The comments about Ken Clarke are starting to read like an obituary.
A political obituary, certainly.
He's making a good advert for MP term limits.
Edit: Although, to be fair, he's never hidden his love of all things EU, as opposed to others today who supported a referendum last year but now don't support implementing the result of it.
Why shouldn't he be returned if he's doing what his constituents want? Parliament needs contrarian voices, from all sides (which for clarity, is not the same argument as the one about what his constituents want: both stand on their own merits).
While it goes without saying that Labour MPs are as a class venal, hypocritical, self-interested phonies who hold the British people generally and their constituents specifically in total contempt, and who would sell this country down the river given any opportunity, I am not sure what those opposing the A50 trigger gain by voting against a popular measure that is going to pass - especially as by doing so they make it more likely they will lose their seats at the next general election. Clearly, there must be some kind of wicked ulterior motive as it is impossible for them merely to be doing what they believe is right, but I just can't see what it is. Can you help? :-)
No, I can't help. They seem to be all over the place. I agree that there is no rational explanation for their bizarre behaviour.
Or, if you prefer Sir Keir's terminology:
13:17 Starmer says when he campaigned in the referendum, he told people they were taking a decision. He did not say they were just expressing a view.
Labour is internationalist, he says. But above all they are democrats. So they must accept the result of the referendum, he says.
Yep, I agree with him. I also accept that some Labour MPs don't. My guess is that they believe that Brexit is a bad idea and because of that will not vote to trigger it, knowing that in doing so they could well lose their seats at the next general election.
By the next election Brexit will be a fact. How a Labour MP voted in a particular Division three years earlier will not matter at all.
@steverichards14: KenClarke's speech similar to R Cook's pre Iraq- will be cited and admired when he proves to be right. All pro EU Lab MPs should be with him
Total bollocks. And idiotic bollocks, at that.
Brexit is completely different to Iraq, by an order. He's made a category error.
With Iraq you could point to lots of consequences which sprang directly from the war, or were directly related to the war: the chaos in the country, the insurrection, the deaths, the rise of ISIS, the lack of WMDs, etc etc etc. These were so bad most people were able to agree that Iraq was a grave error.
Brexit is entirely different and much more complex. It is a geopolitical rupture that is inherently dynamic and unpredictable, and there will be no right or wrong conclusion on which everyone will agree. If growth is slower Leavers will blame Trump or the EU, if growth is better than expected Remainers will say it would have been better still inside the EU.
None of us, on either side, will ever be able to point at the other and say: Told you so.
If Nissan mothballs its Sunderland operation and says it is because we are no longer in the single market and customs union wouldn't that be a direct consequence of Brexit?
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
Yep. All for nothing. Everything Clarke's strived for, believed in, worked towards. Gone. Ruined. Nixed. Blown away. His whole career rendered pointless. Right at the end.
Quite a sickening blow, one imagines.
Quite common amongst those unwilling to compromise when they have minority views, I should expect.
He ought to have retired a long time ago - or formed a party in which his fixed views on Europe could be catered for.
IDS, Bill Cash etc didn't resign when their fixed views on Europe were not catered for in their party. They just helped bring down their own PM and bring in a government that was even more out of tune with their position.
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Yet your party chose IDS over him. Why?
Because it didn't want either but IDS would be easier to get rid of. (Declaration of interest: I voted for Clarke).
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
We frequently accuse politicians who constantly compromise of having no values; no beliefs. Yet when we have a politician who refuses to compromise his beliefs, someone says that he should have compromised them to get to the top job.
Politicians really cannot win.
Ken Clarke has always been a giant. He's one of these annoying politicians who can make a point based in facts, and even when he's passionate he always remains polite. We need more like him, even if we disagree with some of their positions.
He has not always been polite. I remember him being very rude as Chancellor in the mid-90s to the LibDem Alan Beith.
I disapprove of politicians who are unfailingly polite. The politeness tends to hide an ideological ruthlessness. They also frequently lack a sense of humour (because humour is usually at someone's expense, which is incompatible with being polite). A well-placed put-down is a very useful skill.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
His biggest failing was leaving such a good legacy for his successor that Brown was able to hide his incompetence for so long.
The economic legacy bequeathed in 1997 was in spite of - not because of - the Major Government's economic policies. The UK's humiliating ejection from the ERM laid the basis for economic growth. Was that really a development that such an arch pro-European as Clarke welcomed?
I want to do things to Nusrat Ghani that'd make SeanT blush.
Have a cold shower, you're a married man.
And, more to the point, she's a married woman!
Indeed, speaking not from experience, sleeping with other married women gets you into trouble.
So instead of a pissed off wife at home to deal with, you've got a pissed off cuckolded husband to deal with as well.
If you're ever going to have an affair, have it with a woman who is single.
In some parts of the world (here) it can end you up in jail.
There's a distinct problem when you meet a woman and start dating, only to find out later that she's married.
I'm not speaking from experience, twice, obviously ...
But that's all well in the past. I sometimes feel that I'm the only man on PB perfectly happy with just one woman. Especially as that woman also happens to be my wife...
Happy is the man who loves his wife (as long as she loves him back). And I mean that. I have a few friends in genuinely happy marriages and I envy them. Quite a lot.
Trouble is domesticity just isn't for me. I don't even like sharing a bed (overnight). And I'm a rambler, geographically, sexually, emotionally. The advantage of my life is excitement, and stimulation. Keeps me on my toes. The disadvantage is sometimes quite acute loneliness.
That's when I envy my happily wed pals.
I could not imagine being on my own. When I am away, it's so good to know there is someone to go back to. I could not cope with acute loneliness: the mind cannot bear, in such a bleak place, too much grief.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Was Ken Clarke really an eminent QC ? If he took silk in 1980 then he'd already have been a junior minister. On the other hand, he'd been an MP for a decade so might not be a mere artificial silk.
The comments about Ken Clarke are starting to read like an obituary.
A political obituary, certainly.
He's making a good advert for MP term limits.
Edit: Although, to be fair, he's never hidden his love of all things EU, as opposed to others today who supported a referendum last year but now don't support implementing the result of it.
Why shouldn't he be returned if he's doing what his constituents want? Parliament needs contrarian voices, from all sides (which for clarity, is not the same argument as the one about what his constituents want: both stand on their own merits).
Agree that there's a balance to be struck between a local MP and his or her party. Sarah Wollaston is another good example of someone to challenges her party's orthodoxy on a number of issues. I guess we all want a local MP who will stand up for local issues, rather than a party apparatchik who is a slave to the whip. In practice it's a little more difficult to arrange under a Parliamentary system.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
His biggest failing was leaving such a good legacy for his successor that Brown was able to hide his incompetence for so long.
The economic legacy bequeathed in 1997 was in spite of - not because of - the Major Government's economic policies. The UK's humiliating ejection from the ERM laid the basis for economic growth. Was that really a development that such an arch pro-European as Clarke welcomed?
Yep - that is true, but there was one thing that Clarke did when Chancellor that can only be laid at his door: the refusal to cut taxes in the lead up to the 1997 election. If he had done so, the Tories still would have lost, but Labour would have inherited a much more difficult medium term situation.
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
Yep. All for nothing. Everything Clarke's strived for, believed in, worked towards. Gone. Ruined. Nixed. Blown away. His whole career rendered pointless. Right at the end.
Quite a sickening blow, one imagines.
Quite common amongst those unwilling to compromise when they have minority views, I should expect.
He ought to have retired a long time ago - or formed a party in which his fixed views on Europe could be catered for.
IDS, Bill Cash etc didn't resign when their fixed views on Europe were not catered for in their party. They just helped bring down their own PM and bring in a government that was even more out of tune with their position.
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
Rubbish, I'm afraid. The Tories have always been a patriotic, Unionist and Eurosceptic party at heart. Many of those who advocated Remain would have still been Eurosceptics.
History will prove IDS and Cash were far more in line with public and activist opinion.
So we've now reached democracy by petition - well, it had to happen. I can't "appose" the Trump visit (whatever that means) and have 110,000 people really signed it without noticing the typo ? Just goes to show.
Both petitions are ludicrous and bear witness to the echo chamber. One side shouts, the other side has to shout louder.
I don't play the petition game either way to score political points (only to highlight issues that are otherwise buried, unknown or ignored and flush debate out into the public arena) but I wouldn't sign one with bad spelling either way.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Very good Home Secretary, Education Secretary and Health Secretary too. He pissed off all the right people, which is usually (though not always) a sign of making the right decisions.
Robert Kimbell Of the 900,000 Brits living in the 27 other EU countries, fully 250,000 live in Ireland. Just 650,000 in the remaining 26. https://t.co/yJpjzNd4A1
IDS was the best of a fairly poor choice. Ken could never have been trusted, we would have been bounced in to the €.
How ? In 2001, the Conservatives had just suffered their second big shellacking (sorry, TSE) and were in no position to influence anything.
What position would Conservative Opposition leader Clarke have taken on Iraq and would he have been supported by his band of 166 MPs ? It's hard to see Clarke beating Blair in 2005 though he might have done better than Howard.
That's when it all gets murky - would the Conservatives have stayed with Clarke through the next Parliament - I think Clarke would have dissected Brown over the economy and won the Conservatives a majority in 2010 or would they have ditched him in favour of Davis and probably lost in 2010 ?
All good counterfactual stuff and worth discussing on alternatehistory.com.
While it goes without saying that Labour MPs are as a class venal, hypocritical, self-interested phonies who hold the British people generally and their constituents specifically in total contempt, and who would sell this country down the river given any opportunity, I am not sure what those opposing the A50 trigger gain by voting against a popular measure that is going to pass - especially as by doing so they make it more likely they will lose their seats at the next general election. Clearly, there must be some kind of wicked ulterior motive as it is impossible for them merely to be doing what they believe is right, but I just can't see what it is. Can you help? :-)
No, I can't help. They seem to be all over the place. I agree that there is no rational explanation for their bizarre behaviour.
Or, if you prefer Sir Keir's terminology:
13:17 Starmer says when he campaigned in the referendum, he told people they were taking a decision. He did not say they were just expressing a view.
Labour is internationalist, he says. But above all they are democrats. So they must accept the result of the referendum, he says.
Yep, I agree with him. I also accept that some Labour MPs don't. My guess is that they believe that Brexit is a bad idea and because of that will not vote to trigger it, knowing that in doing so they could well lose their seats at the next general election.
By the next election Brexit will be a fact. How a Labour MP voted in a particular Division three years earlier will not matter at all.
@steverichards14: KenClarke's speech similar to R Cook's pre Iraq- will be cited and admired when he proves to be right. All pro EU Lab MPs should be with him
Total bollocks. And idiotic bollocks, at that.
Brexit is completely different to Iraq, by an order. He's made a category error.
With Iraq you could point to lots of consequences which sprang directly from the war, or were directly related to the war: the chaos in the country, the insurrection, the deaths, the rise of ISIS, the lack of WMDs, etc etc etc. These were so bad most people were able to agree that Iraq was a grave error.
Brexit is entirely different and much more complex. It is a geopolitical rupture that is inherently dynamic and unpredictable, and there will be no right or wrong conclusion on which everyone will agree. If growth is slower Leavers will blame Trump or the EU, if growth is better than expected Remainers will say it would have been better still inside the EU.
None of us, on either side, will ever be able to point at the other and say: Told you so.
If Nissan mothballs its Sunderland operation and says it is because we are no longer in the single market and customs union wouldn't that be a direct consequence of Brexit?
Voters may think otherwise:
Prof Curtice:
We should remember, though, that if the talks do go badly there is no guarantee that the UK government will get the blame. It may fall instead on the EU. It appears that many voters anticipate that Mrs May’s proposals will indeed not necessarily go down well in Brussels. Just 20% think that other member states will agree to the sort of Brexit deal that the Prime Minister has outlined. On this, those who voted to Remain (14% anticipate agreement) are largely at one with those who voted Leave (27%). But while this might mean that many Remain voters feel that the EU would be quite right to oppose Mrs May’s Plan, it could equally mean that many Leave voters feel that responsibility for the trouble they think is ahead lies with the EU.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Yet your party chose IDS over him. Why?
Because it didn't want either but IDS would be easier to get rid of. (Declaration of interest: I voted for Clarke).
... and they were chosen by the "the most sophisticated electorate in the world"
@steverichards14: KenClarke's speech similar to R Cook's pre Iraq- will be cited and admired when he proves to be right. All pro EU Lab MPs should be with him
Total bollocks. And idiotic bollocks, at that.
Brexit is completely different to Iraq, by an order. He's made a category error.
With Iraq you could point to lots of consequences which sprang directly from the war, or were directly related to the war: the chaos in the country, the insurrection, the deaths, the rise of ISIS, the lack of WMDs, etc etc etc. These were so bad most people were able to agree that Iraq was a grave error.
Brexit is entirely different and much more complex. It is a geopolitical rupture that is inherently dynamic and unpredictable, and there will be no right or wrong conclusion on which everyone will agree. If growth is slower Leavers will blame Trump or the EU, if growth is better than expected Remainers will say it would have been better still inside the EU.
None of us, on either side, will ever be able to point at the other and say: Told you so.
If Nissan mothballs its Sunderland operation and says it is because we are no longer in the single market and customs union wouldn't that be a direct consequence of Brexit?
It would have to take it out of mothballs because we didn't join the Euro first
You don't understand (not for the first time). Brexit isn't a clash of opinions (like Iraq). It's a clash of political belief systems. Expecting someone like me to turn around in ten years time and say Yes, Brexit was an error, is like expecting Catholics to say Yep, the Reformation was a good thing. I will always believe it was and is better for us to govern ourselves.
The same goes for you. It's obvious you - and people like williamglenn - have a religiose faith in the virtues of EU membership. You will always think Brexit was a bad idea the way Muslims will always revere the Prophet.
There will never be a meeting of minds. The only thing we can agree on is that my side won. Heh.
And you are wrong (not for the first time).
You have already swung from Brexit is great, dreadful, brilliant, terrible and back.
There will be many, many occasions when you will shriek and wail and rend your clothes for the catastrophe you bequeathed your children.
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
Yep. All for nothing. Everything Clarke's strived for, believed in, worked towards. Gone. Ruined. Nixed. Blown away. His whole career rendered pointless. Right at the end.
Quite a sickening blow, one imagines.
Quite common amongst those unwilling to compromise when they have minority views, I should expect.
He ought to have retired a long time ago - or formed a party in which his fixed views on Europe could be catered for.
IDS, Bill Cash etc didn't resign when their fixed views on Europe were not catered for in their party. They just helped bring down their own PM and bring in a government that was even more out of tune with their position.
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
Because you disagree with them ? In other times they would be called men of principle.
Corbyn's been 'alternative facting" about "Thatcher's support for apartheid"
At the Lord Mayor’s banquet in 1985, she said: “I couldn’t stand being excluded or discriminated against because of the colour of my own skin. And if you can’t stand a colour bar against yourself, you can’t stand it against anyone else.” Asked by the leading Afrikaans newspaper Beeld, what was the difference between the ANC and the IRA, Thatcher’s answer was: “The IRA have the vote, the ANC do not.”
IDS was the best of a fairly poor choice. Ken could never have been trusted, we would have been bounced in to the €.
How ? In 2001, the Conservatives had just suffered their second big shellacking (sorry, TSE) and were in no position to influence anything.
What position would Conservative Opposition leader Clarke have taken on Iraq and would he have been supported by his band of 166 MPs ? It's hard to see Clarke beating Blair in 2005 though he might have done better than Howard.
That's when it all gets murky - would the Conservatives have stayed with Clarke through the next Parliament - I think Clarke would have dissected Brown over the economy and won the Conservatives a majority in 2010 or would they have ditched him in favour of Davis and probably lost in 2010 ?
All good counterfactual stuff and worth discussing on alternatehistory.com.
I made no reference to Iraq. It was joining the € that made me vote for IDS rather than Clarke.
@steverichards14: KenClarke's speech similar to R Cook's pre Iraq- will be cited and admired when he proves to be right. All pro EU Lab MPs should be with him
Total bollocks. And idiotic bollocks, at that.
Brexit is completely different to Iraq, by an order. He's made a category error.
With Iraq you could point to lots of consequences which sprang directly from the war, or were directly related to the war: the chaos in the country, the insurrection, the deaths, the rise of ISIS, the lack of WMDs, etc etc etc. These were so bad most people were able to agree that Iraq was a grave error.
Brexit is entirely different and much more complex. It is a geopolitical rupture that is inherently dynamic and unpredictable, and there will be no right or wrong conclusion on which everyone will agree. If growth is slower Leavers will blame Trump or the EU, if growth is better than expected Remainers will say it would have been better still inside the EU.
None of us, on either side, will ever be able to point at the other and say: Told you so.
If Nissan mothballs its Sunderland operation and says it is because we are no longer in the single market and customs union wouldn't that be a direct consequence of Brexit?
Voters may think otherwise:
Prof Curtice:
We should remember, though, that if the talks do go badly there is no guarantee that the UK government will get the blame. It may fall instead on the EU. It appears that many voters anticipate that Mrs May’s proposals will indeed not necessarily go down well in Brussels. Just 20% think that other member states will agree to the sort of Brexit deal that the Prime Minister has outlined. On this, those who voted to Remain (14% anticipate agreement) are largely at one with those who voted Leave (27%). But while this might mean that many Remain voters feel that the EU would be quite right to oppose Mrs May’s Plan, it could equally mean that many Leave voters feel that responsibility for the trouble they think is ahead lies with the EU.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Very good Home Secretary, Education Secretary and Health Secretary too. He pissed off all the right people, which is usually (though not always) a sign of making the right decisions.
Ken Clarke's role in Labour's landslide should not be underestimated -- most of those he pissed off might normally have voted Conservative.
While it goes without saying that Labour MPs are as a class venal, hypocritical, self-interested phonies who hold the British people generally and their constituents specifically in total contempt, and who would sell this country down the river given any opportunity, I am not sure what those opposing the A50 trigger gain by voting against a popular measure that is going to pass - especially as by doing so they make it more likely they will lose their seats at the next general election. Clearly, there must be some kind of wicked ulterior motive as it is impossible for them merely to be doing what they believe is right, but I just can't see what it is. Can you help? :-)
No, I can't help. They seem to be all over the place. I agree that there is no rational explanation for their bizarre behaviour.
Or, if you prefer Sir Keir's terminology:
13:17 Starmer says when he campaigned in the referendum, he told people they were taking a decision. He did not say they were just expressing a view.
Labour is internationalist, he says. But above all they are democrats. So they must accept the result of the referendum, he says.
Yep, I agree with him. I also accept that some Labour MPs don't. My guess is that they believe that Brexit is a bad idea and because of that will not vote to trigger it, knowing that in doing so they could well lose their seats at the next general election.
By the next election Brexit will be a fact. How a Labour MP voted in a particular Division three years earlier will not matter at all.
That is a keeper.
In the same way that how Tory MPs voted in the Norway Debate in May 1940 had little or no impact on how they fared in the 1945 election. Ditto the 69 Labour MPs who rebelled against a three line Whip to support the Heath Govt's EEC application in Autumn 1971 were not adversely affected at the 1974 elections.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Yet your party chose IDS over him. Why?
Because it didn't want either but IDS would be easier to get rid of. (Declaration of interest: I voted for Clarke).
That was a pretty weird moment: faced by the choice between IDS and Ken, I remember my reaction, essentially, being "oh, shit". Would you have voted for Portillo, if he'd got through?
I want to do things to Nusrat Ghani that'd make SeanT blush.
Have a cold shower, you're a married man.
And, more to the point, she's a married woman!
Indeed, speaking not from experience, sleeping with other married women gets you into trouble.
So instead of a pissed off wife at home to deal with, you've got a pissed off cuckolded husband to deal with as well.
If you're ever going to have an affair, have it with a woman who is single.
In some parts of the world (here) it can end you up in jail.
There's a distinct problem when you meet a woman and start dating, only to find out later that she's married.
I'm not speaking from experience, twice, obviously ...
But that's all well in the past. I sometimes feel that I'm the only man on PB perfectly happy with just one woman. Especially as that woman also happens to be my wife...
Happy is the man who loves his wife (as long as she loves him back). And I mean that. I have a few friends in genuinely happy marriages and I envy them. Quite a lot.
Trouble is domesticity just isn't for me. I don't even like sharing a bed (overnight). And I'm a rambler, geographically, sexually, emotionally. The advantage of my life is excitement, and stimulation. Keeps me on my toes. The disadvantage is sometimes quite acute loneliness.
That's when I envy my happily wed pals.
When I was ill last year (in fact, a year ago tomorrow), it made me realise exactly what real love is. Mrs J showed more kindness and consideration than I could ever have hoped, even when I was a grumpy sod (*) during my recuperation. It was a terribly hard time for her as she juggled a demanding job, a teething toddler and visiting a husband who she had thought she was going to lose.
Such times can destroy or cement relationships. I am so thankful that it did the latter.
Oh, and dry January is dangerous. I still think I'd not have been ill if I'd been my usual debauched self.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Yet your party chose IDS over him. Why?
Because at the time the Euro looked to be an existential issue in British politics. There was no UKIP, he was pro, and no other political party was anti. He risked splitting the Tories.
Plus his campaigning material was self-entitled and arrogant (I don't think he agreed with members having a vote) whereas IDS tried.
IDS set some useful reforms in motion, including a focus on welfare reform.
I have no regrets. Rather a crap leader for 2 years than the Euro.
@faisalislam: Soubry: "needs to be said..Govt decided the reduction of immigration is worth more than the economic benefit of single mkt & Customs union"
Donald J Trump When will the Democrats give us our Attorney General and rest of Cabinet! They should be ashamed of themselves! No wonder D.C. doesn't work!
I remember that the first year of Obama's presidency, he sounded half-candidate and half-senator. Trump is still sounding half-candidate and half-TV personality.
I'm still trying to work out if he's genuinely got no idea how politics works or whether he's five moves ahead of everyone.
I think he's both, the reason he's sometimes five moves ahead of everyone else is because he's approaching politics in a totally different way, his own way, with his own rules, and this is because he doesn't know or care how normal politics works.
Hence the sometimes horrific blunders, which he shrugs off, and the weirdly clever moves, which blindside everyone else
Yes, I'd agree with that. Though it'll almost certainly end badly if he doesn't care (and I don't think he does, though that might just be show) unless he can keep a lot of the public onside. If he can do that, the other politicos will be terrified that their own position is under threat from a force they don't understand and will run with him for fear of the alternative; if he can't, they'll eat him.
So why did both the Republicans and Democrats put up such dreadful candidates in their primaries?
And, no, I don't think Sanders would have been any better. Rubio came across as the best of the worst, but was clearly inexperienced and a bit robotic.
Harriet Harman on Jeremy Corbyn: "it was a surprise to me to hand over the leadership to someone who is older and posher than myself"
Hattie's related to an Admiral and an Earl isn't she? Does Jezza have any posh family members?
Her aunt was Elizabeth Pakenham ( née Elizabeth Harman ), Countess of Longford, and she is a great-great niece of Joseph Chamberlain, her father is a Harley Street surgeon. A veritable woman of the people.
Corbyn's parents were a maths teacher and an electrical engineer that met as fellow peace campaigners....
Mr. P, Beckett seems to be making a habit of voting for things she thinks are a bad idea.
Beckett is (or at least, for the majority of her career, was) an ultra-loyalist to whichever was the prevailing force in Labour at the time. She was very left-wing in the early 1980s before becoming Blairite. That inevitably leaves a trail to be brushed over where possible and apologised for where not.
IDS was the best of a fairly poor choice. Ken could never have been trusted, we would have been bounced in to the €.
How ? In 2001, the Conservatives had just suffered their second big shellacking (sorry, TSE) and were in no position to influence anything.
What position would Conservative Opposition leader Clarke have taken on Iraq and would he have been supported by his band of 166 MPs ? It's hard to see Clarke beating Blair in 2005 though he might have done better than Howard.
That's when it all gets murky - would the Conservatives have stayed with Clarke through the next Parliament - I think Clarke would have dissected Brown over the economy and won the Conservatives a majority in 2010 or would they have ditched him in favour of Davis and probably lost in 2010 ?
All good counterfactual stuff and worth discussing on alternatehistory.com.
I want to do things to Nusrat Ghani that'd make SeanT blush.
Have a cold shower, you're a married man.
And, more to the point, she's a married woman!
Indeed, speaking not from experience, sleeping with other married women gets you into trouble.
So instead of a pissed off wife at home to deal with, you've got a pissed off cuckolded husband to deal with as well.
If you're ever going to have an affair, have it with a woman who is single.
In some parts of the world (here) it can end you up in jail.
There's a distinct problem when you meet a woman and start dating, only to find out later that she's married.
I'm not speaking from experience, twice, obviously ...
But that's all well in the past. I sometimes feel that I'm the only man on PB perfectly happy with just one woman. Especially as that woman also happens to be my wife...
For clarity: I'm very happy with my wife. And very lucky.
But, do I not salivate/fantasise over other beautiful women, occasionally?
Of course I do. I'm a red-blooded male. And so does my wife over some 'celebrity' men. And we tell each other. And it's ok.
I want to do things to Nusrat Ghani that'd make SeanT blush.
Have a cold shower, you're a married man.
And, more to the point, she's a married woman!
Indeed, speaking not from experience, sleeping with other married women gets you into trouble.
So instead of a pissed off wife at home to deal with, you've got a pissed off cuckolded husband to deal with as well.
If you're ever going to have an affair, have it with a woman who is single.
In some parts of the world (here) it can end you up in jail.
There's a distinct problem when you meet a woman and start dating, only to find out later that she's married.
I'm not speaking from experience, twice, obviously ...
But that's all well in the past. I sometimes feel that I'm the only man on PB perfectly happy with just one woman. Especially as that woman also happens to be my wife...
Happy is the man who loves his wife (as long as she loves him back). And I mean that. I have a few friends in genuinely happy marriages and I envy them. Quite a lot.
Trouble is domesticity just isn't for me. I don't even like sharing a bed (overnight). And I'm a rambler, geographically, sexually, emotionally. The advantage of my life is excitement, and stimulation. Keeps me on my toes. The disadvantage is sometimes quite acute loneliness.
That's when I envy my happily wed pals.
When I was ill last year (in fact, a year ago tomorrow), it made me realise exactly what real love is. Mrs J showed more kindness and consideration than I could ever have hoped, even when I was a grumpy sod (*) during my recuperation. It was a terribly hard time for her as she juggled a demanding job, a teething toddler and visiting a husband who she had thought she was going to lose.
Such times can destroy or cement relationships. I am so thankful that it did the latter.
Oh, and dry January is dangerous. I still think I'd not have been ill if I'd been my usual debauched self.
(*) even more than usual.
If Dry January was meant to be a Thing, then God wouldn't have made Christmas last until Jan 6th. (Or my birthday in January, for that matter).
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
Yep. All for nothing. Everything Clarke's strived for, believed in, worked towards. Gone. Ruined. Nixed. Blown away. His whole career rendered pointless. Right at the end.
Quite a sickening blow, one imagines.
Quite common amongst those unwilling to compromise when they have minority views, I should expect.
He ought to have retired a long time ago - or formed a party in which his fixed views on Europe could be catered for.
IDS, Bill Cash etc didn't resign when their fixed views on Europe were not catered for in their party. They just helped bring down their own PM and bring in a government that was even more out of tune with their position.
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
Because you disagree with them ? In other times they would be called men of principle.
And so should Ken Clarke. One of the glories of the Conservative Party, and part of the reason that it has survived so long, is that it has accepted many different views within its MPs. Clarke's europhillia is part of that tradition, and at least he never worked to bring down his own government. Unlike the likes of IDS and Cash.
You don't understand (not for the first time). Brexit isn't a clash of opinions (like Iraq). It's a clash of political belief systems. Expecting someone like me to turn around in ten years time and say Yes, Brexit was an error, is like expecting Catholics to say Yep, the Reformation was a good thing. I will always believe it was and is better for us to govern ourselves.
The same goes for you. It's obvious you - and people like williamglenn - have a religiose faith in the virtues of EU membership. You will always think Brexit was a bad idea the way Muslims will always revere the Prophet.
There will never be a meeting of minds. The only thing we can agree on is that my side won. Heh.
And you are wrong (not for the first time).
You have already swung from Brexit is great, dreadful, brilliant, terrible and back.
There will be many, many occasions when you will shriek and wail and rend your clothes for the catastrophe you bequeathed your children.
Brexit will not be a catastrophe. Neither will it be a paradise.
It's just choosing a different geopolitical path for the UK to follow. I think a better on. But life will go on either way.
Mr. Royale, indeed. We're already seeing how far the tentacles have grasped. Makes the view of some (that we should've Remained and then voted to leave a decade later) even more inexplicable.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Yet your party chose IDS over him. Why?
Because it didn't want either but IDS would be easier to get rid of. (Declaration of interest: I voted for Clarke).
... and they were chosen by the "the most sophisticated electorate in the world"
Keeping Portillo off the ballot paper by one vote. Did I ever mention that I wrote an alternate history based on that vote switching?
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Very good Home Secretary, Education Secretary and Health Secretary too. He pissed off all the right people, which is usually (though not always) a sign of making the right decisions.
Ken Clarke's role in Labour's landslide should not be underestimated -- most of those he pissed off might normally have voted Conservative.
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
Yep. All for nothing. Everything Clarke's strived for, believed in, worked towards. Gone. Ruined. Nixed. Blown away. His whole career rendered pointless. Right at the end.
Quite a sickening blow, one imagines.
Quite common amongst those unwilling to compromise when they have minority views, I should expect.
He ought to have retired a long time ago - or formed a party in which his fixed views on Europe could be catered for.
IDS, Bill Cash etc didn't resign when their fixed views on Europe were not catered for in their party. They just helped bring down their own PM and bring in a government that was even more out of tune with their position.
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
Treason never prospers And why? Here's the reason: For if it prospers, No man dare call it treason
You couldn't make this up. President of the European Council, Donald Tusk,says
'President Trump's US is among external threats to the European Union along with China, Russia and Radical Islam'.
So he declares war on all the major players but Juncker's has just said they will have an EU army even though Trump opposes that.
Discounting the fact that Trump is likely to withdraw all his personel and equipment from the EU and especially the Baltic States, the EU are inviting trade and financial sanctions from Trump.
As my wife just said 'They are lunatics - acting like children'
Mr. Royale, reminds me of the Macintyre[sp] line about him and his wife drawing up a list of six names who they're allowed to have affairs with. His wife's top name was George Clooney. His was his wife's sister.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Yet your party chose IDS over him. Why?
Because it didn't want either but IDS would be easier to get rid of. (Declaration of interest: I voted for Clarke).
That was a pretty weird moment: faced by the choice between IDS and Ken, I remember my reaction, essentially, being "oh, shit". Would you have voted for Portillo, if he'd got through?
Probably not. At least Clarke was authentic. Portillo had reinvented himself into something he didn't seem comfortable in. Besides, I wasn't as spooked by the prospect of Euro entry as many Tory members.
Mr. NorthWales, Tusk is the same chap who thought the UK leaving the EU would mean the end of Western Civilisation (which does raise the question of why they didn't offer us more incentive to stay).
As you say, it seems a bizarrely line to take given the Baltic states (and probably Poland too) would be really rather keen for the US to stay very pro-NATO. Otherwise, who's going to stand up to Russia if it comes to that?
The UK and France, primarily. Except the UK's leaving the EU and a deal must be done.
It's possible Trump and dislike of Trump could make the EU slightly friendlier (in practice if not tone) towards the UK.
While it goes without saying that Labour MPs are as a class venal, hypocritical, self-interested phonies who hold the British people generally and their constituents specifically in total contempt, and who would sell this country down the river given any opportunity, I am not sure what those opposing the A50 trigger gain by voting against a popular measure that is going to pass - especially as by doing so they make it more likely they will lose their seats at the next general election. Clearly, there must be some kind of wicked ulterior motive as it is impossible for them merely to be doing what they believe is right, but I just can't see what it is. Can you help? :-)
No, I can't help. They seem to be all over the place. I agree that there is no rational explanation for their bizarre behaviour.
Or, if you prefer Sir Keir's terminology:
13:17 Starmer says when he campaigned in the referendum, he told people they were taking a decision. He did not say they were just expressing a view.
Labour is internationalist, he says. But above all they are democrats. So they must accept the result of the referendum, he says.
Yep, I agree with him. I also accept that some Labour MPs don't. My guess is that they believe that Brexit is a bad idea and because of that will not vote to trigger it, knowing that in doing so they could well lose their seats at the next general election.
By the next election Brexit will be a fact. How a Labour MP voted in a particular Division three years earlier will not matter at all.
How a Labour MP voted in a particular Division three years earlier will not matter - because they will have been de-selected by their local constituency Labour party.
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
Yep. All for nothing. Everything Clarke's strived for, believed in, worked towards. Gone. Ruined. Nixed. Blown away. His whole career rendered pointless. Right at the end.
Quite a sickening blow, one imagines.
Quite common amongst those unwilling to compromise when they have minority views, I should expect.
He ought to have retired a long time ago - or formed a party in which his fixed views on Europe could be catered for.
IDS, Bill Cash etc didn't resign when their fixed views on Europe were not catered for in their party. They just helped bring down their own PM and bring in a government that was even more out of tune with their position.
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
Because you disagree with them ? In other times they would be called men of principle.
And so should Ken Clarke. One of the glories of the Conservative Party, and part of the reason that it has survived so long, is that it has accepted many different views within its MPs. Clarke's europhillia is part of that tradition, and at least he never worked to bring down his own government. Unlike the likes of IDS and Cash.
We are about to find out. If he votes against A50 and the government loses the vote as a result he will have done just that.
However in my defence I'm a total hands on Dad with my daughter in England. I see more of her, and interact more with her, far more than my Dad ever did with me. Even though my Dad technically lived with us, in between his mistresses.
Which is great, but to stretch the analogy just a bit further, that is now, when she is a sentient companion, capable of discourse and interaction and you can spend pleasant time together.
How many poopy diapers (sic) did you change at the start?
Or, in the terms of the analogy
Brexit may be fun to be with in 8 years time, but how much shit will some other people have to shovel in the meantime?
I want to do things to Nusrat Ghani that'd make SeanT blush.
Have a cold shower, you're a married man.
And, more to the point, she's a married woman!
Indeed, speaking not from experience, sleeping with other married women gets you into trouble.
So instead of a pissed off wife at home to deal with, you've got a pissed off cuckolded husband to deal with as well.
If you're ever going to have an affair, have it with a woman who is single.
In some parts of the world (here) it can end you up in jail.
There's a distinct problem when you meet a woman and start dating, only to find out later that she's married.
I'm not speaking from experience, twice, obviously ...
But that's all well in the past. I sometimes feel that I'm the only man on PB perfectly happy with just one woman. Especially as that woman also happens to be my wife...
For clarity: I'm very happy with my wife. And very lucky.
But, do I not salivate/fantasise over other beautiful women, occasionally?
Of course I do. I'm a red-blooded male. And so does my wife over some 'celebrity' men. And we tell each other. And it's ok.
It's normal; it's human.
Indeed. And as you say, the same's true for many married women.
I'm quite lucky in the fact I was a bit of a tart in my younger life. I slept around a bit, had fun, and had some relationships with women who are still my (and in a couple of cases 'our') friend. I got the sleeping-around bug more or less out of my system.
I meet lots of yummy mummies, and am friends with a fair few as well (in fact, I had one around for a play date with her son this morning). Some are very attractive, and all are younger than me. But if I was to cheat with one, I would potentially lose so much, and for what? A few shags.
Taking it logically, I'd lose far more than I could ever gain. Being crude, I'd much rather have a w*nk than an affair.
Mr. NorthWales, Tusk is the same chap who thought the UK leaving the EU would mean the end of Western Civilisation (which does raise the question of why they didn't offer us more incentive to stay).
As you say, it seems a bizarrely line to take given the Baltic states (and probably Poland too) would be really rather keen for the US to stay very pro-NATO. Otherwise, who's going to stand up to Russia if it comes to that?
The UK and France, primarily. Except the UK's leaving the EU and a deal must be done.
It's possible Trump and dislike of Trump could make the EU slightly friendlier (in practice if not tone) towards the UK.
I have no doubt that they will have no choice. The EU seems much weaker than only a few weeks ago
Of the non-nationals, 318 Australians have signed the petition to allow Trump a State Visit. 240 from the USA and 6 from Russia. 1 from Iraq and 7 from Zimbabwe.
But the upside, a Commons with sovereignty restored, is so enormous I cannot imagine a plausible scenario where I will regret my choice. Perhaps it is Confirmation Bias, but there it is. You better get used to it, because I suspect many other Brits are feeling the same. No going back. We're free. For good or ill. It's all on us now.
"We're free"
"Take Back Control"
"Sovereignty"
Yes, we are about to find out the true meaning of those platitudes. Euratom is an early example.
We are not free to be members (as it currently stands), which means we are not free to host JET, and we are not free to run Sellafield.
Maybe all those things are great, but they don't look like control to me.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Yet your party chose IDS over him. Why?
Because it didn't want either but IDS would be easier to get rid of. (Declaration of interest: I voted for Clarke).
That was a pretty weird moment: faced by the choice between IDS and Ken, I remember my reaction, essentially, being "oh, shit". Would you have voted for Portillo, if he'd got through?
Probably not. At least Clarke was authentic. Portillo had reinvented himself into something he didn't seem comfortable in. Besides, I wasn't as spooked by the prospect of Euro entry as many Tory members.
Fair enough. I think most of us were in the same camp as Casino; the Euro felt like an existential threat that trumped all other considerations. It still felt wrong voting for someone who, with the best will in the world, was never going to look like a PM in waiting, though.
'President Trump's US is among external threats to the European Union along with China, Russia and Radical Islam'
Verhofstad said something very similar yesterday - so clearly a coordinated position, not random musings....
And quite right too. All this pussyfooting around this lunatic in the White House is making most other countries look weak. This will be very popular in Europe and probably in this country too. Europe have the capacity to rule the free world . They are the largest economy possibly equal to the US and it's about time they showed their muscle.
Mr. Royale, indeed. We're already seeing how far the tentacles have grasped. Makes the view of some (that we should've Remained and then voted to leave a decade later) even more inexplicable.
As Cummings made clear, once the referendum was called, Leavers had to fight to the death, even if they might have preferred a gentler route originally.
To think nomarks like Gordon Brown and Theresa May became PM but Ken Clarke never did.
There ain't no justice in the world.
Brown kept us out of the Euro (admittedly, just to spite Blair, but nonetheless, he did); May is taking us out of the EU. What, for all his gifts, did Clarke ever achieve?
The finest Chancellor of my lifetime.
Superb Justice Secretary.
President of the Cambridge Union.
Eminent QC
For starters.
Very good Home Secretary, Education Secretary and Health Secretary too. He pissed off all the right people, which is usually (though not always) a sign of making the right decisions.
Ken Clarke's role in Labour's landslide should not be underestimated -- most of those he pissed off might normally have voted Conservative.
The NUT?
Maybe not the NUT leadership but teachers at the chalkface tend to be small-c conservative.
Ken going very red in the face and losing his voice
I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His entire life's work is in tatters. He could have served as a very successful UK Prime Minister but wouldn't compromise on his passion for the EU... And now, because of those useless Posh Boys who he never liked in the first place, it's all been for nothing.
Must be hard for Clarke and Hezza to bear it.
Yep. All for nothing. Everything Clarke's strived for, believed in, worked towards. Gone. Ruined. Nixed. Blown away. His whole career rendered pointless. Right at the end.
Quite a sickening blow, one imagines.
Quite common amongst those unwilling to compromise when they have minority views, I should expect.
He ought to have retired a long time ago - or formed a party in which his fixed views on Europe could be catered for.
IDS, Bill Cash etc didn't resign when their fixed views on Europe were not catered for in their party. They just helped bring down their own PM and bring in a government that was even more out of tune with their position.
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
That's unfair. Even had every Tory MP in the 92-97 parliament been entirely on side with the leadership, Blair would still have battered Major.
'President Trump's US is among external threats to the European Union along with China, Russia and Radical Islam'
Verhofstad said something very similar yesterday - so clearly a coordinated position, not random musings....
It's a gamble that Merkel and ABLP (anyone but le Pen) win the elections this year. If they do, the EU will be well placed (politically) to press ahead with EU army and other big integration steps. Laying the groundwork to treat the USA as an enemy not an ally gives them more justification for integration.
Well that's where you're wrong. My daughter"s mum has a lifelong condition which means I had to be there a lot when she was a tot. I changed 100s of nappies. My dad told me the other day he changed zero.
Comments
This word is overused on here, but they were the real traitors.
Does Jezza have any posh family members?
See https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844
History will prove IDS and Cash were far more in line with public and activist opinion.
Of the 900,000 Brits living in the 27 other EU countries, fully 250,000 live in Ireland. Just 650,000 in the remaining 26. https://t.co/yJpjzNd4A1
What position would Conservative Opposition leader Clarke have taken on Iraq and would he have been supported by his band of 166 MPs ? It's hard to see Clarke beating Blair in 2005 though he might have done better than Howard.
That's when it all gets murky - would the Conservatives have stayed with Clarke through the next Parliament - I think Clarke would have dissected Brown over the economy and won the Conservatives a majority in 2010 or would they have ditched him in favour of Davis and probably lost in 2010 ?
All good counterfactual stuff and worth discussing on alternatehistory.com.
Prof Curtice:
We should remember, though, that if the talks do go badly there is no guarantee that the UK government will get the blame. It may fall instead on the EU. It appears that many voters anticipate that Mrs May’s proposals will indeed not necessarily go down well in Brussels. Just 20% think that other member states will agree to the sort of Brexit deal that the Prime Minister has outlined. On this, those who voted to Remain (14% anticipate agreement) are largely at one with those who voted Leave (27%). But while this might mean that many Remain voters feel that the EU would be quite right to oppose Mrs May’s Plan, it could equally mean that many Leave voters feel that responsibility for the trouble they think is ahead lies with the EU.
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/does-mrs-mays-brexit-plan-meet-voters-expectations/
You have already swung from Brexit is great, dreadful, brilliant, terrible and back.
There will be many, many occasions when you will shriek and wail and rend your clothes for the catastrophe you bequeathed your children.
At the Lord Mayor’s banquet in 1985, she said: “I couldn’t stand being excluded or discriminated against because of the colour of my own skin. And if you can’t stand a colour bar against yourself, you can’t stand it against anyone else.” Asked by the leading Afrikaans newspaper Beeld, what was the difference between the ANC and the IRA, Thatcher’s answer was: “The IRA have the vote, the ANC do not.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/margaret-thatcher/11403728/Margaret-Thatchers-secret-campaign-to-end-apartheid.html
It was joining the € that made me vote for IDS rather than Clarke.
https://twitter.com/Obey___/status/826431769964601345
@MrHarryCole: She said similar when she nominated Corbyn.... twitter.com/BBCNormanS/sta…
Clegg was passionate, emotional and irrational. He is a conviction politician on EU affairs - not always the best position from which to win a debate.
But in the context of your analogy, Brexit is great, as long as you don't have to live with it...
Such times can destroy or cement relationships. I am so thankful that it did the latter.
Oh, and dry January is dangerous. I still think I'd not have been ill if I'd been my usual debauched self.
(*) even more than usual.
Plus his campaigning material was self-entitled and arrogant (I don't think he agreed with members having a vote) whereas IDS tried.
IDS set some useful reforms in motion, including a focus on welfare reform.
I have no regrets. Rather a crap leader for 2 years than the Euro.
That would have been Game Over.
https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/826440980798767106
wonder what the map looks like - could be some overlaps.
Corbyn's parents were a maths teacher and an electrical engineer that met as fellow peace campaigners....
But, do I not salivate/fantasise over other beautiful women, occasionally?
Of course I do. I'm a red-blooded male. And so does my wife over some 'celebrity' men. And we tell each other. And it's ok.
It's normal; it's human.
It's just choosing a different geopolitical path for the UK to follow. I think a better on. But life will go on either way.
So stop being so silly.
Regrets and all that.
Mr. Royale, indeed. We're already seeing how far the tentacles have grasped. Makes the view of some (that we should've Remained and then voted to leave a decade later) even more inexplicable.
And why? Here's the reason:
For if it prospers,
No man dare call it treason
'President Trump's US is among external threats to the European Union along with China, Russia and Radical Islam'.
So he declares war on all the major players but Juncker's has just said they will have an EU army even though Trump opposes that.
Discounting the fact that Trump is likely to withdraw all his personel and equipment from the EU and especially the Baltic States, the EU are inviting trade and financial sanctions from Trump.
As my wife just said 'They are lunatics - acting like children'
As you say, it seems a bizarrely line to take given the Baltic states (and probably Poland too) would be really rather keen for the US to stay very pro-NATO. Otherwise, who's going to stand up to Russia if it comes to that?
The UK and France, primarily. Except the UK's leaving the EU and a deal must be done.
It's possible Trump and dislike of Trump could make the EU slightly friendlier (in practice if not tone) towards the UK.
http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=171928
http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=178844
But then what do I know, I spent Election Day 2010 knocking up doors for a certain Ms Bagshawe.
How many poopy diapers (sic) did you change at the start?
Or, in the terms of the analogy
Brexit may be fun to be with in 8 years time, but how much shit will some other people have to shovel in the meantime?
I'm quite lucky in the fact I was a bit of a tart in my younger life. I slept around a bit, had fun, and had some relationships with women who are still my (and in a couple of cases 'our') friend. I got the sleeping-around bug more or less out of my system.
I meet lots of yummy mummies, and am friends with a fair few as well (in fact, I had one around for a play date with her son this morning). Some are very attractive, and all are younger than me. But if I was to cheat with one, I would potentially lose so much, and for what? A few shags.
Taking it logically, I'd lose far more than I could ever gain. Being crude, I'd much rather have a w*nk than an affair.
Cue comments ...
Church of Brexit.
May is the new Queen Elizabeth I.
"Take Back Control"
"Sovereignty"
Yes, we are about to find out the true meaning of those platitudes. Euratom is an early example.
We are not free to be members (as it currently stands), which means we are not free to host JET, and we are not free to run Sellafield.
Maybe all those things are great, but they don't look like control to me.
That alone would have been worth it...
I suspect that the pro-Trump petition is primarily identifying the size of the "Let's wind-up a lefty" demographic in the UK.