That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Use of CE and BCE recognises the dominant position of Christianity in much of the World, but AD is an abbreviation that non-Christians (and even possibly Unitarians) would be very uncomfortable in using.
It's a case of assuming that people are going to be offended when very few are in reality.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Use of CE and BCE recognises the dominant position of Christianity in much of the World, but AD is an abbreviation that non-Christians (and even possibly Unitarians) would be very uncomfortable in using.
Some non-Christians, maybe. I'm an atheist but the idea that we can pretend that something that is Christian isn't is utterly bizarre to me.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Quiet right. Horrible that you're coerced into using dating terminology of a certain type by oppressive liberal fascists, and denied the use of your preferred option.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Quiet right. Horrible that you're coerced into using dating terminology of a certain type by oppressive' liberal fascists, and denied the use of your preferred option.
I did not suggest that Christians shouldn't use the abbreviation AD, or that non-Christians would be offended by its use, but merely that non-Christians would be uncomfortable in writing it themselves.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
You spelt "students" wrong.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
He's very obviously not transphobic, so accusing him of it annoys me intensely. It dilutes the views of people like me who genuinely are.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Use of CE and BCE recognises the dominant position of Christianity in much of the World, but AD is an abbreviation that non-Christians (and even possibly Unitarians) would be very uncomfortable in using.
It's a case of assuming that people are going to be offended when very few are in reality.
Indeed. Conversely I'm not offended by the change, it's just annoying.
It also makes little sense - BC and AD will make non-christians uncomfortable, even though we're still setting the year from the birth of christ?
No no, everyone, it's fine, we're not forcing you to say BC, it's BCE, so it's ok that the calendar date we use is still set by the C in BC.
Seriously? If someone were uncomfortable by BC and AD, they'll still be offended by using christ's birth being the separation point between the common and before common eras.
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
The point isn't obvious - if the dates are the same, what's the point in calling it the 'common era' when the era is still being defined as post-christian era? Might as well renamed the months because I don't believe in Janus so why should I call the month that?
I'm not christian, I'm atheist, and as I said I don't have a problem with the idea of a calendar rename in principle, but that particular thing is renaming to no purpose, since you're basically using common era as a euphemism, pretending by word that it isn't still set by the purported birth of christ.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Use of CE and BCE recognises the dominant position of Christianity in much of the World, but AD is an abbreviation that non-Christians (and even possibly Unitarians) would be very uncomfortable in using.
It's a case of assuming that people are going to be offended when very few are in reality.
It is indeed, having just returned from a Hindu organised Christmas fair!
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Use of CE and BCE recognises the dominant position of Christianity in much of the World, but AD is an abbreviation that non-Christians (and even possibly Unitarians) would be very uncomfortable in using.
It's a case of assuming that people are going to be offended when very few are in reality.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
The point isn't obvious - if the dates are the same, what's the point in calling it the 'common era' when the era is still being defined as post-christian era? Might as well renamed the months because I don't believe in Janus so why should I call the month that?
I'm not christian, I'm atheist, and as I said I don't have a problem with the idea of a calendar rename in principle, but that particular thing is renaming to no purpose, since you're basically using common era as a euphemism, pretending by word that it isn't still set by the purported birth of christ.
Yes, and that is the point. Clearly you accept that is the point, you just don't agree with it. It is like renaming Ayers Rock Uluru -- it's the same rock.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Use of CE and BCE recognises the dominant position of Christianity in much of the World, but AD is an abbreviation that non-Christians (and even possibly Unitarians) would be very uncomfortable in using.
It's a case of assuming that people are going to be offended when very few are in reality.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
The point isn't obvious - if the dates are the same, what's the point in calling it the 'common era' when the era is still being defined as post-christian era? Might as well renamed the months because I don't believe in Janus so why should I call the month that?
I'm not christian, I'm atheist, and as I said I don't have a problem with the idea of a calendar rename in principle, but that particular thing is renaming to no purpose, since you're basically using common era as a euphemism, pretending by word that it isn't still set by the purported birth of christ.
At my church, a fair number of the elders still refer to Sunday as First day for this very reason. The joys of Puritanism!
@ShippersUnbound: AA Gill, the writer who first made me buy the Sunday Times, the best of us for thirty years has died. Very sombre mood in the office.
The calendar we use is no longer "the Christian calendar", it's a calendar that has Christian origins but has become the universal standard. Using the terms CE and BCE is a way of facilitating this universal use.
People arguing against this are wasting their time. First, the new terms have been in use for decades. Second, no-one is stopping you from using AD and BC if you want.
Yes, and that is the point. Clearly you accept that is the point, you just don't agree with it. It is like renaming Ayers Rock Uluru -- it's the same rock.
That has a much more reasonable explanation as to why it should be called Uluru - it already had a name, we just didn't bother to use it at the time, and ignoring that. It's still not really critical, or we'd be referring to the proper names of geological features, cities and entire countries properly rather than with their english language equivalents, but it is still quantifiably different to changing a classification out of fear than someone might be offended.
But then, the right to not be offended, whether it is in any way reasonable, is the most important right at all to some these days - quite appropriate given the discussion on Tatchell and all that no platform bollocks.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
@ShippersUnbound: AA Gill, the writer who first made me buy the Sunday Times, the best of us for thirty years has died. Very sombre mood in the office.
Bloody hell, how many more has 2016's grim reaper got left?
The calendar we use is no longer "the Christian calendar", it's a calendar that has Christian origins but has become the universal standard. Using the terms CE and BCE is a way of facilitating this universal use.
People arguing against this are wasting their time. First, the new terms have been in use for decades. Second, no-one is stopping you from using AD and BC if you want.
The calendar we use is no longer "the Christian calendar", it's a calendar that has Christian origins but has become the universal standard. Using the terms CE and BCE is a way of facilitating this universal use.
People arguing against this are wasting their time. First, the new terms have been in use for decades. Second, no-one is stopping you from using AD and BC if you want.
We are all wasting time here all the time, and I use BCE and CE in writing all the time - it's not important enough to fight against - it's just a pet peeve, which since it came up what's the harm in venting about? Corbyn's going nowhere and we still think about if he might.
When I nodded off, Prime Minister Cameron's Remain were winning the EU referendum according to the phone polls, Nigel Farage was wrecking leaves chances by mentioning immigration, Hilary Clinton was nailed on to be POTUS and Spurs were just about to finally finish above the Arsenal...
Did I miss much?
Nah. But we missed you.
Seconded! Welcome back!
Thank you both. A much appreciated birthday present from the Family Smithson
Ched Evans just equalised for Chesterfield... what kind of strange world have I woken up to?
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
No, I am just not driven by party bigotry like you. I judge people on their actions, not on which vested interest those actions hurt. For many years Tatchell was a thorn in the side of the right wing Governments of this country and I was just as pleased about that as I am about his actions these days.
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
I am not driven by party bigotry. I vote Labour but I am not a member. Some actions cry out "spook job". They don't cry out greatness, genuineness, and bravery.
I can't remember any Tory leaders being targeted in this way. Papers were found in Switzerland which brought down Jonathan Aitken. A couple of UKIP leaders have been targeted, but not with pictures. Nigel Farage "decided" at the last moment not to attend the C4 debate on the eve of the referendum. Those kind of things don't rile me so much as when spooks, state or private, run little groups of fake banner wavers and then ensure the photos get massive media coverage. At one point one of these pseudo-groups really had it in for Muammar Gadhafi's family in London. They're fake, fake, fake - and I'd be happy to converse nicely with any Tories, Kippers or others who oppose such fakery.
I am not moaning at all. Thames House will be Thames House. I expect this stuff.
Tatchell reminds me of Jill Stein who when asked the best way to stop Trump replied about how best to stop Clinton.
@PlatoSaid - I've met him too and you're right, he is very wiry. He comes across as being in his own world, but he isn't.
Did you ever post on here, under the user name Tapestry?
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
I hear it is now a pretty good game.
Have you got the new controllers for the Rift? I have tried all these things (except Magic Leap...but that is another matter), but when I tried the Rift it didn't have controllers.
havent got the controllers yet will wait to see how I like the rift
Played with one the other week in a shop, it's bloody awesome but the missus would kill me if I bought one and I'm not sure I've got a room big enough to take it!
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
No, I am just not driven by party bigotry like you. I judge people on their actions, not on which vested interest those actions hurt. For many years Tatchell was a thorn in the side of the right wing Governments of this country and I was just as pleased about that as I am about his actions these days.
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
I am not driven by party bigotry. I vote Labour but I am not a member. Some actions cry out "spook job". They don't cry out greatness, genuineness, and bravery.
I can't remember any Tory leaders being targeted in this way. Papers were found in Switzerland which brought down Jonathan Aitken. A couple of UKIP leaders have been targeted, but not with pictures. Nigel Farage "decided" at the last moment not to attend the C4 debate on the eve of the referendum. Those kind of things don't rile me so much as when spooks, state or private, run little groups of fake banner wavers and then ensure the photos get massive media coverage. At one point one of these pseudo-groups really had it in for Muammar Gadhafi's family in London. They're fake, fake, fake - and I'd be happy to converse nicely with any Tories, Kippers or others who oppose such fakery.
I am not moaning at all. Thames House will be Thames House. I expect this stuff.
Tatchell reminds me of Jill Stein who when asked the best way to stop Trump replied about how best to stop Clinton.
@PlatoSaid - I've met him too and you're right, he is very wiry. He comes across as being in his own world, but he isn't.
Did you ever post on here, under the user name Tapestry?
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
@ShippersUnbound: AA Gill, the writer who first made me buy the Sunday Times, the best of us for thirty years has died. Very sombre mood in the office.
If the secondaries spread to the pancreas/liver then it's all over: they can't operate (too many blood vessels), they can't amputate (you die without a liver), they can't transplant (cancer victims do not get transplants). They tend to move immediately to palliative care and time to death can be incredibly short: months instead of years, weeks instead of months. You can stick a pie in the freezer and it will outlast you. Iain Banks - may his tribe increase - died within six months of diagnosis, and by the looks of it AA Gill may have died quicker. It can be very nasty indeed and I hope his end was as painless as the Macmillan nurses and visiting GPs could make it.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
Ladies and Gentlemen accurately covers those who can't decide....
Waahey, a quick Daily Mail Santa dash round suppression of Christian heritage, excising of Christmas and enforcement of Liberal dating terminology. Surely time for some Halal turkey and carol banning.
1980 Lab ahead, lost seats 1984 Lab behind, gained seats 1988 Lab behind, gained seats I993 Lab ahead, gained seats 1998 Lab miles ahead, no significant change 2002 Lab ahead, lost seats 2006 Lab ahead lost seats 2011 Lab ahead lost seats.
It looks a pretty poor indicator to me, indeed quite possibly inversely related!
You're comparing an static predictor (Lab minus Con poll) to a dynamic outcome (change in Lab seats). If you have a static predictor you should be comparing it to a static outcome (eg number of Lab seats)
The calendar we use is no longer "the Christian calendar", it's a calendar that has Christian origins but has become the universal standard. Using the terms CE and BCE is a way of facilitating this universal use.
People arguing against this are wasting their time. First, the new terms have been in use for decades. Second, no-one is stopping you from using AD and BC if you want.
We are all wasting time here all the time, and I use BCE and CE in writing all the time - it's not important enough to fight against - it's just a pet peeve, which since it came up what's the harm in venting about? Corbyn's going nowhere and we still think about if he might.
Different things annoy different people. It really bugs me that AD is a Latin abbreviation and BC is an English abbreviation. More consistency needed.
Exactly. In what way would Syria be better off if we were busily dropping bombs on someone?
At this point, it appears that Assad is going to win, and that's probably a lesser evil than indefinite civil war. It's certainly not so obvious that another option is better as to justify our intervention.
On topic, Labour has a clear problem of even getting attention at the moment - 75% of the public have taken a view on Corbyn and are not hearing much to make them reconsider. I don't think he will get anywhere by being slightly more centrist, compromising on this and that - rather, he actually needs to take a leaf out of Trump's book and champion measures suffciently radical to get coverage. The phasing out of fossil fuel car engines is an example - lots of people will be annoyed, but quite a few non-Labour voters will see it as interesting if feasible. I also think he has little to lose by adopting a "second Brexit referendum unless the terms are right" strategy.
It's not about Corbyn, Nick, it's about the Labour party providing a halfway decent opposition to this abysmal government at a time when the country is crying out for one. Phasing out non-fossil fuel cars has nothing to do with that. The fact that you see things in the way that you do shows just how removed so many Labour members are these days from the lives of ordinary people in this country. For you, it seems, Corbyn's continued leadership is the absolute priority. I guess it's because you do not actually need a Labour government or fear the consequences of a Tory one.
As for Tatchell, he has graphically pointed out the sanctimonious hypocrisy of a man who earlier this week spent the evening at the book launch of a well-known anti-Semite which had been organised by the propaganda wing of an Iranian regime that hangs gay men and allows women to be stoned to death. That's how much Corbyn values human rights.
Aleppo has been under siege for months, tens of thousands have died, Corbyn has said nothing. Why? Because it was not the Americans doing it.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
On topic, the Labour right needs to decide what, if anything, it stands for. At present it is clear what it doesn't like but without a positive programme it is doomed to sink with its Corbynite masters.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are worry about potential offence on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas, Easter, etc and plenty do gifts etc.
On topic, the Labour right needs to decide what, if anything, it stands for. At present it is clear what it doesn't like but without a positive programme it is doomed to sink with its Corbynite masters.
On current polling, places like Hartlepool, Wrexham, and Grimsby are coming into play.
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain. The view is that the decision is much narrower than thought and in the event of a split decision referring the matter back to Parliament it is considered that that would stengthen Brexit as labour and lid dems will find it much harder to oppose.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are the offense on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Absolutely. A non-issue. Nothing to stop individuals referring to things however they want (if someone wants to say "Winter Festival", fine), but the idea that referring to Christmas etc. offends someone is a myth.
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are the offense on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Absolutely. A non-issue. Nothing to stop individuals referring to things however they want (if someone wants to say "Winter Festival", fine), but the idea that referring to Christmas etc. offends someone is a myth.
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
If you get back into parliament I expect a private members bill on outlawing christmas stuff before start of December !
Currently in Pakistan. The Christmas tree is up with decorations, and presents under it. The winter snowman scene is in place, complete with steam locomotive on the track. Now carols though.
That is in sharp contrast to the German Christmas market at the marina in Beirut, and the entire malls of over the top Christmas stuff in Kuala Lumpur, both blasting out carols.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are worry about potential offence on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas, Easter, etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are the offense on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Absolutely. A non-issue. Nothing to stop individuals referring to things however they want (if someone wants to say "Winter Festival", fine), but the idea that referring to Christmas etc. offends someone is a myth.
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
Saw thousand of Santa's running along Llandudno Promenade this morning. It must confuse children enormously but it was a fun sight
The calendar we use is no longer "the Christian calendar", it's a calendar that has Christian origins but has become the universal standard. Using the terms CE and BCE is a way of facilitating this universal use.
Exactly. In what way would Syria be better off if we were busily dropping bombs on someone?
At this point, it appears that Assad is going to win, and that's probably a lesser evil than indefinite civil war. It's certainly not so obvious that another option is better as to justify our intervention.
On topic, Labour has a clear problem of even getting attention at the moment - 75% of the public have taken a view on Corbyn and are not hearing much to make them reconsider. I don't think he will get anywhere by being slightly more centrist, compromising on this and that - rather, he actually needs to take a leaf out of Trump's book and champion measures suffciently radical to get coverage. The phasing out of fossil fuel car engines is an example - lots of people will be annoyed, but quite a few non-Labour voters will see it as interesting if feasible. I also think he has little to lose by adopting a "second Brexit referendum unless the terms are right" strategy.
It's not about Corbyn, Nick, it's about the Labour party providing a halfway decent opposition to this abysmal government at a time when the country is crying out for one. Phasing out non-fossil fuel cars has nothing to do with that. The fact that you see things in the way that you do shows just how removed so many Labour members are these days from the lives of ordinary people in this country. For you, it seems, Corbyn's continued leadership is the absolute priority. I guess it's because you do not actually need a Labour government or fear the consequences of a Tory one.
As for Tatchell, he has graphically pointed out the sanctimonious hypocrisy of a man who earlier this week spent the evening at the book launch of a well-known anti-Semite which had been organised by the propaganda wing of an Iranian regime that hangs gay men and allows women to be stoned to death. That's how much Corbyn values human rights.
Aleppo has been under siege for months, tens of thousands have died, Corbyn has said nothing. Why? Because it was not the Americans doing it.
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain.
For remain? That's not what they're deciding on.
It's not clear what purpose this kind of briefing from the government is supposed to serve. If I were in the judges' position I wouldn't be impressed by civil servants believing they could read my mind.
Exactly. In what way would Syria be better off if we were busily dropping bombs on someone?
At this point, it appears that Assad is going to win, and that's probably a lesser evil than indefinite civil war. It's certainly not so obvious that another option is better as to justify our intervention.
On topic, Labour has a clear problem of even getting attention at the moment - 75% of the public have taken a view on Corbyn and are not hearing much to make them reconsider. I don't think he will get anywhere by being slightly more centrist, compromising on this and that - rather, he actually needs to take a leaf out of Trump's book and champion measures suffciently radical to get coverage. The phasing out of fossil fuel car engines is an example - lots of people will be annoyed, but quite a few non-Labour voters will see it as interesting if feasible. I also think he has little to lose by adopting a "second Brexit referendum unless the terms are right" strategy.
It's not about Corbyn, Nick, it's about the Labour party providing a halfway decent opposition to this abysmal government at a time when the country is crying out for one. Phasing out non-fossil fuel cars has nothing to do with that. The fact that you see things in the way that you do shows just how removed so many Labour members are these days from the lives of ordinary people in this country. For you, it seems, Corbyn's continued leadership is the absolute priority. I guess it's because you do not actually need a Labour government or fear the consequences of a Tory one.
No, I'm making a more basic political point. If you're labelled as extreme, you need to grab attention by proposing radical policies, not by apologetically offering ways in wihch you're not quite as extreme as they thought. Being seen as extreme and saying nothing very striking would be the worst of both worlds.
But, as Alastair Meeks says, it would be helpful if someone offered an alternative social democratic agenda. Keir Starmer, for instance, seems to have the capacity to do so, though understandablypreoccupied by his immediate brief.
Seems highly unlikely that the Supreme Court Judges would be on the blower to the government or the newspapers or anybody else proclaiming their decision.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are the offense on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Absolutely. A non-issue. Nothing to stop individuals referring to things however they want (if someone wants to say "Winter Festival", fine), but the idea that referring to Christmas etc. offends someone is a myth.
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
Nick..you have been quite hostile about the PLP in the past and how they have impeded Corbyn's prospects...now we are a number of months into Corbyn's next term, and the PLP are Shutting TFU....what do you suggest is the main impediment now to Jezza increasing his popularity?
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain.
For remain? That's not what they're deciding on.
It's not clear what purpose this kind of briefing from the government is supposed to serve. If I were in the judges' position I wouldn't be impressed by civil servants believing they could read my mind.
Well Gina Miller if you prefer. I have no idea how this conclusion has been arrived at but quite a few commentators were indicating that they could come down for Theresa May.
It doesn't change my view that Theresa May has played a blinder by getting a Supreme Court ruling thereby providing a clear legal path to Brexit that will make resistance extemely difficult as she challengers MP's and Lords not to attempt to derail the process
Exactly. In what way would Syria be better off if we were busily dropping bombs on someone?
At this point, it appears that Assad is going to win, and that's probably a lesser evil than indefinite civil war. It's certainly not so obvious that another option is better as to justify our intervention.
On topic, interesting if feasible. I also think he has little to lose by adopting a "second Brexit referendum unless the terms are right" strategy.
It's not about Corbyn, Nick, it's about the Labour party providing a halfway decent opposition to this abysmal government at a time when the country is crying out for one. Phasing out non-fossil fuel cars has nothing to do with that. The fact that you see things in the way that you do shows just how removed so many Labour members are these days from the lives of ordinary people in this country. For you, it seems, Corbyn's continued leadership is the absolute priority. I guess it's because you do not actually need a Labour government or fear the consequences of a Tory one.
No, I'm making a more basic political point. If you're labelled as extreme, you need to grab attention by proposing radical policies, not by apologetically offering ways in wihch you're not quite as extreme as they thought. Being seen as extreme and saying nothing very striking would be the worst of both worlds.
But, as Alastair Meeks says, it would be helpful if someone offered an alternative social democratic agenda. Keir Starmer, for instance, seems to have the capacity to do so, though understandablypreoccupied by his immediate brief.
Nope - it's about the left accepting that Corbyn is taking Labour towards catastrophic defeat and that his leadership is not as important as preventing this from happening. The Corbyn agenda, for what it is, is not the issue here. It's the fact that for as long as he is in charge no-one will listen to anything that Labour has to say. He renders the party utterly irrelevant. Floating plans to phase out petrol cars as a way of getting attention just demonstrates that. This is about personality, not policy. As someone in the centre of the party, I accept that it has moved leftwards. Everyone else I know accepts it too. We realise that the next leader will come from the left and we will accept that and get behind anyone who comes across as credible and who gets Labour a hearing in the country. The left, though, seems far more interested in beating us - when we are already beaten - than it is in beating the Tories. It's that which has to change.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are the offense on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Absolutely. A non-issue. Nothing to stop individuals referring to things however they want (if someone wants to say "Winter Festival", fine), but the idea that referring to Christmas etc. offends someone is a myth.
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
Nick..you have been quite hostile about the PLP in the past and how they have impeded Corbyn's prospects...now we are a number of months into Corbyn's next term, and the PLP are Shutting TFU....what do you suggest is the main impediment now to Jezza increasing his popularity?
I'll tell you.. its simple. The answer is Jeremy Corbyn.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are the offense on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Absolutely. A non-issue. Nothing to stop individuals referring to things however they want (if someone wants to say "Winter Festival", fine), but the idea that referring to Christmas etc. offends someone is a myth.
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
Nick..you have been quite hostile about the PLP in the past and how they have impeded Corbyn's prospects...now we are a number of months into Corbyn's next term, and the PLP are Shutting TFU....what do you suggest is the main impediment now to Jezza increasing his popularity?
I'll tell you.. its simple. The answer is Jeremy Corbyn.
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain. The view is that the decision is much narrower than thought and in the event of a split decision referring the matter back to Parliament it is considered that that would stengthen Brexit as labour and lid dems will find it much harder to oppose.
No idea how true this is but it is being reported
Nothing the Supreme Court decides will *prevent* Leave. All it is doing is deciding the process by which it should be enacted.
Nope - it's about the left accepting that Corbyn is taking Labour towards catastrophic defeat and that his leadership is not as important as preventing this from happening. The Corbyn agenda, for what it is, is not the issue here. It's the fact that for as long as he is in charge no-one will listen to anything that Labour has to say. He renders the party utterly irrelevant. Floating plans to phase out petrol cars as a way of getting attention just demonstrates that. This is about personality, not policy. As someone in the centre of the party, I accept that it has moved leftwards. Everyone else I know accepts it too. We realise that the next leader will come from the left and we will accept that and get behind anyone who comes across as credible and who gets Labour a hearing in the country. The left, though, seems far more interested in beating us - when we are already beaten - than it is in beating the Tories. It's that which has to change.
In order to beat the Tories, Labour would need to move back to the centre again. Which is a problem for The Left.
Exactly. In what way would Syria be better off if we were busily dropping bombs on someone?
At this point, it appears that Assad is going to win, and that's probably a lesser evil than indefinite civil war. It's certainly not so obvious that another option is better as to justify our intervention.
On topic, Labour has a clear problem of even getting attention at the moment - 75% of the public have taken a view on Corbyn and are not hearing much to make them reconsider. I don't think he will get anywhere by being slightly more centrist, compromising on this and that - rather, he actually needs to take a leaf out of Trump's book and champion measures suffciently radical to get coverage. The phasing out of fossil fuel car engines is an example - lots of people will be annoyed, but quite a few non-Labour voters will see it as interesting if feasible. I also think he has little to lose by adopting a "second Brexit referendum unless the terms are right" strategy.
It's not about Corbyn, Nick, it's about the Labour party providing a halfway decent opposition to this abysmal government at a time when the country is crying out for one. Phasing out non-fossil fuel cars has nothing to do with that. The fact that you see things in the way that you do shows just how removed so many Labour members are these days from the lives of ordinary people in this country. For you, it seems, Corbyn's continued leadership is the absolute priority. I guess it's because you do not actually need a Labour government or fear the consequences of a Tory one.
No, I'm making a more basic political point. If you're labelled as extreme, you need to grab attention by proposing radical policies, not by apologetically offering ways in wihch you're not quite as extreme as they thought. Being seen as extreme and saying nothing very striking would be the worst of both worlds.
But, as Alastair Meeks says, it would be helpful if someone offered an alternative social democratic agenda. Keir Starmer, for instance, seems to have the capacity to do so, though understandablypreoccupied by his immediate brief.
Coincidence that possible saviour-of-the-party Starmer is tied up on Brexit for years? Shadowing a negotiating team that aren't going to tell us what is going on - so thereby rendering him mute?
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
It's irritating, like dropping "Ladies and Gentlemen" to avoid giving offence to people who can't work out whether they're male or female.
And it's promoted by the same people who annoyingly refer to 'Winter Festival' for the next couple of weeks. It's Christmas, you idiots.
Calm down Donald...
LOL - but it annoys the hell out of me, especially those who complain that 'other religions' might be offended by it. Well guess what, I live in an Islamic country yet all the malls are competing to find the biggest Christmas tree, I'm going to a carol singing next weekend and all the restaurants and hotels are doing special Christmas menus and brunches!
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
You are right there exists a small vocal number of idiots who are the offense on behalf of the offended brigade...I have never met a Muslim who is in anyway offended by people talking about Christmas etc and plenty do gifts etc.
Absolutely. A non-issue. Nothing to stop individuals referring to things however they want (if someone wants to say "Winter Festival", fine), but the idea that referring to Christmas etc. offends someone is a myth.
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
Nick..you have been quite hostile about the PLP in the past and how they have impeded Corbyn's prospects...now we are a number of months into Corbyn's next term, and the PLP are Shutting TFU....what do you suggest is the main impediment now to Jezza increasing his popularity?
I'll tell you.. its simple. The answer is Jeremy Corbyn.
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain. The view is that the decision is much narrower than thought and in the event of a split decision referring the matter back to Parliament it is considered that that would stengthen Brexit as labour and lid dems will find it much harder to oppose.
No idea how true this is but it is being reported
Government spin. I'm not sure what their objective is, though. Perhaps they assume people will have lost interest once the actual result is reported
Nick..you have been quite hostile about the PLP in the past and how they have impeded Corbyn's prospects...now we are a number of months into Corbyn's next term, and the PLP are Shutting TFU....what do you suggest is the main impediment now to Jezza increasing his popularity?
I'll tell you.. its simple. The answer is Jeremy Corbyn.
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
heard about it didn't see it.. Of course the fact that Corbyn is the problem reaches out to those who he surrounds himself with.
On topic, the Labour right needs to decide what, if anything, it stands for. At present it is clear what it doesn't like but without a positive programme it is doomed to sink with its Corbynite masters.
On current polling, places like Hartlepool, Wrexham, and Grimsby are coming into play.
Excepting Cardiff, every single Labour-held seat in Wales voted Leave.
None of the North Walian Labour seats look very secure at the moment. Even a moderately poor election could see them lose the lot. They are all much more vulnerable than the Valleys seats, which need a Scotland 2015-type collapse.
In fact, Baxter has them losing the lot -- Ynys Mon (to PC), and the rest (Wrecsam, Clywd S, Alyn & Deeside and Delyn) to Cons.
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
I guess Corbyn brings out that protective female instinct...didn't Diane Abbott block people from seeing him during the leadership woes.
Next stop the Leigh by election and the May locals to tell us what we already know....
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
I guess Corbyn brings out that protective female instinct...didn't Diane Abbott block people from seeing him during the leadership woes.
Next stop the Leigh by election and the May locals to tell us what we already know....
Nuttall winning Leigh might start the leadership issue rolling again.
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain. The view is that the decision is much narrower than thought and in the event of a split decision referring the matter back to Parliament it is considered that that would stengthen Brexit as labour and lid dems will find it much harder to oppose.
No idea how true this is but it is being reported
Nothing the Supreme Court decides will *prevent* Leave. All it is doing is deciding the process by which it should be enacted.
[edit: remove superfluous "will"]
Hence my view that the next court case should be a prosecution against the groups who crowdfunded the case, on the basis of 'obtaining property by deception'.
They raised money under slogans such as "Say Yes 2 Europe", "Remain in the EU". The banners of their supporters read "No to Brexit" and "Stop Brexit". Their Facebook page describes them as "A network of groups and individuals all working to ensure that the UK will Remain in the EU".
They're either lying when they say this isn't about preventing us leaving the EU, or they lied to their supporters to get them to part with the hundreds of thousands they have spunked away on lawyers in order to change (apparently) nothing.
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain. The view is that the decision is much narrower than thought and in the event of a split decision referring the matter back to Parliament it is considered that that would stengthen Brexit as labour and lid dems will find it much harder to oppose.
No idea how true this is but it is being reported
Nothing the Supreme Court decides will *prevent* Leave. All it is doing is deciding the process by which it should be enacted.
[edit: remove superfluous "will"]
Hence my view that the next court case should be a prosecution against the groups who crowdfunded the case, on the basis of 'obtaining property by deception'.
They raised money under slogans such as "Say Yes 2 Europe", "Remain in the EU". The banners of their supporters read "No to Brexit" and "Stop Brexit". Their Facebook page describes them as "A network of groups and individuals all working to ensure that the UK will Remain in the EU".
They're either lying when they say this isn't about preventing us leaving the EU, or they lied to their supporters to get them to part with the hundreds of thousands they have spunked away on lawyers in order to change (apparently) nothing.
Not sure of you point.
They want to force the government to get a vote in the hope that it can be delayed, watered down, or even stopped at that stage. Of course if the government doesn't require a vote then none of that can happen, however unlikely in any case.
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
I guess Corbyn brings out that protective female instinct...didn't Diane Abbott block people from seeing him during the leadership woes.
Next stop the Leigh by election and the May locals to tell us what we already know....
It was nothing to do with being female: they were protecting their careers. They have thrown their lot in with Corbyn. If he goes, they do too.
Snuck out from behind the Paywall. AA Gill on Brexit
This remains my favourite part, confirmed by the Minister for Brexit this week Brexit is the fond belief that Britain is worse now than at some point in the foggy past where we achieved peak Blighty
We listen to the Brexit lot talk about the trade deals they’re going to make with Europe after we leave, and the blithe insouciance that what they’re offering instead of EU membership is a divorce where you can still have sex with your ex. They reckon they can get out of the marriage, keep the house, not pay alimony, take the kids out of school, stop the in-laws going to the doctor, get strict with the visiting rights, but, you know, still get a shag at the weekend and, obviously, see other people on the side.
Really, that’s their best offer? That’s the plan? To swagger into Brussels with Union Jack pants on and say: “ ’Ello luv, you’re looking nice today. Would you like some?”
When the rest of us ask how that’s really going to work, leavers reply, with Terry-Thomas smirks, that “they’re going to still really fancy us, honest, they’re gagging for us. Possibly not Merkel, but the bosses of Mercedes and those French vintners and cheesemakers, they can’t get enough of old John Bull. Of course they’re going to want to go on making the free market with two backs after we’ve got the decree nisi. Makes sense, doesn’t it?”
Telegraph reporting the Government expects the Supreme Court judges to split 7 to 4 for remain. The view is that the decision is much narrower than thought and in the event of a split decision referring the matter back to Parliament it is considered that that would stengthen Brexit as labour and lid dems will find it much harder to oppose.
No idea how true this is but it is being reported
Nothing the Supreme Court decides will *prevent* Leave. All it is doing is deciding the process by which it should be enacted.
[edit: remove superfluous "will"]
Hence my view that the next court case should be a prosecution against the groups who crowdfunded the case, on the basis of 'obtaining property by deception'.
They raised money under slogans such as "Say Yes 2 Europe", "Remain in the EU". The banners of their supporters read "No to Brexit" and "Stop Brexit". Their Facebook page describes them as "A network of groups and individuals all working to ensure that the UK will Remain in the EU".
They're either lying when they say this isn't about preventing us leaving the EU, or they lied to their supporters to get them to part with the hundreds of thousands they have spunked away on lawyers in order to change (apparently) nothing.
Not sure of you point.
They want to force the government to get a vote in the hope that it can be delayed, watered down, or even stopped at that stage. Of course if the government doesn't require a vote then none of that can happen, however unlikely in any case.
OK, so they're lying (now) when they say it isn't about stopping Brexit*, rather than lying during the fundraising stage when they said it was. That at least just makes them par for the course, rather than criminals.
* "I knew that people wouldn’t see the nuances of what I and my team are doing and that we would be seen as trying to stop Brexit. But that is not what I’m doing. I believe we should accept that we are leaving the EU" - Gina Miller.
The attack on Corbyn today and the splits in Momentum show us that the left will not be happy with Corbyn. Ditto for Brexiters with Brexit. And ditto with the Alt Right and Trump.
No good will ever come of those causes spearheaded by grubby opportunists that ride on the coat tails of populism.
2016...the year of Momentum, Brexit and the Alt Right....it will be interesting to see how they all go in 2017.....
The attack on Corbyn today and the splits in Momentum show us that the left will not be happy with Corbyn. Ditto for Brexiters with Brexit. And ditto with the Alt Right and Trump.
No good will ever come of those causes spearheaded by grubby opportunists that ride on the coat tails of populism.
2016...the year of Momentum, Brexit and the Alt Right....it will be interesting to see how they all go in 2017.....
Should we run a PB "dead pool" to see which one crashes and burns first?
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
I guess Corbyn brings out that protective female instinct...didn't Diane Abbott block people from seeing him during the leadership woes.
Next stop the Leigh by election and the May locals to tell us what we already know....
It was nothing to do with being female: they were protecting their careers. They have thrown their lot in with Corbyn. If he goes, they do too.
As much as I agree with you probably more than any other poster Joff I respectively disagree.I think the likes of Abbott, Thornberry and Charabarti actually do feel protective to Corbyn; they can probably see his failings up close and personal more than most.
I think Thornberry will come out well from the post Corbyn era. Chakrabarti...I don't know. Abbott will go back to This Week with Portillo. Lewis will come out well too, as too will Angela Rayner.
Corbyn has shone a light on some good performers that would not have had any attention. Thornberry is one. I for one said here that I was very impressed with her, and that was well before this week in Parliament.
On Topic. Labour Centrists actually have an option, one that would seperate Corbyn from his supporters & stop The Libdem Revival. They could swing behind The 48%, oppose Brexit & appeal to the mass of the members. Brexit is the one issue that most of Corbyns supporters disagree with him about. Unfortunately that would involve picking a fight with Labour voters in many "safe" Seats in The North & they just dont have the courage. Most of The Centrist "Leadership" seem determined to faff about in the muddled middle, not pleasing either side. To answer the question in the headline -"Oh Yes they can."
It's a good point. Labour can afford to lose some backing in very safe, northern seats, if they can grow in the middle class marginals.
It doesn't matter what policy platforms Labour conjure up. The public will not believe them, and even if they did, they would not believe Labour would be capable of delivering anything under Corbyn and McDonnell. Let's assume the very worst scenario for the Tories - a bad Brexit negotiation and the beginnings of a slide towards recession. The question put to the public will be - which party will be competent enough to guide us through and out of said recession? I cannot see any circumstance, even a bad recession, where the public would choose Corbyn over the Tories. It's not just him, of course. Labour now has the worst front bench in their history, and every time the public see them or hear them, that view is only reinforced.
I've said this before, but unless Corbyn resigns or dies, they are stuck with him (and therefore the front bench). Think he'll gracefully stand down after a terrible future election defeat? Think again. He won't. He sees his 'leadership' as a divine mission to change the Labour party into his own image, and it simply does not matter what happens at a general election.
The attack on Corbyn today and the splits in Momentum show us that the left will not be happy with Corbyn. Ditto for Brexiters with Brexit. And ditto with the Alt Right and Trump.
No good will ever come of those causes spearheaded by grubby opportunists that ride on the coat tails of populism.
2016...the year of Momentum, Brexit and the Alt Right....it will be interesting to see how they all go in 2017.....
Should we run a PB "dead pool" to see which one crashes and burns first?
We've already got a winner - it was called 'The Cameron Project'.
On Topic. Labour Centrists actually have an option, one that would seperate Corbyn from his supporters & stop The Libdem Revival. They could swing behind The 48%, oppose Brexit & appeal to the mass of the members. Brexit is the one issue that most of Corbyns supporters disagree with him about. Unfortunately that would involve picking a fight with Labour voters in many "safe" Seats in The North & they just dont have the courage. Most of The Centrist "Leadership" seem determined to faff about in the muddled middle, not pleasing either side. To answer the question in the headline -"Oh Yes they can."
It's a good point. Labour can afford to lose some backing in very safe, northern seats, if they can grow in the middle class marginals.
That sounds very reminiscent of what Labour supporters were saying before 2015 - "it doesn't matter if we lose some working class support where we don't need it as long as we get more middle class support in the cities".
Now take a look at what happened in Morley, Telford, Bolton W, Derby N, Plymouth Moor View, Southampton Itchen, Gower and Vale of Clwyd.
Or what happened in Nuneaton, Warwickshire N, Sherwood, Amber Valley, Morecambe, Stockton S, Thurrock and Weaver Vale.
Comments
Just a flesh wound
Horrible that you're coerced into using dating terminology of a certain type by oppressive liberal fascists, and denied the use of your preferred option.
1980 Lab ahead, lost seats
1984 Lab behind, gained seats
1988 Lab behind, gained seats
I993 Lab ahead, gained seats
1998 Lab miles ahead, no significant change
2002 Lab ahead, lost seats
2006 Lab ahead lost seats
2011 Lab ahead lost seats.
It looks a pretty poor indicator to me, indeed quite possibly inversely related!
Ah, I've missed a date argument. Alas!
BCE and CE are stupid terms, trying to remove the Christianity from the Christian calendar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Unaq2x_ZqC4
It also makes little sense - BC and AD will make non-christians uncomfortable, even though we're still setting the year from the birth of christ?
No no, everyone, it's fine, we're not forcing you to say BC, it's BCE, so it's ok that the calendar date we use is still set by the C in BC.
Seriously? If someone were uncomfortable by BC and AD, they'll still be offended by using christ's birth being the separation point between the common and before common eras. The point isn't obvious - if the dates are the same, what's the point in calling it the 'common era' when the era is still being defined as post-christian era? Might as well renamed the months because I don't believe in Janus so why should I call the month that?
I'm not christian, I'm atheist, and as I said I don't have a problem with the idea of a calendar rename in principle, but that particular thing is renaming to no purpose, since you're basically using common era as a euphemism, pretending by word that it isn't still set by the purported birth of christ.
People arguing against this are wasting their time. First, the new terms have been in use for decades. Second, no-one is stopping you from using AD and BC if you want.
But then, the right to not be offended, whether it is in any way reasonable, is the most important right at all to some these days - quite appropriate given the discussion on Tatchell and all that no platform bollocks.
Removing Christ from the Christian calendar is demented. Will we see the Islamic calendar rebranded the Arabic calendar? Will the Chinese calendar become the Oriental calendar?
It's the revisionism that annoys me more than anything, imposing a feeble, limp, bland name onto a perfectly good calendar that happens to be Christian.
The creeping manipulation of language for political ends is something of which Morris Dancer disapproves absolutely.
BCE - Before Christian Era
CE - Christian Era
Ched Evans just equalised for Chesterfield... what kind of strange world have I woken up to?
Let that sink in....
22 points behind the genius that brought you the Ed-stone.
Maybe some Labour MPs should club together to create a 49-foot high carved tablet that simply says
FVCKED
As for Tatchell, he has graphically pointed out the sanctimonious hypocrisy of a man who earlier this week spent the evening at the book launch of a well-known anti-Semite which had been organised by the propaganda wing of an Iranian regime that hangs gay men and allows women to be stoned to death. That's how much Corbyn values human rights.
Aleppo has been under siege for months, tens of thousands have died, Corbyn has said nothing. Why? Because it was not the Americans doing it.
AA Gill was only 62, younger than my parents. Life put into perspective once again by this horrible year.
No idea how true this is but it is being reported
That said, personally I'd be happy if nobody referred to Christmas until about December 15. It seems to go forever.
If you get back into parliament I expect a private members bill on outlawing christmas stuff before start of December !
That is in sharp contrast to the German Christmas market at the marina in Beirut, and the entire malls of over the top Christmas stuff in Kuala Lumpur, both blasting out carols.
It's not clear what purpose this kind of briefing from the government is supposed to serve. If I were in the judges' position I wouldn't be impressed by civil servants believing they could read my mind.
But, as Alastair Meeks says, it would be helpful if someone offered an alternative social democratic agenda. Keir Starmer, for instance, seems to have the capacity to do so, though understandablypreoccupied by his immediate brief.
Apart from that "Ireland Professor of Poetry" fits perfectly.
It doesn't change my view that Theresa May has played a blinder by getting a Supreme Court ruling thereby providing a clear legal path to Brexit that will make resistance extemely difficult as she challengers MP's and Lords not to attempt to derail the process
a long, mournful complaint or lamentation; a list of woes.
[edit: remove superfluous "will"]
In order to beat the Tories, Labour would need to move back to the centre again. Which is a problem for The Left.
Hardly....
Nick..you have been quite hostile about the PLP in the past and how they have impeded Corbyn's prospects...now we are a number of months into Corbyn's next term, and the PLP are Shutting TFU....what do you suggest is the main impediment now to Jezza increasing his popularity?
I'll tell you.. its simple. The answer is Jeremy Corbyn.
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
heard about it didn't see it.. Of course the fact that Corbyn is the problem reaches out to those who he surrounds himself with.
None of the North Walian Labour seats look very secure at the moment. Even a moderately poor election could see them lose the lot. They are all much more vulnerable than the Valleys seats, which need a Scotland 2015-type collapse.
In fact, Baxter has them losing the lot -- Ynys Mon (to PC), and the rest (Wrecsam, Clywd S, Alyn & Deeside and Delyn) to Cons.
It's the entire fiasco of his leadership team. The sight of Shami Chakrabatty and Emily Thornberry rushing on stage to protect Corbyn and their own career choices from that horrid Peter Tatchell was an absolute embarrassment.
I guess Corbyn brings out that protective female instinct...didn't Diane Abbott block people from seeing him during the leadership woes.
Next stop the Leigh by election and the May locals to tell us what we already know....
I guess Corbyn brings out that protective female instinct...didn't Diane Abbott block people from seeing him during the leadership woes.
Next stop the Leigh by election and the May locals to tell us what we already know....
Nuttall winning Leigh might start the leadership issue rolling again.
Of Macron, Le Pen and Fillon who do you trust most to...
Defend traditional values (A)
35% Fillon, 24% Le Pen, 9% Macron
Reduce the deficit and debt
28% Fillon, 21% Macron, 12% Le Pen
Deal with the terrorist threat (B)
26% Fillon 25% Le Pen 8% Macron
Deal with the security threat
28% Le Pen 25% Fillon 9% Macron
Reducing unemployment and stimulating the economy (C)
25% Macron 23% Fillon 13% Le Pen
Deal with illegal immigration
41% Le Pen 19% Fillon 7% Macron
If Fillon can't get A; Le Pen B; and Macron C they stand no chance of winning the election.
They raised money under slogans such as "Say Yes 2 Europe", "Remain in the EU". The banners of their supporters read "No to Brexit" and "Stop Brexit". Their Facebook page describes them as "A network of groups and individuals all working to ensure that the UK will Remain in the EU".
They're either lying when they say this isn't about preventing us leaving the EU, or they lied to their supporters to get them to part with the hundreds of thousands they have spunked away on lawyers in order to change (apparently) nothing.
They want to force the government to get a vote in the hope that it can be delayed, watered down, or even stopped at that stage. Of course if the government doesn't require a vote then none of that can happen, however unlikely in any case.
I guess Corbyn brings out that protective female instinct...didn't Diane Abbott block people from seeing him during the leadership woes.
Next stop the Leigh by election and the May locals to tell us what we already know....
It was nothing to do with being female: they were protecting their careers. They have thrown their lot in with Corbyn. If he goes, they do too.
This remains my favourite part, confirmed by the Minister for Brexit this week
Brexit is the fond belief that Britain is worse now than at some point in the foggy past where we achieved peak Blighty
We listen to the Brexit lot talk about the trade deals they’re going to make with Europe after we leave, and the blithe insouciance that what they’re offering instead of EU membership is a divorce where you can still have sex with your ex. They reckon they can get out of the marriage, keep the house, not pay alimony, take the kids out of school, stop the in-laws going to the doctor, get strict with the visiting rights, but, you know, still get a shag at the weekend and, obviously, see other people on the side.
Really, that’s their best offer? That’s the plan? To swagger into Brussels with Union Jack pants on and say: “ ’Ello luv, you’re looking nice today. Would you like some?”
When the rest of us ask how that’s really going to work, leavers reply, with Terry-Thomas smirks, that “they’re going to still really fancy us, honest, they’re gagging for us. Possibly not Merkel, but the bosses of Mercedes and those French vintners and cheesemakers, they can’t get enough of old John Bull. Of course they’re going to want to go on making the free market with two backs after we’ve got the decree nisi. Makes sense, doesn’t it?”
http://dndlaw.com/aa-gill-on-brexit/
* "I knew that people wouldn’t see the nuances of what I and my team are doing and that we would be seen as trying to stop Brexit. But that is not what I’m doing. I believe we should accept that we are leaving the EU" - Gina Miller.
No good will ever come of those causes spearheaded by grubby opportunists that ride on the coat tails of populism.
2016...the year of Momentum, Brexit and the Alt Right....it will be interesting to see how they all go in 2017.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-38275905
As much as I agree with you probably more than any other poster Joff I respectively disagree.I think the likes of Abbott, Thornberry and Charabarti actually do feel protective to Corbyn; they can probably see his failings up close and personal more than most.
I think Thornberry will come out well from the post Corbyn era. Chakrabarti...I don't know. Abbott will go back to This Week with Portillo. Lewis will come out well too, as too will Angela Rayner.
Corbyn has shone a light on some good performers that would not have had any attention. Thornberry is one. I for one said here that I was very impressed with her, and that was well before this week in Parliament.
new thread
I've said this before, but unless Corbyn resigns or dies, they are stuck with him (and therefore the front bench). Think he'll gracefully stand down after a terrible future election defeat? Think again. He won't. He sees his 'leadership' as a divine mission to change the Labour party into his own image, and it simply does not matter what happens at a general election.
Now take a look at what happened in Morley, Telford, Bolton W, Derby N, Plymouth Moor View, Southampton Itchen, Gower and Vale of Clwyd.
Or what happened in Nuneaton, Warwickshire N, Sherwood, Amber Valley, Morecambe, Stockton S, Thurrock and Weaver Vale.