Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » BMG finds 63% now want an elected House of Lords – up 15 point

124»

Comments

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,508
    MikeL said:

    Derek Robinson, "Red Robbo", has died (aged 90):

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-41820070

    My God that name takes me back to my Brummie teen age years.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,484
    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Yes she is. I know this on very good authority indeed. She's not very bright either though she thinks she is.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    edited October 2017
    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.

    Plus while I was not a fan of the dementia tax and using peoples' homes to fund their personal care it was at least an attempt to provide more funds for social care, something Labour opposed.
    Well, they were unclear on how at least.

    Manifesto.

    There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how [national care service at additional 3bn per annum] should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy.

    So they would have sought consensus with the Tories, apparently. Perhaps some kind of dementia tax.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    If true then you would expect a trend over a number of years. Instead, the death rate went down the following year

    Here's the graph on Figure 1 of the link from the ONS

    http://tinyurl.com/y9melq6d

    Obvious points (i) No real evidence of a trend, given the scatter from year to year, (ii) absolute numbers of deaths peaked under Labour in 2003, (iii) absolute numbers were least under the Coalition in 2011.

    Conclusion; your post is nonsense.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    Cyclefree said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Yes she is. I know this on very good authority indeed. She's not very bright either though she thinks she is.
    At the very least I think she still hasn't gotten used to the fact that now she has to openly parrot partisan Labour talking points, she cannot expect to have the same weight given to her pronouncements on other topics. She is so clearly in the game now.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    kle4 said:

    Well, they were unclear on how at least.

    Manifesto.

    There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how [national care service at additional 3bn per annum] should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy.

    So they would have sought consensus with the Tories, apparently. Perhaps some kind of dementia tax.

    In a sense they were right. This does need to go beyond politics, because it's a massive long term structural issue. But in a sense also it's the wrong question to ask. Until we as a country have a sensible grown up conversation about end of life care for the elderly and who we do it and how much we pay for it, politicians can't really work out how to raise sufficient money to pay for it.

    The problem is that governments of successive hues have increasingly taken away the ability to debate such issues sensibly in public by failing to give us time and space to do it. So now, when we really need not a political consensus but a national consensus on a huge variety of issues, we can't do it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,609
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.

    Plus while I was not a fan of the dementia tax and using peoples' homes to fund their personal care it was at least an attempt to provide more funds for social care, something Labour opposed.
    Well, they were unclear on how at least.

    Manifesto.

    There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how [national care service at additional 3bn per annum] should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy.

    So they would have sought consensus with the Tories, apparently. Perhaps some kind of dementia tax.
    No commitment to anything there at all, just some vague considerations of potential options.

    Though personally I prefer social insurance which is suggested as the final option.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.
    Mao Zedong was considered a great intellectual, wit and speaker.

    Well, by people stood next to him anyway.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.

    Plus while I was not a fan of the dementia tax and using peoples' homes to fund their personal care it was at least an attempt to provide more funds for social care, something Labour opposed.
    Well, they were unclear on how at least.

    Manifesto.

    There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how [national care service at additional 3bn per annum] should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy.

    So they would have sought consensus with the Tories, apparently. Perhaps some kind of dementia tax.
    No commitment to anything there at all, just some vague considerations of potential options.
    Oh I know. My recollection is the LDs had a similar goal of a national care service but were clearer on specific funding.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    McCluskey's quote on Red Robbo is unfortunately a bit backhanded:

    "He is quoted as saying: 'If we make Leyland successful, it will be a political victory. It will prove that ordinary working people have got the intelligence and determination to run industry'.

    "These words are a suitable epithet for a stalwart of the trade union movement, whose passing we mourn."
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.
    Mao Zedong was considered a great intellectual, wit and speaker.

    Well, by people stood next to him anyway.
    That Kim Jong Il is also a demon on the golf course I have heard.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Multiple incidents being reported in Manhattan
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.

    Intelligent sociopaths are very good at manipulating and deceiving people. Being able to be charming (when they want to) is part of their abilities. They simply do whatever it takes to achieve their goals without any qualms whatsoever.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Scott_P said:

    Multiple incidents being reported in Manhattan

    Sky are covering it but nothing on the front page of the New York Times.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Danny565 said:

    Number of casualties reported after an apparent shooting incident in New York's Lower Manhattan

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41825577

    Being called an aggravated road rage incident on local radio (1010 WINS).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,609
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.

    Plus while I was not a fan of the dementia tax and using peoples' homes to fund their personal care it was at least an attempt to provide more funds for social care, something Labour opposed.
    Well, they were unclear on how at least.

    Manifesto.

    There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how [national care service at additional 3bn per annum] should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy.

    So they would have sought consensus with the Tories, apparently. Perhaps some kind of dementia tax.
    No commitment to anything there at all, just some vague considerations of potential options.
    Oh I know. My recollection is the LDs had a similar goal of a national care service but were clearer on specific funding.
    A step up from Labour then.
  • Sean_F said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.
    Age-standardised mortality rates fell significantly in 2016, and were about 6% lower than in 2010, and far lower than the average for 1997-2010. So, at any given age, people are less likely to die now than has ever been the case.
    According to this: https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2017/07/20/whats-happening-with-mortality-rates-in-england/ - 2016 ASM rates fell to the standard, and then early 2017 data indicates it's been worse than the trend again. Having seen the state of the NHS early this year I can believe it. A year back on the expected trend does not reverse a year significantly worse. The NHS is palpably struggling, people who use it can feel that it's been stretched to breaking point regardless. This winter will be another one of misery for many families.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.
    Mao Zedong was considered a great intellectual, wit and speaker.

    Well, by people stood next to him anyway.
    That Kim Jong Il is also a demon on the golf course I have heard.
    Only today he apparently congratulated an officer for stopping his chauffeur for speeding.

    Well, according to the Twitter feed of DPRK News Service anyway, who, as we know, never lie.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Scott_P said:

    Multiple incidents being reported in Manhattan

    Hmm, not on local media there aren't.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    The House of Lords should indeed be abolished and replaced by an elected chamber which represents the People.

    The irony?

    The Liberals and Labour who should be leading the campaign to abolish the Lords, are at the moment looking to the Lords and its unelected and unrepresentative peers to frustrate the will of the People on Brexit.
  • RhubarbRhubarb Posts: 359
    rpjs said:

    Danny565 said:

    Number of casualties reported after an apparent shooting incident in New York's Lower Manhattan

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41825577

    Being called an aggravated road rage incident on local radio (1010 WINS).
    There are pictures of a smaller rental truck on twitter.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,609
    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:

    Multiple incidents being reported in Manhattan

    Sky are covering it but nothing on the front page of the New York Times.
    It is the main news on Fox news though seems to be road rage and a fight between truck drivers.
    http://www.foxnews.com/
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    stevef said:

    The House of Lords should indeed be abolished and replaced by an elected chamber which represents the People.

    The irony?

    The Liberals and Labour who should be leading the campaign to abolish the Lords, are at the moment looking to the Lords and its unelected and unrepresentative peers to frustrate the will of the People on Brexit.


    Lords give us reform but not yet.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157

    stevef said:

    The House of Lords should indeed be abolished and replaced by an elected chamber which represents the People.

    The irony?

    The Liberals and Labour who should be leading the campaign to abolish the Lords, are at the moment looking to the Lords and its unelected and unrepresentative peers to frustrate the will of the People on Brexit.


    Lords give us reform but not yet.

    *Claps*

    Mind you, reform of the Lords has been going on for 106 years and hasn't got very far yet.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    In looking back at old manifestos, I am reminded that the Tory manifesto in June included no mention of Corbyn or Labour (in the sense of Labour party, not that there is no reference to, for example, labour markets). I wonder if that is usual, for governments, as Labour's has a handful of references to Theresa May and Tory cuts and Tory government and so on. Not huge numbers, but a handful.

    The LD manifesto opening on the other hand reads a little sad now, as it is clear there was hope of really breaking back in, at Labour's expense.

    To be clear, Theresa May’s Conservative Party is on course to win this election.
    Unless we make a stand, they will walk away with a landslide. We risk the
    arrogance and heartlessness with which she has governed for the last 10 months
    being reinforced by a majority that no government has had for 20 years.
    The reason? There is a complete absence of real opposition from Jeremy Corbyn’s
    Labour Party


    And to this question, people said 'Yes please'

    So on June the 8th, I am asking you to think very hard about what will be best for you, your friends and family, and the area you live in. Another Tory MP, to bolster Theresa May’s majority? Another member of Labour’s hopeless and failed opposition? Another Nationalist MP who only wants to break up the UK?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.

    Plus while I was not a fan of the dementia tax and using peoples' homes to fund their personal care it was at least an attempt to provide more funds for social care, something Labour opposed.
    Well, they were unclear on how at least.

    Manifesto.

    There are care levy.

    So they would have sought consensus with the Tories, apparently. Perhaps some kind of dementia tax.
    No commitment to anything there at all, just some vague considerations of potential options.
    Oh I know. My recollection is the LDs had a similar goal of a national care service but were clearer on specific funding.
    A step up from Labour then.
    That was a major theme of their manifesto - a step up from Labour.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,609
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.

    Plus while I was not a fan of the dementia tax and using peoples' homes to fund their personal care it was at least an attempt to provide more funds for social care, something Labour opposed.
    Well, they were unclear on how at least.

    Manifesto.

    There are care levy.

    So they would have sought consensus with the Tories, apparently. Perhaps some kind of dementia tax.
    No commitment to anything there at all, just some vague considerations of potential options.
    Oh I know. My recollection is the LDs had a similar goal of a national care service but were clearer on specific funding.
    A step up from Labour then.
    That was a major theme of their manifesto - a step up from Labour.
    Though not in votes or seats.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.

    Intelligent sociopaths are very good at manipulating and deceiving people. Being able to be charming (when they want to) is part of their abilities. They simply do whatever it takes to achieve their goals without any qualms whatsoever.

    Is there such a thing as an intelligent non-sociopath?

    I'd like to think so, but I'm not convinced there are many of those about. Perhaps a few librarians and such.

    I think people generally learn - and then use - whichever social strategies advance their interests.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    ydoethur said:

    stevef said:

    The House of Lords should indeed be abolished and replaced by an elected chamber which represents the People.

    The irony?

    The Liberals and Labour who should be leading the campaign to abolish the Lords, are at the moment looking to the Lords and its unelected and unrepresentative peers to frustrate the will of the People on Brexit.


    Lords give us reform but not yet.

    *Claps*

    Mind you, reform of the Lords has been going on for 106 years and hasn't got very far yet.
    Well sure, but it's been around in one form or another for the better part of a thousand years, so when you look it that way it's been some rapid change in the last 10-15% of its existence.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,157
    edited October 2017
    kle4 said:

    In looking back at old manifestos, I am reminded that the Tory manifesto in June included no mention of Corbyn or Labour (in the sense of Labour party, not that there is no reference to, for example, labour markets). I wonder if that is usual, for governments, as Labour's has a handful of references to Theresa May and Tory cuts and Tory government and so on. Not huge numbers, but a handful.

    Until the 1980s, Tory policy in most elections was to campaign positively in the belief that it was statesmanlike not to attack your opponents. There were dazzling exceptions, but Thatcher was the first to use strongly negative tactics in her manifesto as a matter of course.

    However, one advantage the Tories undoubtedly do have that extends back literally centuries is that the press do a lot of the negative stuff for them - this year, Miliband, Kinnock, Bevan, Zinoviev all spring to mind with no effort!

    Edit - and yes the Liberal Democrat pitch is rather poignant.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    NYC incident: ABC7 and NBC4 both reporting two dead. City officials saying incident seems to have started with a road-rage incident with shots fired, then one participant driving truck along cycle lane and then hitting a school bus before leaving vehicle and firing at pedestrians. Then shot by NYPD and taken into custody.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722

    Sean_F said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    Link to the independent research pls?
    This is the one I was thinking of: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/care-cuts-may-have-fuelled-largest-rise-death-rates-50-years/

    It's very easy for us all to be chummy on here, and be charitable to politicians. For political anoraks it's an interesting hobby like following the football and cheering the reds or the blues. McDonnell's quotation may be the sign of a different mood that I think is growing. People who are drawn to politics because it has delivered them and their families real hardship, real suffering, real death.
    Age-standardised mortality rates fell significantly in 2016, and were about 6% lower than in 2010, and far lower than the average for 1997-2010. So, at any given age, people are less likely to die now than has ever been the case.
    According to this: https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2017/07/20/whats-happening-with-mortality-rates-in-england/ - 2016 ASM rates fell to the standard, and then early 2017 data indicates it's been worse than the trend again. Having seen the state of the NHS early this year I can believe it. A year back on the expected trend does not reverse a year significantly worse. The NHS is palpably struggling, people who use it can feel that it's been stretched to breaking point regardless. This winter will be another one of misery for many families.
    ASM rates won't improve for ever. But, it doesn't alter that they are better than when this government came to power.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    rpjs said:

    NYC incident: ABC7 and NBC4 both reporting two dead. City officials saying incident seems to have started with a road-rage incident with shots fired, then one participant driving truck along cycle lane and then hitting a school bus before leaving vehicle and firing at pedestrians. Then shot by NYPD and taken into custody.

    1010WINS now saying NYT saying six dead.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,866
    Cyclefree said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Yes she is. I know this on very good authority indeed. She's not very bright either though she thinks she is.
    Ooohhhh. Does she post on PB? Am I allowed to guess who she is?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,138
    edited October 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Yes she is. I know this on very good authority indeed. She's not very bright either though she thinks she is.
    Ooohhhh. Does she post on PB? Am I allowed to guess who she is?
    Let’s put it this way... have you ever seen MikeSmithson and her in the same room?

    :D
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 597
    Pong said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.

    Intelligent sociopaths are very good at manipulating and deceiving people. Being able to be charming (when they want to) is part of their abilities. They simply do whatever it takes to achieve their goals without any qualms whatsoever.

    Is there such a thing as an intelligent non-sociopath?

    I'd like to think so, but I'm not convinced there are many of those about. Perhaps a few librarians and such.

    I think people generally learn - and then use - whichever social strategies advance their interests.
    People with Asperger's are often intelligent but have poor social skills.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @BBCJonSopel: NYPD confirm several fatalities and numerous people injured after truck drives 20 blocks in bike lane. Assumption is deliberate attack

    This not the only incident reported
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Scott_P said:

    @BBCJonSopel: NYPD confirm several fatalities and numerous people injured after truck drives 20 blocks in bike lane. Assumption is deliberate attack

    This not the only incident reported

    I'm not seeing anything else reported. What else are you seeing?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    rpjs said:

    I'm not seeing anything else reported. What else are you seeing?

    Shots fired. But that could just be NYC
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Scott_P said:

    rpjs said:

    I'm not seeing anything else reported. What else are you seeing?

    Shots fired. But that could just be NYC
    Quite. There were some manhole explosions on the UES earlier as well, but that's just conEd being shite.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120
    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Yes she is. I know this on very good authority indeed. She's not very bright either though she thinks she is.
    Ooohhhh. Does she post on PB? Am I allowed to guess who she is?
    Cyclefree's personal antipathy to anything Chakra on this site is tiresome, tedious and particularly unpleasant
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120
    dodrade said:

    Pong said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.

    Intelligent sociopaths are very good at manipulating and deceiving people. Being able to be charming (when they want to) is part of their abilities. They simply do whatever it takes to achieve their goals without any qualms whatsoever.

    Is there such a thing as an intelligent non-sociopath?

    I'd like to think so, but I'm not convinced there are many of those about. Perhaps a few librarians and such.

    I think people generally learn - and then use - whichever social strategies advance their interests.
    People with Asperger's are often intelligent but have poor social skills.
    PbCOM attracts quite a few obsessive asbergery types.....some left, some right and some centre
  • rpjs said:

    Scott_P said:

    rpjs said:

    I'm not seeing anything else reported. What else are you seeing?

    Shots fired. But that could just be NYC
    Quite. There were some manhole explosions on the UES earlier as well, but that's just conEd being shite.
    Lower Manhattan reporting 'terror' attack
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    rpjs said:

    Scott_P said:

    rpjs said:

    I'm not seeing anything else reported. What else are you seeing?

    Shots fired. But that could just be NYC
    Quite. There were some manhole explosions on the UES earlier as well, but that's just conEd being shite.
    Lower Manhattan reporting 'terror' attack
    Latest is that no shots were fired - suspect had paintball and BB guns. Suspect reported shouting something involving "Allah".
  • tyson said:

    dodrade said:

    Pong said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Is she personally unpleasant? Certainly, she's been willing to sacrifice her principles for personally advancement. But that's hardly unusual.

    Indeed, some of the most pleasant people I've ever met have been utterly venal and corrupt. (My one big personal investing loss was the consequence of backing an extremely pleasant, affable individual. Who turned out to be a total crook.)
    Hitler had the reputation of being able to be very charming when he wanted to be.
    As could Idi Amin. A friend of mine grew up in Uganda in the Seventies and his parents were often invited to dinner and drinks with Amin, and he remembers how much fun he was for children to be with.

    Intelligent sociopaths are very good at manipulating and deceiving people. Being able to be charming (when they want to) is part of their abilities. They simply do whatever it takes to achieve their goals without any qualms whatsoever.

    Is there such a thing as an intelligent non-sociopath?

    I'd like to think so, but I'm not convinced there are many of those about. Perhaps a few librarians and such.

    I think people generally learn - and then use - whichever social strategies advance their interests.
    People with Asperger's are often intelligent but have poor social skills.
    PbCOM attracts quite a few obsessive asbergery types.....some left, some right and some centre
    I didn't know you were Aspergery :)
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587
    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Hmm. To quote an oracle:

    "I think it is very important not to take the view that because someone disagrees with you they are an awful human being."
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Hmm. To quote an oracle:

    "I think it is very important not to take the view that because someone disagrees with you they are an awful human being."
    Zing.

    That said, it would be possible to disagree with someone and coincidentally take the view they an awful human being, depending on other qualities they possess.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,546
    edited October 2017
    FFS...

    Home Secretary Amber Rudd was put on there only because she had a relationship with Eton-educated Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng after her divorce from AA Gill.

    St Austell MP Steve Double is also on there for having an affair with his office liaison with Sarah Bunt, 26, but was taken back by his forgiving wife Anne in 2016

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5034799/Fresh-allegations-swirl-sex-Westminster.html

    I am sure there are going to be some serious allegations / cases, but so far knee touching and consensual relationships some how find themselves on the list of sex pests does nobody any good.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811

    FFS...

    Home Secretary Amber Rudd was put on there only because she had a relationship with Eton-educated Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng after her divorce from AA Gill.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5034799/Fresh-allegations-swirl-sex-Westminster.html

    Not taking any chances springs to mind if that sort is included.
  • Apparently Liz Truss is also on da list...for having a consensual relationship...
  • Apparently Liz Truss is also on da list...for having a consensual relationship...

    The list is not helping the real issues as per tonights rape allegation
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,546
    edited October 2017
    Katz has limited experience of commissioning programmes but a Channel 4 source praised his “history of risk-taking” and “promoting new talent”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/oct/31/newsnight-editor-ian-katz-quits-bbc-for-top-channel-4-role

    I believe that is media speak for is totally unqualified for the role and was shit at his last job, but we are going to hire him anyway.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,546
    edited October 2017
    15 MPs are named over consensual relationships or personal sexual preferences, with no suggestion of harassment.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/31/tory-minister-mp-accused-paying-women-keep-quiet/

    So some people have clearly been included because they are closeted or into kinky stuff in a consensual way.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    FFS...

    Home Secretary Amber Rudd was put on there only because she had a relationship with Eton-educated Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng after her divorce from AA Gill.

    St Austell MP Steve Double is also on there for having an affair with his office liaison with Sarah Bunt, 26, but was taken back by his forgiving wife Anne in 2016

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5034799/Fresh-allegations-swirl-sex-Westminster.html

    I am sure there are going to be some serious allegations / cases, but so far knee touching and consensual relationships some how find themselves on the list of sex pests does nobody any good.

    Why is Kwasi's education relevant? What does the mail think we learn at School?!
  • Charles said:

    FFS...

    Home Secretary Amber Rudd was put on there only because she had a relationship with Eton-educated Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng after her divorce from AA Gill.

    St Austell MP Steve Double is also on there for having an affair with his office liaison with Sarah Bunt, 26, but was taken back by his forgiving wife Anne in 2016

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5034799/Fresh-allegations-swirl-sex-Westminster.html

    I am sure there are going to be some serious allegations / cases, but so far knee touching and consensual relationships some how find themselves on the list of sex pests does nobody any good.

    Why is Kwasi's education relevant? What does the mail think we learn at School?!
    Given it was the mail, I am surprised they didn't also include the value of his house.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    edited October 2017
    Charles said:

    FFS...

    Home Secretary Amber Rudd was put on there only because she had a relationship with Eton-educated Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng after her divorce from AA Gill.

    St Austell MP Steve Double is also on there for having an affair with his office liaison with Sarah Bunt, 26, but was taken back by his forgiving wife Anne in 2016

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5034799/Fresh-allegations-swirl-sex-Westminster.html

    I am sure there are going to be some serious allegations / cases, but so far knee touching and consensual relationships some how find themselves on the list of sex pests does nobody any good.

    Why is Kwasi's education relevant? What does the mail think we learn at School?!
    Eton-Educated=elitish and posh=probably into some weird kinky stuff?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,267
    Charles said:

    FFS...

    Home Secretary Amber Rudd was put on there only because she had a relationship with Eton-educated Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng after her divorce from AA Gill.

    St Austell MP Steve Double is also on there for having an affair with his office liaison with Sarah Bunt, 26, but was taken back by his forgiving wife Anne in 2016

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5034799/Fresh-allegations-swirl-sex-Westminster.html

    I am sure there are going to be some serious allegations / cases, but so far knee touching and consensual relationships some how find themselves on the list of sex pests does nobody any good.

    Why is Kwasi's education relevant? What does the mail think we learn at School?!
    Presumably because he isn't some vulnerable young researcher.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Hmm. To quote an oracle:

    "I think it is very important not to take the view that because someone disagrees with you they are an awful human being."
    #isitok to be up for anything consensual with Shami?

    My sort of woman, and those eyes...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,866

    Apparently Liz Truss is also on da list...for having a consensual relationship...

    That's the worst kind of relationship.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    Apparently Liz Truss is also on da list...for having a consensual relationship...

    That's the worst kind of relationship.
    Your friend Kwai has a thing for Cabinet Ministers...
  • We don’t need to know about affairs, or sexual preferences. Those should be private matters.
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    HYUFD said:

    OchEye said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ms. Apocalypse, only the other day I was knocking Mao for his horrendous views (regarding hounding Conservative MPs).

    On abuse: only at one conference were their hanged effigies. Only one side has a very senior MP calling for total hounding of all MPs from the other side.

    When Conservative activists start stringing up effigies of Labour MPs, and Philip Hammond calls for every Labour MP to be hounded whenever they travel in public, I'll accept both major parties are equally nasty.

    The BBC's political editor only needed a bodyguard at one conference, for that matter.

    Kuenssberg had a bodyguard at Tory conference, too. She needed one for neither realistically.

    I'd say the nasty party is the one whose policies have led to tens of thousands of excess deaths in recent years according to independent research. McDonnell's quotation from a member of the public may have been unpleasant, but it's not an inaccurate portrayal of how sections of the public feel about the bastards.
    I seem to recall it was your party which left unemployment of 9% which has only fallen to 4% under the Coalition and the Tories.
    Interesting, in that being unable to answer, you try and divert attention away. Sign of a guilty conscience perhaps?
    No, see my two posts below rebutting the original allegations too.
    Nope, nice try, but when the same tactic is used repeatedly, others start catching on. You'll just have to try something else when you're losing an argument.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587
    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Looks like a case for an investigation by Baroness Chakrabarti!

    No no no! She's a stupid unpleasant ninny who wouldn't know what integrity and independence were if they came and bit her on her bum.
    Hmm. To quote an oracle:

    "I think it is very important not to take the view that because someone disagrees with you they are an awful human being."
    Zing.

    That said, it would be possible to disagree with someone and coincidentally take the view they an awful human being, depending on other qualities they possess.
    True. But I've not heard Cyclefree express a view on any aspect of Shami except that she wrote a report that Cyclefree disagreed with. If they've met and Cyclefree has some non-political reason for disliking her, that's of course different.

    Irritatingly, I like both Shami and Cyclefree.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Cyclefree said:

    Well, completely off topic but very exciting - for me anyway!

    Today I got my first piece of work as a freelance. Since I only set up my company last week and have not really launched myself on an unsuspecting world, this is very exciting news for me.

    Of course, it may be the only piece of work I get, but hey.... it's a start.

    Has anything happened out there: any more knees touched? War in Korea? Some hitherto unappreciated aspect of Brexit we have not discussed ad nauseam?

    Congratulations on getting your first piece of work. I hope it will be one of many.
This discussion has been closed.