"Mr Phillips is believed to have pondered crossing the floor and remaining as an independent MP, but as he had been elected to a Conservative Party that he now believes has "UKIP-lite" values, he believed the "honourable course" was to resign.
"This is not the basis upon which he stood as an MP," one friend told Sky News.
The "final straw" was the decision by Number 10 to appeal a "clear-cut" High Court judgement to involve Parliament in the decision to trigger Article 50."
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
chortle
is this the bit where we can play the Cameroon argument in reverse and you get told to fk off and join the LibDems ?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That was in the expectation of a Remain victory and Dave & George being in charge.
LOL
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
"Germany at over $1.5t is second, behind China at $1.9t, despite being much smaller and poor in raw materials (except lignite and potash). Export goods include motor vehicles, machinery, chemicals, computer and electronic products, electrical equipment, pharmaceuticals, metals, transport equipment, food items, textiles, rubber and plastic products"
Nevertheless it's a futile argument, given the size of the US and China compared to Germany. The figures I found put Germany second, not third, but OK, so what if I concede Germany is third not far behind China and the US, despite being much smaller?
This supports my argument that being inside the EU is clearly not an inhibitor to being a tremendously successful exporter, and, by extension, all this stuff about how the UK 'freed' from the restrictions of EU membership is better placed to export to the world is just more delusional BS.
Alternatively, you could just admit that you lied.
As a general point, I have a problem with accusations of lying when there was no intention to deceive. The accusation is itself a lie, I suppose. You could have simply said Ian was wrong.
FWIW I'm guessing the fall in the value of the € versus the € at the end of 2014 meant the US and Germany swapped places in terms of absolute value of exports.
No, he was shown evidence, then persisted with his falsehood. That's a lie.
And you can be sure if a Leaver was consistently peddling untruths that support a Leave thesis, IanB2 would not hesitate to call it a lie.
This is truly desperate stuff from this site's chief bullsh*tter SeanT.
I just typed the query into a search engine and this was the site that came up with the data I provided:
But it matters not whose data is correct. Even going by SeanT's data, my argument that Germany is a tremendously successful exporter (particularly for its size) is validated, not undermined. Hence, presumably, why Sean resorts to throwing the mud in preference to facing the facts.
Times photo has upped the light exposure about two stops, in addition I think they've turned up the contrast and "sharpened" the image.
The Sun photo looks to me to be alot lower contrast, "softer" and the light exposure is no change from the original .NEF or cannon file I'd guess.
I'd guess the Times photo has been 'lightroomed' (Noone has used photoshop on either) a good deal more.
Yep. Those Remain-supporting traitors at the Times trying to bamboozle us with their reverse racebaiting. Eh, Southam?
Perhaps give Southam at least a chance to consider the discussion of his original post and adjust his position as he sees fit before calling out mental impairment on him!
"Mr Phillips is believed to have pondered crossing the floor and remaining as an independent MP, but as he had been elected to a Conservative Party that he now believes has "UKIP-lite" values, he believed the "honourable course" was to resign.
"This is not the basis upon which he stood as an MP," one friend told Sky News.
The "final straw" was the decision by Number 10 to appeal a "clear-cut" High Court judgement to involve Parliament in the decision to trigger Article 50."
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
chortle
is this the bit where we can play the Cameroon argument in reverse and you get told to fk off and join the LibDems ?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That was in the expectation of a Remain victory and Dave & George being in charge.
LOL
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
Dave standing down would have focused minds.
Plus, prior to the general election I got the distinct impression that the party was going to unite and make sure Corbyn didn't become PM.
"Mr Phillips is believed to have pondered crossing the floor and remaining as an independent MP, but as he had been elected to a Conservative Party that he now believes has "UKIP-lite" values, he believed the "honourable course" was to resign.
"This is not the basis upon which he stood as an MP," one friend told Sky News.
The "final straw" was the decision by Number 10 to appeal a "clear-cut" High Court judgement to involve Parliament in the decision to trigger Article 50."
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
chortle
is this the bit where we can play the Cameroon argument in reverse and you get told to fk off and join the LibDems ?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That's assuming Remain won, because many in the Leave camp, like Stephen Phillips, were just playing games.
So the "lying Tory bastards " theory ?
Lying Tory bastards is a tautology.
Why do you think we've been the most ruthlessly efficient and successful political party in history
"Germany at over $1.5t is second, behind China at $1.9t, despite being much smaller and poor in raw materials (except lignite and potash). Export goods include motor vehicles, machinery, chemicals, computer and electronic products, electrical equipment, pharmaceuticals, metals, transport equipment, food items, textiles, rubber and plastic products"
Nevertheless it's a futile argument, given the size of the US and China compared to Germany. The figures I found put Germany second, not third, but OK, so what if I concede Germany is third not far behind China and the US, despite being much smaller?
This supports my argument that being inside the EU is clearly not an inhibitor to being a tremendously successful exporter, and, by extension, all this stuff about how the UK 'freed' from the restrictions of EU membership is better placed to export to the world is just more delusional BS.
Alternatively, you could just admit that you lied.
As a general point, I have a problem with accusations of lying when there was no intention to deceive. The accusation is itself a lie, I suppose. You could have simply said Ian was wrong.
FWIW I'm guessing the fall in the value of the € versus the € at the end of 2014 meant the US and Germany swapped places in terms of absolute value of exports.
No, he was shown evidence, then persisted with his falsehood. That's a lie.
And you can be sure if a Leaver was consistently peddling untruths that support a Leave thesis, IanB2 would not hesitate to call it a lie.
But it matters not whose data is correct. Even going by SeanT's data, my argument that Germany is a tremendously successful exporter (particularly for its size) is validated.
Sounds like a country who would be really keen on no tariffs post Brexit ?
"Mr Phillips is believed to have pondered crossing the floor and remaining as an independent MP, but as he had been elected to a Conservative Party that he now believes has "UKIP-lite" values, he believed the "honourable course" was to resign.
"This is not the basis upon which he stood as an MP," one friend told Sky News.
The "final straw" was the decision by Number 10 to appeal a "clear-cut" High Court judgement to involve Parliament in the decision to trigger Article 50."
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
chortle
is this the bit where we can play the Cameroon argument in reverse and you get told to fk off and join the LibDems ?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That was in the expectation of a Remain victory and Dave & George being in charge.
LOL
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
Dave standing down would have focused minds.
Plus, prior to the general election I got the distinct impression that the party was going to unite and make sure Corbyn didn't become PM.
'Not on my watch' was the mantra
yes, but youve just accepted your colleagues are lying bastards so you shouldnt really have taken that at face value
Not even the Government's lawyers tried to make the case that the Referendum Act gave authority in that way - it could have been put in the Act, it was in the past for things such as the AV Referendum, and it was not in this case.
The Government can't go "Oops, we meant to put it in but forgot; let's all act as if we did." If they did, given the briefing paper the Government passed out to all parliamentarians saying that it explicitly did NOT give such authority would probably have scuppered them.
In short - they could have done that, they did in previous ones where it was to be automatic, they didn't in this one and they wrote and distributed a paper to the parliamentarians saying it was advisory only
I'm not arguing that the Act authorised the government; I'm arguing that the referendum did, as an inherent feature of referendums expressing the will of the sovereign people.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory is a side-issue. That would only be pertinent if the question was whether the government was obliged to invoke A50 (which it isn't). The question instead is whether the government can invoke A50 following the referendum result.
That's a total constitutional change, though. We've had referendums before and never argued that they automatically gave the Government any extra constitutional powers. Or extra-constitutional powers, for that matter. It's a massive change in power for any Government. As constitutional changes like that are so important, we'd need to either put it to the people in a General Election or in a referendum (the latter duly passed by Parliament in advance, of course )
I'm not making a general argument beyond that a referendum ratified by parliament implies that the government can implement the decision providing that it already had the authority. In this case, the government has always had the royal prerogative with regard to the exercise of treaties ratified by parliament. The question is simply whether with regard to A50, that prerogative had been put into total abeyance by the 1972 ECA or whether it still existed and if so, in what form.
"Mr Phillips is believed to have pondered crossing the floor and remaining as an independent MP, but as he had been elected to a Conservative Party that he now believes has "UKIP-lite" values, he believed the "honourable course" was to resign.
"This is not the basis upon which he stood as an MP," one friend told Sky News.
The "final straw" was the decision by Number 10 to appeal a "clear-cut" High Court judgement to involve Parliament in the decision to trigger Article 50."
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
chortle
is this the bit where we can play the Cameroon argument in reverse and you get told to fk off and join the LibDems ?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That was in the expectation of a Remain victory and Dave & George being in charge.
LOL
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
Dave standing down would have focused minds.
Plus, prior to the general election I got the distinct impression that the party was going to unite and make sure Corbyn didn't become PM.
'Not on my watch' was the mantra
I wonder in your state of personal angst and loss of political identity TSE following Brexit, would a Labour party under someone like Chuka or Sadiq have drawn you across the political divide. After all, I would have voted Tory under Cambourne faced against Jezza.....
As I've been arguing all morning, holding a further vote in Parliament is intrinsically anti-democratic as doing so accepts that Parliament has the right to veto the people's decision. At best, this is storing up trouble for the future.
Yes, Parliament has the right to veto a referendum. That's representative democracy. Removing that right creates a direct democracy. I'm not necessarily against it, as I said. Do you favour it?
Yes. It would be absurd if Parliament could veto a referendum - if it wasn't prepared to accept one answer it shouldn't have called the referendum in the first place.
It shouldn't have been made an advisory referendum then.
If it was "advisory" (which it wasn't) it was advisory to the government not Parliament.
Thing is...if remain had squeaked it there is no doubt whatsoever it would have been binding. You know it, I know it we all do. It's the way referendums are continued until they get it correct. Then that's it binding no rerun.
Much is permitted, including referendums, providing parliament legislates for it. If you want referendums to be binding, then legislate to that effect.
But if you take the Parliamentary absolutist line then, if the EU Ref Act had had some extra waffle inserted into it that explicitly stated the binding nature of the vote, it would effectively have no relevance. Parliament could simply enact a new piece of legislation countermanding the old one.
My reading of what @david_herdson was arguing is that the courts ought to recognise that times have changed since Gladstone and Disraeli were battling it out, and if Parliament legislates for a referendum, the people have a reasonable expectation that the outcome of the referendum must be acted upon. Effectively, the sovereignty of the people should be recognised as superior to that of Parliamentarians, and thus the previously assumed right of Parliament to dismiss the popular verdict if it sees fit should now be consigned to the constitutional dustbin.
That's not how binding referendums work.
But if Parliament is supreme then surely there is no such thing as a binding referendum in the first place?
"Mr Phillips is believed to have pondered crossing the floor and remaining as an independent MP, but as he had been elected to a Conservative Party that he now believes has "UKIP-lite" values, he believed the "honourable course" was to resign.
"This is not the basis upon which he stood as an MP," one friend told Sky News.
The "final straw" was the decision by Number 10 to appeal a "clear-cut" High Court judgement to involve Parliament in the decision to trigger Article 50."
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
chortle
is this the bit where we can play the Cameroon argument in reverse and you get told to fk off and join the LibDems ?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That was in the expectation of a Remain victory and Dave & George being in charge.
LOL
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
Dave standing down would have focused minds.
Plus, prior to the general election I got the distinct impression that the party was going to unite and make sure Corbyn didn't become PM.
'Not on my watch' was the mantra
I wonder in your state of personal angst and loss of political identity TSE following Brexit, would a Labour party under someone like Chuka or Sadiq have drawn you across the political divide. After all, I would have voted Tory under Cambourne faced against Jezza.....
Whilst it does seem the Times is the one to alter the image, I think Mr. Observer's reaction at first glance is reasonable (although clearly needs amending given that, for whatever reason, the Times have lightened it).
For tennis fans...this afternoon could be interesting. Djopkovic has a very tricky match against an in form Cilic, and if Murray wins the tournament and gets to be number 1 it would arguably be the UK's best sporting single competitor achievement in our history...
"Germany at over $1.5t is second, behind China at $1.9t, despite being much smaller and poor in raw materials (except lignite and potash). Export goods include motor vehicles, machinery, chemicals, computer and electronic products, electrical equipment, pharmaceuticals, metals, transport equipment, food items, textiles, rubber and plastic products"
NevertheEU membership is better placed to export to the world is just more delusional BS.
Alternatively, you could just admit that you lied.
As a general point, I have a problem with accusations of lying when there was no intention to deceive. The accusation is itself a lie, I suppose. You could have simply said Ian was wrong.
FWIW I'm guessing the fall in the value of the € versus the € at the end of 2014 meant the US and Germany swapped places in terms of absolute value of exports.
No, he was shown evidence, then persisted with his falsehood. That's a lie.
And you can be sure if a Leaver was consistently peddling untruths that support a Leave thesis, IanB2 would not hesitate to call it a lie.
This is truly desperate stuff from this site's chief bullsh*tter SeanT.
I just typed the query into a search engine and this was the site that came up with the data I provided:
But it matters not whose data is correct. Even going by SeanT's data, my argument that Germany is a tremendously successful exporter (particularly for its size) is validated, not undermined. Hence, presumably, why Sean resorts to throwing the mud in preference to facing the facts.
I withdraw the accusation that you're a liar, and will instead grant that you're a sad, pathetic, dribble-chinned and dissembling halfwit.
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That was in the expectation of a Remain victory and Dave & George being in charge.
LOL
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
Dave standing down would have focused minds.
Plus, prior to the general election I got the distinct impression that the party was going to unite and make sure Corbyn didn't become PM.
'Not on my watch' was the mantra
I wonder in your state of personal angst and loss of political identity TSE following Brexit, would a Labour party under someone like Chuka or Sadiq have drawn you across the political divide. After all, I would have voted Tory under Cambourne faced against Jezza.....
I cannot see that happening.
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
Whereas Labour seems to be more focused on making the cake equal.
If I never voted Labour under Blair, then I don't think I ever will*
*I did vote Labour in a local council election in 2003, the Tory candidate was a knob, and it also made it more likely IDS would be toppled after a crap performance in the 2003 locals.
"Germany at over $1.5t is second, behind China at $1.9t, despite being much smaller and poor in raw materials (except lignite and potash). Export goods include motor vehicles, machinery, chemicals, computer and electronic products, electrical equipment, pharmaceuticals, metals, transport equipment, food items, textiles, rubber and plastic products"
NevertheEU membership is better placed to export to the world is just more delusional BS.
Alternatively, you could just admit that you lied.
As a general point, I have a problem with accusations of lying when there was no intention to deceive. The accusation is itself a lie, I suppose. You could have simply said Ian was wrong.
FWIW I'm guessing the fall in the value of the € versus the € at the end of 2014 meant the US and Germany swapped places in terms of absolute value of exports.
No, he was shown evidence, then persisted with his falsehood. That's a lie.
And you can be sure if a Leaver was consistently peddling untruths that support a Leave thesis, IanB2 would not hesitate to call it a lie.
This is truly desperate stuff from this site's chief bullsh*tter SeanT.
I just typed the query into a search engine and this was the site that came up with the data I provided:
But it matters not whose data is correct. Even going by SeanT's data, my argument that Germany is a tremendously successful exporter (particularly for its size) is validated, not undermined. Hence, presumably, why Sean resorts to throwing the mud in preference to facing the facts.
I withdraw the accusation that you're a liar, and will instead grant that you're a sad, pathetic, dribble-chinned and dissembling halfwit.
Talking to the mirror will get you nowhere.
I haven't heard "I know you are, but what am I" in a long time
At some point someone in government is going to need to say something about the importance of the independence of the judiciary. It would be well if they did so sooner rather than later. This is an entirely avoidable minefield that they are blundering into.
2 out of 3 aint bad. "Lord Justice Sales is a close friend of Tony Blair, the former prime minister who campaigned for Remain and wants a second vote on Britain's EU membership. Lord Thomas co-founded a Europhile legal group. "Telegraph
The third one is openly gay, you know. And he fenced!
The idea of reporting the reasoning behind the judgment - which is clear and well put together, whether or not you agree with it - seems to be beyond the journalist, who prefers to rely on unfounded innuendo.
Recently the Telegraph's only value has been as toilet paper, its journalism has been so poor. But paper with such lazy and lousy ad hominem attacks (one of which is so flimsy that it is based on someone that the judge is friends with) wouldn't even get to touch my shitty arse.
I agree with you about The Telegraph, but the judgement being clear and well put together is surely a given, whatever the verdict. One would hardly expect a legal judgement to be ambiguous and incoherent.
Mr. Pulpstar, backed on Ladbrokes at 1.9. Incidentally, thanks to Mr. Cabinet, who tipped the Republicans at 3.25 a short time ago. Mildly green on that whatever happens.
Mr. T, we agree on the latter point. Things are divisive now but they'll get much, much worse if the likes of Blair and Clegg manage to either ignore the referendum result or water down our departure so much we're effectively members in all but names.
"Mr Phillips is believed to have pondered crossing the floor and remaining as an independent MP, but as he had been elected to a Conservative Party that he now believes has "UKIP-lite" values, he believed the "honourable course" was to resign.
"This is not the basis upon which he stood as an MP," one friend told Sky News.
The "final straw" was the decision by Number 10 to appeal a "clear-cut" High Court judgement to involve Parliament in the decision to trigger Article 50."
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
chortle
is this the bit where we can play the Cameroon argument in reverse and you get told to fk off and join the LibDems ?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
Two scenarios:
1. Tory Party splits in half between the Leave and Remain MPs, now morphed into hard vs soft Brexit factions. Total chaos, mutually assured destruction, likely results in ruination and a cobbled together socialist Government. Why on Earth would they do that over the mechanics (not even the actual decision) of Brexit?
2. A tiny rump of continuity Remainers flounces off, and is annihilated at the polls (does anybody remember the Pro-Euro Conservative Party? Thought not.)
At some point someone in government is going to need to say something about the importance of the independence of the judiciary. It would be well if they did so sooner rather than later. This is an entirely avoidable minefield that they are blundering into.
2 out of 3 aint bad. "Lord Justice Sales is a close friend of Tony Blair, the former prime minister who campaigned for Remain and wants a second vote on Britain's EU membership. Lord Thomas co-founded a Europhile legal group. "Telegraph
The third one is openly gay, you know. And he fenced!
The idea of reporting the reasoning behind the judgment - which is clear and well put together, whether or not you agree with it - seems to be beyond the journalist, who prefers to rely on unfounded innuendo.
Recently the Telegraph's only value has been as toilet paper, its journalism has been so poor. But paper with such lazy and lousy ad hominem attacks (one of which is so flimsy that it is based on someone that the judge is friends with) wouldn't even get to touch my shitty arse.
I agree with you about The Telegraph, but the judgement being clear and well put together is surely a given, whatever the verdict. One would hardly expect a legal judgement to be ambiguous and incoherent.
Some judgements are ambiguous and incoherent (I'm not saying that this one is).
"Germany at over $1.5t is second, behind China at $1.9t, despite being much smaller and poor in raw materials (except lignite and potash). Export goods include motor vehicles, machinery, chemicals, computer and electronic products, electrical equipment, pharmaceuticals, metals, transport equipment, food items, textiles, rubber and plastic products"
Alternatively, you could just admit that you lied.
As a general point, I have a problem with accusations of lying when there was no intention to deceive. The accusation is itself a lie, I suppose. You could have simply said Ian was wrong.
FWIW I'm guessing the fall in the value of the € versus the € at the end of 2014 meant the US and Germany swapped places in terms of absolute value of exports.
No, he was shown evidence, then persisted with his falsehood. That's a lie.
And you can be sure if a Leaver was consistently peddling untruths that support a Leave thesis, IanB2 would not hesitate to call it a lie.
This is truly desperate stuff from this site's chief bullsh*tter SeanT.
I just typed the query into a search engine and this was the site that came up with the data I provided:
But it matters not whose data is correct. Even going by SeanT's data, my argument that Germany is a tremendously successful exporter (particularly for its size) is validated, not undermined. Hence, presumably, why Sean resorts to throwing the mud in preference to facing the facts.
I withdraw the accusation that you're a liar, and will instead grant that you're a sad, pathetic, dribble-chinned and dissembling halfwit.
Talking to the mirror will get you nowhere.
I haven't heard "I know you are, but what am I" in a long time
Bottom line is that it says very little for Sean that he is utterly incapable of discussing whether leaving the EU improves the UK's prospects as a global exporter without quickly descending into schoolboy abuse.
I share the concerns he has about the direction of the Tory party.
?
I'm staying, it is much more fun staying in the tent and pissing in. I'm not French and surrending at the first bit of difficulty, I stay on and fight.
My fear is the Tory party is torn asunder, and Brexit is the new Corn Laws.
bullshit
I had it on very good authority ( you ) that post the vote the Tories would come together and all would be sweetness and light
That was in the expectation of a Remain victory and Dave & George being in charge.
LOL
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
Dave standing down would have focused minds.
Plus, prior to the general election I got the distinct impression that the party was going to unite and make sure Corbyn didn't become PM.
'Not on my watch' was the mantra
I wonder in your state of personal ane faced against Jezza.....
I cannot see that happening.
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
Whereas Labour seems to be more focused on making the cake equal.
If I never voted Labour under Blair, then I don't think I ever will*
*I did vote Labour in a local council election in 2003, the Tory candidate was a knob, and it also made it more likely IDS would be toppled after a crap performance in the 2003 locals.
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
but in that camerooney way where you also cut yourself a bigger slice of the bigger cake.
Whilst it does seem the Times is the one to alter the image, I think Mr. Observer's reaction at first glance is reasonable (although clearly needs amending given that, for whatever reason, the Times have lightened it).
No, it's a stupid reaction. Anyone with a brain would know that the Sun picture eds are most unlikely to be hateful race baiters fuelled by Brexit loathing of Ms Miller.
But Southam desperately WANTED to believe this, so he leapt to a ludicrous conclusion.
It shows that there are credulous nitwits on all sides of this debate. Brexit is sending people bonkers.
I remember some people claimed that the sun and daily mail only photoed the one or two child migrants who looked a bit old, until it was revealed it was Getty who took the images and all looked similarly not a child.
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick 2h2 hours ago Stephen Phillips succeeds David Cameron as Steward & Bailiff of Manor of Northstead - that's office under Crown which enables MPs to quit
Is this because Zac is already doing the Chilterns Hundreds job?
Yes.
Are the Chiltern Hundred going to be vacant if Zac is returned to parliament?
What percentage of the Chiltern Hundred are voting for Hillary?
Bottom line is that it says very little for Sean that he is utterly incapable of discussing whether leaving the EU improves the UK's prospects as a global exporter without quickly descending into schoolboy abuse.
Mr. Tyson, yes, but the British have achieved rather a lot in sport (just this year).
Yes....I seem to remember we did manage to score against Iceland....
Seriously, Mo Farah is a legend of course. But with Olympic sports on the whole (not athletics or swimming), like F1...one is fishing in a very small pond of competitors...
But the point about tennis....probably 90% of kids in most developed countries have held a tennis racket in their hands at some point. Scaling the top of that tree is a mighty feat....
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
but in that camerooney way where you also cut yourself a bigger slice of the bigger cake.
No, whilst Cameron was PM, my taxes went up, just like Dave's did, but those at the bottom saw their taxes cut thanks to the increases in personal allowance.
Much is permitted, including referendums, providing parliament legislates for it. If you want referendums to be binding, then legislate to that effect.
But if you take the Parliamentary absolutist line then, if the EU Ref Act had had some extra waffle inserted into it that explicitly stated the binding nature of the vote, it would effectively have no relevance. Parliament could simply enact a new piece of legislation countermanding the old one.
My reading of what @david_herdson was arguing is that the courts ought to recognise that times have changed since Gladstone and Disraeli were battling it out, and if Parliament legislates for a referendum, the people have a reasonable expectation that the outcome of the referendum must be acted upon. Effectively, the sovereignty of the people should be recognised as superior to that of Parliamentarians, and thus the previously assumed right of Parliament to dismiss the popular verdict if it sees fit should now be consigned to the constitutional dustbin.
Sorry, been out so didn't see that. If that is indeed his argument, then it's rubbish. It's not up to the courts - and would be completely alien to UK political tradition - for them to innovate in some putative 'balance' between Parliament and popular opinion. Where on earth would you draw the line ? Far simpler and more sensible to set out the terms of the referendum in the enabling bill.
And you first para is a hypothetical on top of a hypothetical which goes nowhere. Parliament 'could enact' a piece of legislation now doing just that; it isn't going to.
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
but in that camerooney way where you also cut yourself a bigger slice of the bigger cake.
No, whilst Cameron was PM, my taxes went up, just like Dave's did, but those at the bottom saw their taxes cut thanks to the increases in personal allowance.
Increases in the personal allowance were the policy of the Lib Dem wing of the coalition not the Comservatives.
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
but in that camerooney way where you also cut yourself a bigger slice of the bigger cake.
No, whilst Cameron was PM, my taxes went up, just like Dave's did, but those at the bottom saw their taxes cut thanks to the increases in personal allowance.
those at the bottom saw more money because it was LD policy. Thicky George eventually copied the policy and prfetended it was his.
As for your taxes, as a lawyer a 110% rate is the minimum acceptable
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
but in that camerooney way where you also cut yourself a bigger slice of the bigger cake.
No, whilst Cameron was PM, my taxes went up, just like Dave's did, but those at the bottom saw their taxes cut thanks to the increases in personal allowance.
Increases in the personal allowance were the policy of the Lib Dem wing of the coalition not the Comservatives.
History will note it was a Tory Chancellor who delivered them.
But yes, it was a Lib Dem policy.
One of those great ironies, the private polling the Tories conducted in the South West prior to the 2015 general election, one of the three main reasons people defected to the Tories was the increase in the personal allowance.
Mr. Tyson, well, not *all* posts. And mostly, but not always polite [there's only so much patience a man can have for the perverted lunacy that is Mr. Eagles' fumbling attempts to refer to classical history].
Replying a lot can also be a sign I'm mildly procrastinating. Ahem.
Jeez, this is an awful week to write my threads for Sunday in advance.
I might go for a non time sensitive piece on AV/electoral reform/House of Lords reform.
why not give us the upside of the courts decision and write how Nicola Sturgeon's strategy is in tatters and a career in pantomime is all she has left ?
I was right, and it was obvious I was right. Yet the mad Remainers WANTED to believe so very very much.
There's quite a few people on Twitter now who could face a successful libel action from the Sun.
Sean, I realise that a soft Devonian cream-tea boy such as yourself finds such things hard to understand, but I was a remain voter, and I pointed out that piccies of her in Google Images showed her having a wide range of skin tones, and that it was a non-story.
It's not a remain versus leave thing. It's a people-want-to-believe-anything-that-matches-their-prejudices thing, and that's something we all fall into at times.
Whilst it does seem the Times is the one to alter the image, I think Mr. Observer's reaction at first glance is reasonable (although clearly needs amending given that, for whatever reason, the Times have lightened it).
No, it's a stupid reaction. Anyone with a brain would know that the Sun picture eds are most unlikely to be hateful race baiters fuelled by Brexit loathing of Ms Miller.
But Southam desperately WANTED to believe this, so he leapt to a ludicrous conclusion.
It shows that there are credulous nitwits on all sides of this debate. Brexit is sending people bonkers.
I remember some people claimed that the sun and daily mail only photoed the one or two child migrants who looked a bit old, until it was revealed it was Getty who took the images and all looked similarly not a child.
Yep. Exactly the same mental process.
To be fair, it's not surprising that people are skeptical about press photos these days:
http://petapixel.com/2016/10/26/world-press-photo-debut-new-photo-contest-no-rules/ The prestigious World Press Photo contest has been tarnished in recent years by findings of inappropriate staging and digital manipulation of photos. So, the organizers have come up with a solution: there will soon be a new separate contest that does away with all the rules.
World Press Photo announced today that starting in October 2017, there will be a brand new contest for “creative documentary photography” (the official name has yet to be finalized).
Unlike the organization’s traditional contest for photojournalists, which disqualified 20% of finalists last year and subsequently implemented a Code of Ethics, the new contest won’t be bound by journalism ethics.
“This contest will be for professional visual storytellers who, in wanting to communicate about actual people, events or issues, deploy creative techniques in constructing, processing and presenting images,” World Press Photo says. “This contest will not have rules limiting how images are produced, and will not have categories.”…
Whilst it does seem the Times is the one to alter the image, I think Mr. Observer's reaction at first glance is reasonable (although clearly needs amending given that, for whatever reason, the Times have lightened it).
No, it's a stupid reaction. Anyone with a brain would know that the Sun picture eds are most unlikely to be hateful race baiters fuelled by Brexit loathing of Ms Miller.
But Southam desperately WANTED to believe this, so he leapt to a ludicrous conclusion.
It shows that there are credulous nitwits on all sides of this debate. Brexit is sending people bonkers.
Given where we have been going with headlines and stories over recent days, I thought it could well be true. I was wrong. I forgot my own rule, which is never to believe anything on Twitter without corroborating evidence. I look a bit stupid now. Not for the first time. We move on and I will be more careful in future.
Comments
given they couldnt unite their party before the vote how were they going to do it after ?
I just typed the query into a search engine and this was the site that came up with the data I provided:
http://www.therichest.com/business/the-10-biggest-exporting-countries-in-the-world/
So there is no "lie" involved.
But it matters not whose data is correct. Even going by SeanT's data, my argument that Germany is a tremendously successful exporter (particularly for its size) is validated, not undermined. Hence, presumably, why Sean resorts to throwing the mud in preference to facing the facts.
Plus, prior to the general election I got the distinct impression that the party was going to unite and make sure Corbyn didn't become PM.
'Not on my watch' was the mantra
You are correct of course, but judges are part of the legal profession - aren't they?
Does getting kicked upstairs and getting a bigger wig confer instant objectivity?
No chance the Gov't will take it there though.
Al Qaeda terror plot 'targets US election day'
http://news.sky.com/story/al-qaeda-terror-plot-targets-us-election-day-10644520
Ok....I must confess ....already in the pub with a pint of fine circuit bitter ( castle combe breweries)
Sounds like a lovely fellow.
http://www.rollonfriday.com/TheNews/EuropeNews/tabid/58/Id/4853/fromTab/36/currentIndex/3/Default.aspx
Michael McDonald
Michael McDonald – @ElectProject
Georgia race comparison to 2012 same day
Afr-Am +28,935 (+5.2%)
White +292,321 (+29.6%)
It's not Afr-Am unethused, it's Whites much more
Battleground States - PPP - Samples Below - 31 Oct - 1 Nov
NH - Clinton 48 .. Trump 43 - 781
NV - Clinton 48 .. Trump 45 - 681
WI - Clinton 48 .. Trump 41 -1,169
PA - Clinton 48 .. Trump 44 - 1,050
NC - Clinton 49 .. Trump 45- 891
https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/sites/2/2016/11/03143857/NHResults112-Final.pdf
https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/sites/2/2016/11/03143904/NVResults112-Final.pdf
https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/sites/2/2016/11/03143904/NCResults112-Final.pdf
https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/sites/2/2016/11/03143856/WIResults112-Final.pdf
https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/sites/2/2016/11/03143857/PAResults11316-Final.pdf
No further questions.
What's happening with the world........
PADDY POWER EVENS North Carolina. (Democrats)
https://twitter.com/BenCawthra/status/794510535807090693
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37869895
£11 a year...no wonder his smile is so wide!
In a BBC interview, Lord Kerr of Kinlochard said the UK could choose to stay in the EU even after exit negotiations had begun.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-37852628
He should post it without lightroom.
Mr. Urquhart, think you missed an 'm' off...
Clinton 41 .. Trump 44
http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_f41eb67b0e694f8ca80b020facc8d937.pdf
At heart I'm someone who believes in making the economic cake bigger then sharing it.
Whereas Labour seems to be more focused on making the cake equal.
If I never voted Labour under Blair, then I don't think I ever will*
*I did vote Labour in a local council election in 2003, the Tory candidate was a knob, and it also made it more likely IDS would be toppled after a crap performance in the 2003 locals.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/8WK8A
Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina to change hands only. Big Clinton ECV win, around a 3% national vote share victory.
Donald Trump essentially = Ed Miliband 2015 performance (Slight improvement)*
* No Scottish Labour for Trump to worry about tho.
http://petapixel.com/2016/11/03/chicago-tribune-sun-times-covers-world-series/
1. Tory Party splits in half between the Leave and Remain MPs, now morphed into hard vs soft Brexit factions. Total chaos, mutually assured destruction, likely results in ruination and a cobbled together socialist Government. Why on Earth would they do that over the mechanics (not even the actual decision) of Brexit?
2. A tiny rump of continuity Remainers flounces off, and is annihilated at the polls (does anybody remember the Pro-Euro Conservative Party? Thought not.)
It would be an incredible sporting achievement for Murray......
but in that camerooney way where you also cut yourself a bigger slice of the bigger cake.
Can judges even sue ?
Silly to imagine they'd engage in the kind of race baiting they might have done 30 odd years ago.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/11/04/record-prices-for-avocados-spark-strikes-in-mexico-and-a-crime-w/
Bloody hell, things must be bad back there
Given the Meeks view that all judges are objective on every occasion and never allow political motives to influence their decisions, then probably.
In actual fact? doubtful.
Seriously, Mo Farah is a legend of course. But with Olympic sports on the whole (not athletics or swimming), like F1...one is fishing in a very small pond of competitors...
But the point about tennis....probably 90% of kids in most developed countries have held a tennis racket in their hands at some point. Scaling the top of that tree is a mighty feat....
If that is indeed his argument, then it's rubbish. It's not up to the courts - and would be completely alien to UK political tradition - for them to innovate in some putative 'balance' between Parliament and popular opinion. Where on earth would you draw the line ?
Far simpler and more sensible to set out the terms of the referendum in the enabling bill.
And you first para is a hypothetical on top of a hypothetical which goes nowhere. Parliament 'could enact' a piece of legislation now doing just that; it isn't going to.
Fair dinkum, I'll shut up on this now.
I might go for a non time sensitive piece on AV/electoral reform/House of Lords reform.
As for your taxes, as a lawyer a 110% rate is the minimum acceptable
https://twitter.com/betdatapolitics/status/794575678964432900
And some context:
https://twitter.com/betdatapolitics/status/746089742920359937
But yes, it was a Lib Dem policy.
One of those great ironies, the private polling the Tories conducted in the South West prior to the 2015 general election, one of the three main reasons people defected to the Tories was the increase in the personal allowance.
Oil price down to 45 dollars a barrel
Yesterday's B of E forecast for steep inflation rise already looking overdone.
Whether they would of course... not sure what libel there actually is in the DM story.
Which is exactly where, according to the BoE's own target, it is meant to be.
Doom, gloom, disaster.
http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/
Replying a lot can also be a sign I'm mildly procrastinating. Ahem.
It's not a remain versus leave thing. It's a people-want-to-believe-anything-that-matches-their-prejudices thing, and that's something we all fall into at times.
BTW, she has a lovely smile in the Times photo.
http://petapixel.com/2016/10/26/world-press-photo-debut-new-photo-contest-no-rules/
The prestigious World Press Photo contest has been tarnished in recent years by findings of inappropriate staging and digital manipulation of photos. So, the organizers have come up with a solution: there will soon be a new separate contest that does away with all the rules.
World Press Photo announced today that starting in October 2017, there will be a brand new contest for “creative documentary photography” (the official name has yet to be finalized).
Unlike the organization’s traditional contest for photojournalists, which disqualified 20% of finalists last year and subsequently implemented a Code of Ethics, the new contest won’t be bound by journalism ethics.
“This contest will be for professional visual storytellers who, in wanting to communicate about actual people, events or issues, deploy creative techniques in constructing, processing and presenting images,” World Press Photo says. “This contest will not have rules limiting how images are produced, and will not have categories.”…