite at risk of being pilloried for a so called “gaffe.”
I don’t want a world where two or three people simply agree with each other. But, a world where they can disagree without being talked over or attacked for who they are not what they said. Fat chance of that happening mind.
There are more than 116,000 companies listed as "approved sponsors", able to recruit people to come to the UK.
Whilst I don't think the entire shebang should be subbed out to say G4S, how on earth does a department as dysfunctional as the Home Office possibly keep tabs on 116,000 different companies effectively arranging visas ?!
That picture looks like the opening shot of the scariest porno ever. “The stepmomford wives”. The poor plumber arrives to fix the tennis club showers.
The way those women look at Trump is how I've imagined how Leon and MisterBedforshire would look at Trump
something clearly makes women of a certain age find dishevelled rambling egotists irresistible. My money is on a few bottles of crappy white wine but who knows?
There are more than 116,000 companies listed as "approved sponsors", able to recruit people to come to the UK.
Whilst I don't think the entire shebang should be subbed out to say G4S, how on earth does a department as dysfunctional as the Home Office possibly keep tabs on 116,000 different companies arranging visas ?!
"keep tabs"
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.....
OT related to the bands & cash discussion from the previous thread, The Rest is Entertainment today discussed another income stream, private events, where a band is paid squillions to appear at a conference or birthday party. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8n7Sqfh0Yo&t=2056s
FPT - Riffing off of comment by Rottenborough re: House of Lords reform, IF what's wanted is "a link to ancient history" then scrap the nouveau riche Norman HoL, and re-establish the good old Anglo-Saxon Witan.
For example, PB's own NPxMP could be chosen by his tribe (lefty animal lovers?) to be their WM (Witan Member) at the next Witenagemot.
There are more than 116,000 companies listed as "approved sponsors", able to recruit people to come to the UK.
Whilst I don't think the entire shebang should be subbed out to say G4S, how on earth does a department as dysfunctional as the Home Office possibly keep tabs on 116,000 different companies arranging visas ?!
"keep tabs"
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.....
The business model is spelt out quite clearly in the piece:
"Muhammad claims he paid £19,000 to a recruitment agent before being sent a certificate of sponsorship and job offer from Renaissance Personnel."
How much abuse of the social care visa system is there going on - potential employees should never in a million years be paying a "recruiter".
That picture looks like the opening shot of the scariest porno ever. “The stepmomford wives”. The poor plumber arrives to fix the tennis club showers.
The way those women look at Trump is how I've imagined how Leon and MisterBedforshire would look at Trump
something clearly makes women of a certain age find dishevelled rambling egotists irresistible. My money is on a few bottles of crappy white wine but who knows?
That picture looks like the opening shot of the scariest porno ever. “The stepmomford wives”. The poor plumber arrives to fix the tennis club showers.
The way those women look at Trump is how I've imagined how Leon and MisterBedforshire would look at Trump
something clearly makes women of a certain age find dishevelled rambling egotists irresistible. My money is on a few bottles of crappy white wine but who knows?
Nads was besotted wasn't she?
And he didn't even give her a peerage or damehood.
There are more than 116,000 companies listed as "approved sponsors", able to recruit people to come to the UK.
Whilst I don't think the entire shebang should be subbed out to say G4S, how on earth does a department as dysfunctional as the Home Office possibly keep tabs on 116,000 different companies arranging visas ?!
"keep tabs"
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.....
The business model is spelt out quite clearly in the piece:
"Muhammad claims he paid £19,000 to a recruitment agent before being sent a certificate of sponsorship and job offer from Renaissance Personnel."
How much abuse of the social care visa system is there going on - potential employees should never in a million years be paying a "recruiter".
How much abuse?
Yes
EDIT: this is why we have immigration at 1% of population.
That picture looks like the opening shot of the scariest porno ever. “The stepmomford wives”. The poor plumber arrives to fix the tennis club showers.
The way those women look at Trump is how I've imagined how Leon and MisterBedforshire would look at Trump
something clearly makes women of a certain age find dishevelled rambling egotists irresistible. My money is on a few bottles of crappy white wine but who knows?
Nads was besotted wasn't she?
And he didn't even give her a peerage or damehood.
About a week in and the HO under Cooper seems to have stripped Reconnaissance Personnel of it's license. Any idea who the previous Home Secretary was ?
Question - who was the imposter Rishi Sunak who was a bristly nasty thin-skinned git?
I met Sunak in 2020 and was genuinely impressed by his warmth and normality. The Sunak who is now Leader of the Opposition is the same man.
Once he became PM something crazy happened to him, transforming the nice Rishi into the idiot disaster Rishi.
A lot of senior Tories from the sentient wing of the party give every impression they are relieved their time is done. I think many of them realised they had gone down too many rabbit holes and needed the British people to rescue them.
That picture looks like the opening shot of the scariest porno ever. “The stepmomford wives”. The poor plumber arrives to fix the tennis club showers.
The way those women look at Trump is how I've imagined how Leon and MisterBedforshire would look at Trump
something clearly makes women of a certain age find dishevelled rambling egotists irresistible. My money is on a few bottles of crappy white wine but who knows?
About a week in and the HO under Cooper seems to have stripped Reconnaissance Personnel of it's license. Any idea who the previous Home Secretary was ?
This chap isn't happy either (check out the response from James Felton).
Yes, interesting piece, @rcs1000 and more than a fair point.
The point of Opposition is not to blindly oppose but to hold the Government to account - to scrutinise and ask questions across the range of government activities but more important to participate in and help improve the quality of governance itself.
I remarked this morning how supporting a political party had become almost like supporting a football team. My Party, Right or Wrong, isn't a good way to run a plural democracy. To be fair, there have been times when opposition parties have supported the Government - often in times of crisis - and they get no political dividend from it.
Look how far ahead the Conservatives were in 2020 and the early part of 2021 during the Covid episode but to simply oppose for the sake of opposing is foolish in extremis. No one party has the monopoly on good or bad ideas.
If the Conservatives are simply going to spend the next four years saying no to everything the Government implements (even if it was a policy they themselves originally proposed) it's not going to go well. Of course, there's always this desperate desire in Opposition to find a policy or area where they can be "different" to the Government, a distinctive area which they can claim as their USP at the next election but you don't win on a USP - you win by looking like a Government, acting like a Government and thinking like a Government.
Starmer and some (not all) of his Shadow Ministers did that.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
See when Trump said that Europe should increase defence spending and reduce dependence on Russian gas.
At least some people now admit it:
Looked at from where we are now (and this is hardly the most important facet of the global crisis), and all things considered, it’s probably time to admit that Donald Trump was right. Right, that is about one thing, if only one thing, which is that Germany completely has totally and completely (to use a Trumpism) messed up its energy and security policy – and that has made it much harder to save Ukraine.
Make no mistake, Trump was a monster; a national security risk; a friend to Putin; inhumane; he threatened Volodymyr Zelensky that he’d delay military aid to Ukraine unless he dished dirt on Hunter Biden. He did plenty wrong. Trump was generally bad for America and the rest of the world; but when he came to the Nato meeting in Brussels in 2018 and was rude to the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, you have to admit the-then president was prescient.
Chillingly so, actually. He said that the Germans (and other Europeans) were getting over-reliant on Russia for energy; and that they weren’t spending enough on their own defence. Goodness, how we mocked his boorish ways, his undiplomatic language and crude analysis; yet Germany and the EU ought to have heeded his warnings. For now we can’t slap an embargo on Russian oil and gas – and stop funding Putin’s war machine – because we’d crash the European economy.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Most radio stations stopped playing Elvis about 10-15 years ago though I think so that probably accounts for some of the decline (though presumably kids get most of the music from downloads and YouTube etc these days?)
Baz Luhrmann's excellent biopic from a couple of years ago did bring him back into focus for younger generations though.
Thanks; I should have thought of that - although it is perhaps not a perfect correlation for cultural significance. It's also curious that that has Elvis being searched more for in the UK than the Beatles, if I read it correctly.
I’d want physical ability as well as mental. It’s no fun not being able to walk or use one’s hands properly. That’s not to say I wouldn’t settle for mental.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Elvis impersonators seemed to be very popular 20 years ago.
There was a bizarre appearance of one with Gordon Brown in 2010:
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
There’s a podcast run by veteran music journos David Hepworth and Mark Ellen, Word in Your Ear, that I dip in and out of, and they’ve commented on the gradual disappearance in the culture of Elvis. His fans are literally dying out and aren’t being replaced, unlike the Beatles who go on being discovered by generation after generation. There’s a shit ton of other bands/artists in a similar position, they argue. The Doors have seemingly vanished, that’s another one I remember them mentioning. Hendrix? Genuine big hitters, peak of the zeitgeist acts that are dropping off the radar.
I suppose it’s always happened to some extent since recorded music began. But I think Elvis is the biggest so far.
Question - who was the imposter Rishi Sunak who was a bristly nasty thin-skinned git?
I met Sunak in 2020 and was genuinely impressed by his warmth and normality. The Sunak who is now Leader of the Opposition is the same man.
Once he became PM something crazy happened to him, transforming the nice Rishi into the idiot disaster Rishi.
He spoke extremely well today. Generous, gracious and intelligent. Loto suits him. He was excellent throughout.
Rishi was just the latest in a series of leaders who get reshaped by CCHQ into a pastiche of their party's greatest recent hits. Labour did the same to Gordon Brown, and even now Keir Starmer is getting a bit Blairesque.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
There’s a podcast run by veteran music journos David Hepworth and Mark Ellen, Word in Your Ear, that I dip in and out of, and they’ve commented on the gradual disappearance in the culture of Elvis. His fans are literally dying out and aren’t being replaced, unlike the Beatles who go on being discovered by generation after generation. There’s a shit ton of other bands/artists in a similar position, they argue. The Doors have seemingly vanished, that’s another one I remember them mentioning. Hendrix? Genuine big hitters, peak of the zeitgeist acts that are dropping off the radar.
I suppose it’s always happened to some extent since recorded music began. But I think Elvis is the biggest so far.
Elvis, especially later Elvis, was very, very commercial. I would have thought the earlier, especially pre-Army, pieces would be more likely to survive.
I’d want physical ability as well as mental. It’s no fun not being able to walk or use one’s hands properly. That’s not to say I wouldn’t settle for mental.
As Ricky Gervaise noted, the trouble with extending your life is it extends the end of your life, not the bit in the middle.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
There’s a podcast run by veteran music journos David Hepworth and Mark Ellen, Word in Your Ear, that I dip in and out of, and they’ve commented on the gradual disappearance in the culture of Elvis. His fans are literally dying out and aren’t being replaced, unlike the Beatles who go on being discovered by generation after generation. There’s a shit ton of other bands/artists in a similar position, they argue. The Doors have seemingly vanished, that’s another one I remember them mentioning. Hendrix? Genuine big hitters, peak of the zeitgeist acts that are dropping off the radar.
I suppose it’s always happened to some extent since recorded music began. But I think Elvis is the biggest so far.
Elvis, especially later Elvis, was very, very commercial. I would have thought the earlier, especially pre-Army, pieces would be more likely to survive.
I wonder if his legacy is slightly sullied by starting off at the cutting edge of cool then losing that edge and becoming bloated and soft and blunted. Plus he never really wrote anything, despite getting writing credits, he was an interpreter of other people’s songs wasn’t he?
Whereas the Beatles went from a seemingly lightweight pop act to credible heavyweight cultural behemoths, bowing out at somewhere near the peak still of their powers. Abbey Road, the final album they recorded, is up there. Get Back has rehabilitated the reputation of Let It Be, the last thing they released.
Hepworth and Ellen posit that to truly endure you need a good story, an element of tragedy. So, Lennon. For my generation, the suicide of Kurt Cobain. James Dean remains an icon, but I’ve never seen any of his films.
I suppose Elvis’s story is tragic in one way, but in another it’s deeply naff. Getting fat and dying on the bog doesn’t really do it, does it?
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
There’s a podcast run by veteran music journos David Hepworth and Mark Ellen, Word in Your Ear, that I dip in and out of, and they’ve commented on the gradual disappearance in the culture of Elvis. His fans are literally dying out and aren’t being replaced, unlike the Beatles who go on being discovered by generation after generation. There’s a shit ton of other bands/artists in a similar position, they argue. The Doors have seemingly vanished, that’s another one I remember them mentioning. Hendrix? Genuine big hitters, peak of the zeitgeist acts that are dropping off the radar.
I suppose it’s always happened to some extent since recorded music began. But I think Elvis is the biggest so far.
Elvis, especially later Elvis, was very, very commercial. I would have thought the earlier, especially pre-Army, pieces would be more likely to survive.
Personally will treat reports of the 2nd Death of Elvis with due skepticism. As with the 1st!
OT, Good thread. Opposition for the sake of it is so boring. Opposition parties have to embrace, or pretend to embrace, the party in power to win elections, cue, Cameron and Starmer.
Jamie Dimon the orange one's pick for Treasury Secretary apparently
Meet the new swamp Same as the old swamp
I'm sure all those hillbillies are looking forward to another tax cut for the 1%.
Many certainly fixin' to vote for J.D. Vance, who began his rise by publishing book that called his fellow hillbillies, starting with his own kinfolk, lazy White trash (I paraphrase but not much).
They ain't stupid. But they are somewhat confused, methinks (being one of 'em, sorta) and also whipsawed by politicos, journos, etc., etc., etc.
Peter doesn't need to worry, the Tories will likely drift further right in opposition as they did after 1997.
The problem with New Labour is while the intelligentsia, left and right, tended to loathe it most voters quite liked it. Hence Blair won 3 general elections, Cameron won 2 moving to follow New Labour policies and even Boris was basically ideologically New Labour plus Brexit when he won in 2019. While Starmer also won by moving away from Corbynism back to Blairism
On topic we tend towards the opposite problem: IDS enthusing over Iraq, Sks pro harder and longer lockdown
I try to remind my Conservative friend that we went to war on the back of Tory votes, but it is greeted by deaf ears.
Did those Tory MPs see the intelligence that Blair saw or did they vote on the basis of the “intelligence” they were presented with by Blair and Campbell and co?
Surely one of the lessons of this and of the very good comments in the thread below is 'don't be party political'.
Judge each issue on its merits irrespective of which side proposed it or what your 'wing' generally thinks of it. In the modern world with all its connectivity at our finger tips there is no excuse for anyone with a reasonable interest in politics and in the future of their country, not to do a bit of basic research and form their own independent opinion.
This is really just another example of how parties damage our democracy. My party right or wrong is just as dumb as my country right or wrong.
The flip side of not opposing for opposing's sake is not agreeing with everything being proposed by your own side.
I'm happy to say that the ban on new offshore exploration is a bloody daft idea for reasons well set out on PB.
I'm also totally against the planned splurge of housebuilding on green field sites.
Doesn't stop me being Labour.
Indeed and when you have 400+ MPs, it's inevitable there will be an element of internal opposition within Labour which you don't normally (the Major Government from 92 to 97 being a notable exception) expect when the majority is much smaller.
It's now clear the Conservative Party was in a state of near political collapse when Sunak called the election and put them out of our misery.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Same with my kids (23 and 16). My son is a Beatles fanatic and his favourite era of music is the 15 years from 1965 to 1980. And yet, although he has heard of elvis, he doesn't really no much of his music. Same with my daughter.
This is why the Lib Dems are a better party then Labour. We don't mind if a Tory government "steals" our policies , if they are policies that benefit the country. But Labour would rather hide their good policies in opposition, in case the Tories use them.
That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
This can't be true, can it? The roof upon which snipers were stationed had a much more severe slope.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Same with my kids (23 and 16). My son is a Beatles fanatic and his favourite era of music is the 15 years from 1965 to 1980. And yet, although he has heard of elvis, he doesn't really no much of his music. Same with my daughter.
My son, 21 yesterday, adores the Beatles, has been around the museums in Liverpool and has the posters on his wall. Elvis? Who he?
I went out with a girl in the early 80s when at University who adored Elvis. But I can't really remember coming across anyone else like that. I fear that the long decline in Las Vagas and the older Elvis damaged his image. Early Elvis was electric.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
There’s a podcast run by veteran music journos David Hepworth and Mark Ellen, Word in Your Ear, that I dip in and out of, and they’ve commented on the gradual disappearance in the culture of Elvis. His fans are literally dying out and aren’t being replaced, unlike the Beatles who go on being discovered by generation after generation. There’s a shit ton of other bands/artists in a similar position, they argue. The Doors have seemingly vanished, that’s another one I remember them mentioning. Hendrix? Genuine big hitters, peak of the zeitgeist acts that are dropping off the radar.
I suppose it’s always happened to some extent since recorded music began. But I think Elvis is the biggest so far.
Elvis, especially later Elvis, was very, very commercial. I would have thought the earlier, especially pre-Army, pieces would be more likely to survive.
I wonder if his legacy is slightly sullied by starting off at the cutting edge of cool then losing that edge and becoming bloated and soft and blunted. Plus he never really wrote anything, despite getting writing credits, he was an interpreter of other people’s songs wasn’t he?
Whereas the Beatles went from a seemingly lightweight pop act to credible heavyweight cultural behemoths, bowing out at somewhere near the peak still of their powers. Abbey Road, the final album they recorded, is up there. Get Back has rehabilitated the reputation of Let It Be, the last thing they released.
Hepworth and Ellen posit that to truly endure you need a good story, an element of tragedy. So, Lennon. For my generation, the suicide of Kurt Cobain. James Dean remains an icon, but I’ve never seen any of his films.
I suppose Elvis’s story is tragic in one way, but in another it’s deeply naff. Getting fat and dying on the bog doesn’t really do it, does it?
Only a handful of artists have the incomprehensible gift of their growing along and deepening in significance with their audience over a long period of time and many years after they are dead. They are always of now. Shakespeare and Jane Austen have it, Marlowe and Charlotte Bronte don't. So most become, over time of only historical interest.
In their field I think Elvis does not possess that (not least he isn't good enough or interesting enough) and possibly some Beatles work does. Other candidates: Sinatra, Joni Mitchell. The next 150 years will tell our great grandchildren the answer.
On topic we tend towards the opposite problem: IDS enthusing over Iraq, Sks pro harder and longer lockdown
I try to remind my Conservative friend that we went to war on the back of Tory votes, but it is greeted by deaf ears.
Did those Tory MPs see the intelligence that Blair saw or did they vote on the basis of the “intelligence” they were presented with by Blair and Campbell and co?
IDS gave way on his original demand to see the intelligence - this was the mistake
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Same with my kids (23 and 16). My son is a Beatles fanatic and his favourite era of music is the 15 years from 1965 to 1980. And yet, although he has heard of elvis, he doesn't really no much of his music. Same with my daughter.
It's hard to come back from spending a generation as a punchline.
That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
This can't be true, can it? The roof upon which snipers were stationed had a much more severe slope.
It’s ‘Elf&Satefy being used to hide a fuckup, as usual.
There are methods and equipment to operate safely on any slope of roof. Given the Secret Service’s job, they should have tons of rooftop trained people.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
"Always on my Mind" by Depeche Mode's Dave Gahan, on his "Imposter" album released 2021:
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Same with my kids (23 and 16). My son is a Beatles fanatic and his favourite era of music is the 15 years from 1965 to 1980. And yet, although he has heard of elvis, he doesn't really no much of his music. Same with my daughter.
My son, 21 yesterday, adores the Beatles, has been around the museums in Liverpool and has the posters on his wall. Elvis? Who he?
I went out with a girl in the early 80s when at University who adored Elvis. But I can't really remember coming across anyone else like that. I fear that the long decline in Las Vagas and the older Elvis damaged his image. Early Elvis was electric.
I think also that, maybe more so in the UK, Elvis is now a figure of fun to many. He’s the guy stag dos dress up as, a million impersonators of various quality and seriousness ape. He’s a punchline about eating too many jellied donuts, dying on a loo. If you don’t know how groundbreaking his music was then he seems like an early Shakin Stevens. He’s a great episode of Father Ted.
Most people probably have an idea of his music but won’t really know absolute corkers like “In the Ghetto” or “Suspicious minds”.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
There’s a podcast run by veteran music journos David Hepworth and Mark Ellen, Word in Your Ear, that I dip in and out of, and they’ve commented on the gradual disappearance in the culture of Elvis. His fans are literally dying out and aren’t being replaced, unlike the Beatles who go on being discovered by generation after generation. There’s a shit ton of other bands/artists in a similar position, they argue. The Doors have seemingly vanished, that’s another one I remember them mentioning. Hendrix? Genuine big hitters, peak of the zeitgeist acts that are dropping off the radar.
I suppose it’s always happened to some extent since recorded music began. But I think Elvis is the biggest so far.
Elvis, especially later Elvis, was very, very commercial. I would have thought the earlier, especially pre-Army, pieces would be more likely to survive.
I wonder if his legacy is slightly sullied by starting off at the cutting edge of cool then losing that edge and becoming bloated and soft and blunted. Plus he never really wrote anything, despite getting writing credits, he was an interpreter of other people’s songs wasn’t he?
Whereas the Beatles went from a seemingly lightweight pop act to credible heavyweight cultural behemoths, bowing out at somewhere near the peak still of their powers. Abbey Road, the final album they recorded, is up there. Get Back has rehabilitated the reputation of Let It Be, the last thing they released.
Hepworth and Ellen posit that to truly endure you need a good story, an element of tragedy. So, Lennon. For my generation, the suicide of Kurt Cobain. James Dean remains an icon, but I’ve never seen any of his films.
I suppose Elvis’s story is tragic in one way, but in another it’s deeply naff. Getting fat and dying on the bog doesn’t really do it, does it?
They had a lot of help from proper musicians like Frank Muir
On topic we tend towards the opposite problem: IDS enthusing over Iraq, Sks pro harder and longer lockdown
I try to remind my Conservative friend that we went to war on the back of Tory votes, but it is greeted by deaf ears.
Did those Tory MPs see the intelligence that Blair saw or did they vote on the basis of the “intelligence” they were presented with by Blair and Campbell and co?
IDS gave way on his original demand to see the intelligence - this was the mistake
That was stupid but I find it disingenuous for Labour supporters to try and drag in the Tories and make them complicit over Iraq by saying “yeh but the Tories also voted for it” when they were voting on the basis of lies.
As far as we know, based on the fact that millions who accepted at the time that the war was necessary because of the WMD threat now realise how wrong the war was, the Tories and most Labour MPs would not have voted to go to war based on the truth if Blair, PM and leader of the Labour Party, had decided to share the truth with Parliament.
Question - who was the imposter Rishi Sunak who was a bristly nasty thin-skinned git?
I met Sunak in 2020 and was genuinely impressed by his warmth and normality. The Sunak who is now Leader of the Opposition is the same man.
Once he became PM something crazy happened to him, transforming the nice Rishi into the idiot disaster Rishi.
He spoke extremely well today. Generous, gracious and intelligent. Loto suits him. He was excellent throughout.
Rishi obviously reads PB (he isn't Leon, is he?) because he has just uploaded his King's Speech response to YouTube for our delectation at:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkKvuPU6b18
Or alternatively, if Virginia is now a marginal Trump’s vote is becoming rather inefficient and we should revisit assumptions about how far ahead Biden needs to be in the popular vote to win.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Same with my kids (23 and 16). My son is a Beatles fanatic and his favourite era of music is the 15 years from 1965 to 1980. And yet, although he has heard of elvis, he doesn't really no much of his music. Same with my daughter.
My son, 21 yesterday, adores the Beatles, has been around the museums in Liverpool and has the posters on his wall. Elvis? Who he?
I went out with a girl in the early 80s when at University who adored Elvis. But I can't really remember coming across anyone else like that. I fear that the long decline in Las Vagas and the older Elvis damaged his image. Early Elvis was electric.
I think also that, maybe more so in the UK, Elvis is now a figure of fun to many. He’s the guy stag dos dress up as, a million impersonators of various quality and seriousness ape. He’s a punchline about eating too many jellied donuts, dying on a loo. If you don’t know how groundbreaking his music was then he seems like an early Shakin Stevens. He’s a great episode of Father Ted.
Most people probably have an idea of his music but won’t really know absolute corkers like “In the Ghetto” or “Suspicious minds”.
Lots of people die on the loo. Biggest exertion of the day.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
Same with my kids (23 and 16). My son is a Beatles fanatic and his favourite era of music is the 15 years from 1965 to 1980. And yet, although he has heard of elvis, he doesn't really no much of his music. Same with my daughter.
My son, 21 yesterday, adores the Beatles, has been around the museums in Liverpool and has the posters on his wall. Elvis? Who he?
I went out with a girl in the early 80s when at University who adored Elvis. But I can't really remember coming across anyone else like that. I fear that the long decline in Las Vagas and the older Elvis damaged his image. Early Elvis was electric.
I think also that, maybe more so in the UK, Elvis is now a figure of fun to many. He’s the guy stag dos dress up as, a million impersonators of various quality and seriousness ape. He’s a punchline about eating too many jellied donuts, dying on a loo. If you don’t know how groundbreaking his music was then he seems like an early Shakin Stevens. He’s a great episode of Father Ted.
Most people probably have an idea of his music but won’t really know absolute corkers like “In the Ghetto” or “Suspicious minds”.
I thought the really good biopic with Tom Hanks as Colonel Tom Parker showed the problem really well. He kept Elvis doing floor shows in Las Vegas because the money kept pouring in and he had a lot of kickbacks but he destroyed him as an artist and prevented him from developing because the old Elvis made him so much money. That image of Elvis getting older, fatter and more drug dependent killed his reputation and the sexiness of his early work and image.
Surely one of the lessons of this and of the very good comments in the thread below is 'don't be party political'.
Judge each issue on its merits irrespective of which side proposed it or what your 'wing' generally thinks of it. In the modern world with all its connectivity at our finger tips there is no excuse for anyone with a reasonable interest in politics and in the future of their country, not to do a bit of basic research and form their own independent opinion.
This is really just another example of how parties damage our democracy. My party right or wrong is just as dumb as my country right or wrong.
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
"Always on my Mind" by Depeche Mode's Dave Gahan, on his "Imposter" album released 2021:
Or alternatively, if Virginia is now a marginal Trump’s vote is becoming rather inefficient and we should revisit assumptions about how far ahead Biden needs to be in the popular vote to win.
Comments
A good threader, with a point well made.
Doubt either US party will listen to a word of it
I met Sunak in 2020 and was genuinely impressed by his warmth and normality. The Sunak who is now Leader of the Opposition is the same man.
Once he became PM something crazy happened to him, transforming the nice Rishi into the idiot disaster Rishi.
I tend to be a bit more “well it’s the opposition’s job to oppose.. and if they won’t who will?” However, I think the difference is between thoughtful opposition and knee jerk opposition. Which is I think more what you are getting at here. And in some respects knee jerk opposition reflects the coarsening and infantile nature of mainstream politics in places like the UK and USA.
I often wonder how much the media (both social media and mainstream media) is to blame for this; arguments increase eyeballs. Gotcha moments can make a “journalist” and it is easy TV (and balance) to set one against the other. In that environment is it any wonder we get the politicians we do. Even the ok/good ones wisely just rigidly stick to the sound bite at risk of being pilloried for a so called “gaffe.”
I don’t want a world where two or three people simply agree with each other. But, a world where they can disagree without being talked over or attacked for who they are not what they said. Fat chance of that happening mind.
If that lot came into my old shop we would code yellow it and get our copy of the Sale of Goods Act out
https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-100-migrants-face-being-in-uk-illegally-as-care-agency-is-stripped-of-ability-to-endorse-visas-13178490
One fact jumps out:
There are more than 116,000 companies listed as "approved sponsors", able to recruit people to come to the UK.
Whilst I don't think the entire shebang should be subbed out to say G4S, how on earth does a department as dysfunctional as the Home Office possibly keep tabs on 116,000 different companies effectively arranging visas ?!
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8n7Sqfh0Yo&t=2056s
For example, PB's own NPxMP could be chosen by his tribe (lefty animal lovers?) to be their WM (Witan Member) at the next Witenagemot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witan
"Muhammad claims he paid £19,000 to a recruitment agent before being sent a certificate of sponsorship and job offer from Renaissance Personnel."
How much abuse of the social care visa system is there going on - potential employees should never in a million years be paying a "recruiter".
#UnrequitedLoveSucksWellActuallyTheresNoSuckingOhGodINeedToStopTyping
The key clue (as eminent psephologist* Sherlock Holmes might say) being the "TRUMP Pence" Democratic-Blue campaign buttons.
*Erudite and/or psychotic PBers may be familiar with Sir A. Conan Doyle's lesser-known work, "The Mystery of the Disappearing Tory Majority".
Yes
EDIT: this is why we have immigration at 1% of population.
https://x.com/JamesCleverly/status/1813580742586401040?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
Oh dear, what a shame, etc.
Or is that too soon?
https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1813532558791176615?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
Yes, interesting piece, @rcs1000 and more than a fair point.
The point of Opposition is not to blindly oppose but to hold the Government to account - to scrutinise and ask questions across the range of government activities but more important to participate in and help improve the quality of governance itself.
I remarked this morning how supporting a political party had become almost like supporting a football team. My Party, Right or Wrong, isn't a good way to run a plural democracy. To be fair, there have been times when opposition parties have supported the Government - often in times of crisis - and they get no political dividend from it.
Look how far ahead the Conservatives were in 2020 and the early part of 2021 during the Covid episode but to simply oppose for the sake of opposing is foolish in extremis. No one party has the monopoly on good or bad ideas.
If the Conservatives are simply going to spend the next four years saying no to everything the Government implements (even if it was a policy they themselves originally proposed) it's not going to go well. Of course, there's always this desperate desire in Opposition to find a policy or area where they can be "different" to the Government, a distinctive area which they can claim as their USP at the next election but you don't win on a USP - you win by looking like a Government, acting like a Government and thinking like a Government.
Starmer and some (not all) of his Shadow Ministers did that.
Meet the new swamp
Same as the old swamp
When I was young (early 1980s), my family were not particularly into music. But culturally, Elvis Presley seemed very visible. Even if you did not hear his music, you would see references to him in many places, from pop to film. This seemed to be the case all the way up to the 1990s.
I just asked my son (ten yo) and a couple of his friends about Elvis and the Beatles. They had heard of the Beatles, and could name a few songs of theirs, but they had not heard of Elvis; and the only song they knew of his was the PSB cover of 'Always on my Mind'.
Has Elvis's cultural significance waned, or do I just have a poor sample of kids.
I can see I am guilty of Oppositionalism (Oppositionism?) at times - I will try to bear this in mind in future because I think you make a good point.
See when Trump said that Europe should increase defence spending and reduce dependence on Russian gas.
At least some people now admit it:
Looked at from where we are now (and this is hardly the most important facet of the global crisis), and all things considered, it’s probably time to admit that Donald Trump was right. Right, that is about one thing, if only one thing, which is that Germany completely has totally and completely (to use a Trumpism) messed up its energy and security policy – and that has made it much harder to save Ukraine.
Make no mistake, Trump was a monster; a national security risk; a friend to Putin; inhumane; he threatened Volodymyr Zelensky that he’d delay military aid to Ukraine unless he dished dirt on Hunter Biden. He did plenty wrong. Trump was generally bad for America and the rest of the world; but when he came to the Nato meeting in Brussels in 2018 and was rude to the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, you have to admit the-then president was prescient.
Chillingly so, actually. He said that the Germans (and other Europeans) were getting over-reliant on Russia for energy; and that they weren’t spending enough on their own defence. Goodness, how we mocked his boorish ways, his undiplomatic language and crude analysis; yet Germany and the EU ought to have heeded his warnings. For now we can’t slap an embargo on Russian oil and gas – and stop funding Putin’s war machine – because we’d crash the European economy.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-merkel-germany-ukraine-war-b2041226.html
A drug has increased the lifespans of laboratory animals by nearly 25%, in a discovery scientists hope can slow human ageing too.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv2gr3x3xkno
No political relevance whatsoever...
Baz Luhrmann's excellent biopic from a couple of years ago did bring him back into focus for younger generations though.
That’s not to say I wouldn’t settle for mental.
There was a bizarre appearance of one with Gordon Brown in 2010:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/gordon-brown-joined-on-the-general-election-217026
Political parties have a duty to manage their opposition constructively, not fuel it destructively.
I suppose it’s always happened to some extent since recorded music began. But I think Elvis is the biggest so far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LxYZMUiEyw
Whereas the Beatles went from a seemingly lightweight pop act to credible heavyweight cultural behemoths, bowing out at somewhere near the peak still of their powers. Abbey Road, the final album they recorded, is up there. Get Back has rehabilitated the reputation of Let It Be, the last thing they released.
Hepworth and Ellen posit that to truly endure you need a good story, an element of tragedy. So, Lennon. For my generation, the suicide of Kurt Cobain. James Dean remains an icon, but I’ve never seen any of his films.
I suppose Elvis’s story is tragic in one way, but in another it’s deeply naff. Getting fat and dying on the bog doesn’t really do it, does it?
They ain't stupid. But they are somewhat confused, methinks (being one of 'em, sorta) and also whipsawed by politicos, journos, etc., etc., etc.
Are there windows in Russian swimming pools?
The problem with New Labour is while the intelligentsia, left and right, tended to loathe it most voters quite liked it. Hence Blair won 3 general elections, Cameron won 2 moving to follow New Labour policies and even Boris was basically ideologically New Labour plus Brexit when he won in 2019. While Starmer also won by moving away from Corbynism back to Blairism
I'm happy to say that the ban on new offshore exploration is a bloody daft idea for reasons well set out on PB.
I'm also totally against the planned splurge of housebuilding on green field sites.
Doesn't stop me being Labour.
Judge each issue on its merits irrespective of which side proposed it or what your 'wing' generally thinks of it. In the modern world with all its connectivity at our finger tips there is no excuse for anyone with a reasonable interest in politics and in the future of their country, not to do a bit of basic research and form their own independent opinion.
This is really just another example of how parties damage our democracy. My party right or wrong is just as dumb as my country right or wrong.
It's now clear the Conservative Party was in a state of near political collapse when Sunak called the election and put them out of our misery.
We don't mind if a Tory government "steals" our policies , if they are policies that benefit the country.
But Labour would rather hide their good policies in opposition, in case the Tories use them.
That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
This can't be true, can it? The roof upon which snipers were stationed had a much more severe slope.
I went out with a girl in the early 80s when at University who adored Elvis. But I can't really remember coming across anyone else like that. I fear that the long decline in Las Vagas and the older Elvis damaged his image. Early Elvis was electric.
In their field I think Elvis does not possess that (not least he isn't good enough or interesting enough) and possibly some Beatles work does. Other candidates: Sinatra, Joni Mitchell. The next 150 years will tell our great grandchildren the answer.
There are methods and equipment to operate safely on any slope of roof. Given the Secret Service’s job, they should have tons of rooftop trained people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_9QOy0xoDI
Most people probably have an idea of his music but won’t really know absolute corkers like “In the Ghetto” or “Suspicious minds”.
https://x.com/ppollingnumbers/status/1813628025591984211
As far as we know, based on the fact that millions who accepted at the time that the war was necessary because of the WMD threat now realise how wrong the war was, the Tories and most Labour MPs would not have voted to go to war based on the truth if Blair, PM and leader of the Labour Party, had decided to share the truth with Parliament.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkKvuPU6b18
And they're still ruling out a wealth tax on multi millionaires & billionaires.
And they're still actively keeping children in poverty.
No wonder the Blue and Red Tories were all smiles at the Kings Speech
It’s a fair comment. That’s excellent.