Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
You keep wittering on about the law, and what is lawful. But legality is not a part of most political discourse; competence, doing the right thing, and morality, is what counts. It's obvious Cummings did the wrong thing, though he's going to get away with it, as frequently happens.
Hypothetically, imagine a PM who has just had a child and got engaged. He is then discovered to be having a fling with another woman, and this makes the news. Completely far-fetched, I know. Has the PM done anything unlawful? Certainly not. In the court of public opinion, would he nonetheless be found guilty of gross misdemeanour and probably lose his job? He certainly would.
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
Again, I think the divide between Tories like Philip and HYUFD is the most significant thing here. Long term he may have lost some of the Mail readers. They’re not about to go and vote anything but Conservative but they have influence in the direction of the party and this, I think, has been an expression of disquiet about that. That’s why, for anti-Tories, it’s tactically better for Cummings to stay.
And for those of us us who don't want some nightmare authoritarian Daily Mail government its probably better he stays too
I may be right wing economically but I have zero respect for the Daily Mail (or The Sun). The Mail is a hateful, racist, bigoted, authoritarian rag. Being on the wrong side of it is a good sign.
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
You keep wittering on about the law, and what is lawful. But legality is not a part of most political discourse; competence, doing the right thing, and morality, is what counts. It's obvious Cummings did the wrong thing, though he's going to get away with it, as frequently happens.
Hypothetically, imagine a PM who has just had a child and got engaged. He is then discovered to be having a fling with another woman, and this makes the news. Completely far-fetched, I know. Has the PM done anything unlawful? Certainly not. In the court of public opinion, would he nonetheless be found guilty of gross misdemeanour and probably lose his job? He certainly would.
Most people here seem to be getting bogged down in rather dull detail that's not going to have any impact on the outcome, unless there's any new revelation.
I would suggest:
1. Cummings did well enough today to survive, and picking away at his account is pointless unless there's something brand new. It should have come earlier, but BLTN.
2. The government's handling of this has been atrocious over the last 72 hours, and contrasts sharply with previous administrations' handling of such PR disasters.
3. Boris needs Cummings much more than vice versa.
4. And the key point: Boris is a much diminished figure, and while this story will fade, Boris's diminution won't. He is not, actually, prime ministerial material. This is nothing like being Mayor of London. It does not suit him, and he can't really do it. This is what should really worry the Tories on here, not the Cummings stuff.
One other thing, which the Sunday Times reported on yesterday, but isn't going anywhere.
When the dust settles, it is certain that the UK will have done badly in terms of wave 1 COVID deaths, and quite possible that we will have the worst outcomes in Europe. The key reason for that is likely to have been that we faffed about for most of March. Because of the time we wasted then, we are going to be stuck in semi-lockdown for longer, because we had a bigger peak to squash (Eire, for example, is down to zero deaths today).
Neither Boris nor Dom can be forced from office against their will, unless lots of Conservative MPs show some sense and find an alternative. But this weekend has diminished both of them. Dom's diminution is just as important- can he really jeer at journos or swagger at Spads in the same way again?
Wasn't the scientific advice that the UK was weeks behind the timeline of other countries ?
In reality we weren't.
I suspect getting a big localised outbreak as Italy and Spain did made it easier to bring in a lockdown than a more general nationwide outbreak as the UK had.
Most people here seem to be getting bogged down in rather dull detail that's not going to have any impact on the outcome, unless there's any new revelation.
I would suggest:
1. Cummings did well enough today to survive, and picking away at his account is pointless unless there's something brand new. It should have come earlier, but BLTN.
2. The government's handling of this has been atrocious over the last 72 hours, and contrasts sharply with previous administrations' handling of such PR disasters.
3. Boris needs Cummings much more than vice versa.
4. And the key point: Boris is a much diminished figure, and while this story will fade, Boris's diminution won't. He is not, actually, prime ministerial material. This is nothing like being Mayor of London. It does not suit him, and he can't really do it. This is what should really worry the Tories on here, not the Cummings stuff.
I agree with all this and add:
Cummings' aim with his press conference was precisely that people do get bogged down with the detail. He deployed lots of bullshit, but importantly he baffled successfully.
The real danger now is if infections and death start going back up again. We have got conditioned to thinking the epidemic is on the way down, if not out. But if people's behaviour changes the epidemic will pick up again. Then people will start remembering Dominic Cummings, who presumably will still be around.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Will that make a difference? It has not felt like anyone has been in charge recently and we have all just been trundling along trying to do The Right Thing ™
The only clarification in recent days is that we can do whatever we like
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
You keep wittering on about the law, and what is lawful. But legality is not a part of most political discourse; competence, doing the right thing, and morality, is what counts. It's obvious Cummings did the wrong thing, though he's going to get away with it, as frequently happens.
Hypothetically, imagine a PM who has just had a child and got engaged. He is then discovered to be having a fling with another woman, and this makes the news. Completely far-fetched, I know. Has the PM done anything unlawful? Certainly not. In the court of public opinion, would he nonetheless be found guilty of gross misdemeanour and probably lose his job? He certainly would.
I would not support the PM losing his job in those circumstances. I couldn't give two f**ks about "morality". Morality is personal it should belong to the individual.
The only reason Cummings should go is if he's broken the law. It can't be one law for everyone else but not for him. If he's not broken the law there's nothing morally wrong with looking after your sick wife and child however you lawfully see right.
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
Again, I think the divide between Tories like Philip and HYUFD is the most significant thing here. Long term he may have lost some of the Mail readers. They’re not about to go and vote anything but Conservative but they have influence in the direction of the party and this, I think, has been an expression of disquiet about that. That’s why, for anti-Tories, it’s tactically better for Cummings to stay.
And for those of us us who don't want some nightmare authoritarian Daily Mail government its probably better he stays too
I may be right wing economically but I have zero respect for the Daily Mail (or The Sun). The Mail is a hateful, racist, bigoted, authoritarian rag. Being on the wrong side of it is a good sign.
It is, given the size of your majority, about which direction your party takes. That’s where the danger for your side lies.
No one will be worried about the Guardian headline. Hell, even Labour Governments don’t care much what the Guardian says. The Daily Mail tomorrow will be interesting though.
I hope Cummings survives. [EDIT: Even though I lose a bet]
This is operating at several levels.
There is the basic emotional level across all political opinions that this stinks. One law for us, another for them. I agree with that. Tory MPs are getting this in their in-trays in spades. That's the political raw material.
The Left wing and maybe some Remainers see this as a way at undermining Johnson's credibility and possibly getting a change of Tory leader and softening of policy on the EU (Hunt?).
But the worrying movement is by the hard Brexiteeers who have always hated Cummings who is a soft Brexiteer (Farage, Baker etc hate him). Baker led the charge by Tory MPs. If they can get rid of Cummings, they stand a better change of getting a No Deal Brexit. Cummings is a steadying force in this Cabinet of half-wits. I hope he survives.
Interesting analysis.
As I said the other day for me it is not a matter of hoping he goes, rather of believing that there is a fundamentally important reason why he must go - which is faith in and adherence to the guidance which, for all the other many things the Government have done wrong, I still believe is the best chance we have of bringing the virus under control with the minimum of further deaths. Cummings staying undermines that.
However as a Brexiteer I also agree with your analysis that Cummings is a pragmatic and a moderating force as far as the type of Brexit we achieve is concerned. So I do worry about who will gain further influence once he is gone.
Finally, whilst he is a moderating influence as far as Brexit is concerned, he is undoubtedly a radical if not a proto-revolutionary when it comes to remodelling the way our country is governed. Again I am a strong advocate of this and do think that when he falls, so will fall the once in a century chance to really reform the civil service and all aspects of Government in Britain. I regret that but still feel that people's lives are more important so he should go.
The issue Cummings has is that he wants Britain to be a techno-libertarian (or even techno-anarchist) society free from the shackles of EU Regulation or, indeed, much regulation at all. I get that - don’t necessarily agree - but I get it.
However many of the people who helped him deliver Brexit, whose mouthpiece is the Daily Mail, are not libertarian, or indeed liberal, let alone anarchist. Many of them don’t much like technology. They are actually quite authoritarian. They don’t like people they perceive as breaking the rules. They like rules. They like order. They like regulation. Not if it’s made in Brussels admittedly, but they like the rules that are made in the U.K. to be kept to the spirit and the letter. British fair play and all that.
This liberal vs traditional Tory beef shows up here on PB in the tension between @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD. It’s the people more like HYUFD he’s upset. HYUFD himself has largely stayed out of it. Traditional Tories who follow the rules and believe in fair play. Cummings believes in disruption. That’s why this is significant. He going to find out he doesn’t understand many (not all by any means, but very many) of the people who achieved Brexit for him. They wanted out for different reasons.
Yep I get that and I think your analysis is sound. Obviously I am more of the Cummings' school of techno-libertarian which is why I have hoped he would succeed in his endeavours. But as I said, human life is more important for me than political ideology so Cummings has crossed a line which means to me he should resign. This is not about what is good for the Tory party but what is good for the country.
Edit: I would disagree with you on one important point. However much they might wish it, the Daily Mail under Greig is no longer the mouthpiece of any sort of Brexit supporter. Hence its attitude towards Cummings.
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Surely Dom's ability to dismantle the civil service and revolutionize government, or whatever he was intending to do, is now in tatters. This is the bloke who can't even arrange child care without almost bringing down the government and jeopardizing the principal public-health policy during a national crisis. Any crackpot schemes he comes up with now will be met with derision. His credibility is totally shot.
I rather like that angle. The man who couldn't manage to organise child-care in London is now going to arrange our exit from the EU transition period. What could possibly go wrong?
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
You keep wittering on about the law, and what is lawful. But legality is not a part of most political discourse; competence, doing the right thing, and morality, is what counts. It's obvious Cummings did the wrong thing, though he's going to get away with it, as frequently happens.
Hypothetically, imagine a PM who has just had a child and got engaged. He is then discovered to be having a fling with another woman, and this makes the news. Completely far-fetched, I know. Has the PM done anything unlawful? Certainly not. In the court of public opinion, would he nonetheless be found guilty of gross misdemeanour and probably lose his job? He certainly would.
I would not support the PM losing his job in those circumstances. I couldn't give two f**ks about "morality". Morality is personal it should belong to the individual.
The only reason Cummings should go is if he's broken the law. It can't be one law for everyone else but not for him. If he's not broken the law there's nothing morally wrong with looking after your sick wife and child however you lawfully see right.
Is going back to work when you should be self quarantining not breaking the law?
Or does "my ill wife told me to go back" count as a reasonable excuse?
"Notes and Queries," from March 21, 1863, describes Barnard Castle, the market town in Teesdale, as having "no enviable reputation. Longstaffe supposes that Sir George Bowes's refusal to fight with the rebels during the rising of the north, gave rise to the contemptuous distich:
'Coward, a coward of Barney Castell, Dare not come out to fight a battel' " And adds that "Come, come, that's a Barna' Cassell," is "a reproof to an exaggerator, or liar."
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
I guess it's because you are unable or unwilling to see any difference between breaking the law and not following the rules.
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
You keep wittering on about the law, and what is lawful. But legality is not a part of most political discourse; competence, doing the right thing, and morality, is what counts. It's obvious Cummings did the wrong thing, though he's going to get away with it, as frequently happens.
Hypothetically, imagine a PM who has just had a child and got engaged. He is then discovered to be having a fling with another woman, and this makes the news. Completely far-fetched, I know. Has the PM done anything unlawful? Certainly not. In the court of public opinion, would he nonetheless be found guilty of gross misdemeanour and probably lose his job? He certainly would.
I would not support the PM losing his job in those circumstances. I couldn't give two f**ks about "morality". Morality is personal it should belong to the individual.
The only reason Cummings should go is if he's broken the law. It can't be one law for everyone else but not for him. If he's not broken the law there's nothing morally wrong with looking after your sick wife and child however you lawfully see right.
Is going back to work when you should be self quarantining not breaking the law?
Or does "my ill wife told me to go back" count as a reasonable excuse?
Self-isolation applied to two symptoms. His wife had neither at that time he went back to work which is why he did.
Should self-isolation have occurred for any and all symptoms of any and all illnesses? Possibly. But it didn't.
I'd only get behind the wheel if I felt my eyesight was up to it. But if I'd been sick or not driven for a long time I always do short drives before going on cross country drives. ...
PS the half hour rule of thumb I've followed since I was 18, came from an RAC agent.
You're taking a lot of ridicule for this, presumably because of the person it's being used in defence of, but just as a standalone piece of advice I think this is a good one. I sometimes go weeks or even a couple of months without driving, and always like to get a short, unpressurised practice run in before starting up driving again. Not sure about optimal duration, but I suspect 30 mins is good for the car too if it's been sitting unused!
Thank you!
Indeed I said the advice came from an RAC agent when I was 18. I'd passed my drivers test the week before going to university. I didn't drive much while at uni and ended up just before the end of first term checking the car and it had a flat battery. Called RAC who sorted it and while chatting with the RAC agent he said to drive for half an hour both for the sake of the car and it was good for my own driving before crossing country to drive home.
Its a rule of thumb I've lived by since if I've ever had a period of not needing to drive for a long time then having to do a lone one. During lockdown I've not driven any futher than the local shops which makes me worry now about the state of the car - I wouldn't do a cross country drive now without doing a half hour drive first.
30 mins or so is pretty good for getting some variety of driving in too - I like a mix of residential side-streets (mostly for getting used to the gears/clutch again, which is always the first thing I start getting out of kilter with, and to test out the brakes), a blast down a dual carriageway to get used to the sensation of speed and check for vibrations, and perhaps some country lanes to get used to the steering again. Rather mirroring your experience, an AA patrolman emphasised the importance of getting the dual carriageways in if you've either not driven or only driven locally for a while.
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
I'm about a third of the way through War and Peace. Haven't made any progress this weekend mind.
There are two many characters to remember....Anna Karenina is easier in that respect.....
Surely Dom's ability to dismantle the civil service and revolutionize government, or whatever he was intending to do, is now in tatters. This is the bloke who can't even arrange child care without almost bringing down the government and jeopardizing the principal public-health policy during a national crisis. Any crackpot schemes he comes up with now will be met with derision. His credibility is totally shot.
I rather like that angle. The man who couldn't manage to organise child-care in London is now going to arrange our exit from the EU transition period. What could possibly go wrong?
We should let him take Northern Ireland out of the Union first, to ensure his eyesight is up to it.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Will that make a difference? It has not felt like anyone has been in charge recently and we have all just been trundling along trying to do The Right Thing ™
The only clarification in recent days is that we can do whatever we like
Whether we like it or not Mrs C. these clowns are in charge and our lives and livlihoods depend on them at the moment.
Johnson has thrown us all under a bus to save Cummings/himself. Pandemic management is in disarray. Weston-Super- Mare Hospital has halted admissions due to an increase in Covid cases today. Johnson and Cummings (who is clearly the only one of the two who knows what is going on) need to review their chaotic release strategy in case the North Somerset problem is the onset of the second wave or just a random spike.
Today in Bridgend it was a free-for-all, and we are still in lockdown here in Wales. Boris' recent antics are undermining the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish responses as well as his own sorry chaos. He needs to get a grip!
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
We left home for the first time in months for a half hour's drive. No, we didn't go to Barnard Castle. I can confirm that the world beyond our gate looks much the same as it did in March. Didn't see anyone with a face covering.
Got home to find out that my mother-in-law had a heart attack this morning. She seems to be doing OK, but of course we can't go to visit her in hospital. At least Wor Lass is able to phone her.
Sorry to hear that. Hope she gets well soon. Best wishes to you all.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Also, the sex scenes read like rape scenes.
The Fountainhead takes the biscuit for that one. Rand had some curious ideas about sexuality, certainly. She was a very pulpy writer in that respect - I'm sure she would have approved of 50 shades of grey...
Well I said from the moment this story broke that if he's broken the law he should go. But it seems that's not enough for most people here. It seems for most people here even if he's followed the rules he should still go. In which case I feel like I'm the one being reasonable while others are losing their heads. Expecting people to lose their jobs because acted legally while their family was sick is not my definition of reasonable.
Getting sucked into some Two Minutes Hate with everyone else who is losing their minds isn't great. Being able to avoid joining in to a hatefest just because someone lawfully looked after their family isn't unreasonable. There's something ugly going on here and I want no part in it.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
I guess it's because you are unable or unwilling to see any difference between breaking the law and not following the rules.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
It might just be a blip. Whatever it is Boris and Cummings have not got the luxury of time to dick about with what Cummings was or wasn't doing in County Durham during the apparantly optional lockdown.
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Also, the sex scenes read like rape scenes.
Not really increasing the 'worth a read' vibe tbh.
Would you be happy to see Diane Abbott, walking home to her kid on her own, being publicly mocked and abused by a street of her neighbours? I would not. That would be an ugly thing. Ditto for Cummings.
It is possible to believe two things at once. That Cummings did an irresponsible breach of his own government's lockdown rules and deserves to be fired, and that the street abuse of politicians is terrible. Although I don't recall you ever condemning the terrible abuse of Remain politicians on their way to parliament.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
Yet the number of positive tests has been falling.
I suppose it is possible that there is some local superspreader event.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Will that make a difference? It has not felt like anyone has been in charge recently and we have all just been trundling along trying to do The Right Thing ™
The only clarification in recent days is that we can do whatever we like
Whether we like it or not Mrs C. these clowns are in charge and our lives and livlihoods depend on them at the moment.
Johnson has thrown us all under a bus to save Cummings/himself. Pandemic management is in disarray. Weston-Super- Mare Hospital has halted admissions due to an increase in Covid cases today. Johnson and Cummings (who is clearly the only one of the two who knows what is going on) need to review their chaotic release strategy in case the North Somerset problem is the onset of the second wave or just a random spike.
Today in Bridgend it was a free-for-all, and we are still in lockdown here in Wales. Boris' recent antics are undermining the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish responses as well as his own sorry chaos. He needs to get a grip!
(Anecdata) Saw groups of drinkers on the terrace of the local pub this afternoon. And the old ladies shopping in the M&S food hall have more or less given up on the mask wearing.
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Its a very good book and portrays the moral case for capitalism brilliantly.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
Apparently they didn't speak about breaking lockdown.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
I know I'm banging on about this but I live next to a main road and in the centre of a coastal town. Traffic levels basically returned to close to normal after the easing a fortnight ago, the neighbours within days had all had friends round and the beaches - whenever the weather's been nice - have obviously been magnets. No one is wearing masks and people are forgetting to social distance, either on the pavement, in the supermarket or in the (many) queues for the restaurants now doing takeaways (all if them). Even my partner's family, who are the most sensible people you could meet, are meeting up with other family members (not in the same household) and going for a big old trip to the garden centre next week.
Yet at the same time, we're paying people not to work until October. It's farcical.
I hope Cummings survives. [EDIT: Even though I lose a bet]
This is operating at several levels.
There is the basic emotional level across all political opinions that this stinks. One law for us, another for them. I agree with that. Tory MPs are getting this in their in-trays in spades. That's the political raw material.
The Left wing and maybe some Remainers see this as a way at undermining Johnson's credibility and possibly getting a change of Tory leader and softening of policy on the EU (Hunt?).
But the worrying movement is by the hard Brexiteeers who have always hated Cummings who is a soft Brexiteer (Farage, Baker etc hate him). Baker led the charge by Tory MPs. If they can get rid of Cummings, they stand a better change of getting a No Deal Brexit. Cummings is a steadying force in this Cabinet of half-wits. I hope he survives.
Interesting analysis.
As I said the other day for me it is not a matter of hoping he goes, rather of believing that there is a fundamentally important reason why he must go - which is faith in and adherence to the guidance which, for all the other many things the Government have done wrong, I still believe is the best chance we have of bringing the virus under control with the minimum of further deaths. Cummings staying undermines that.
However as a Brexiteer I also agree with your analysis that Cummings is a pragmatic and a moderating force as far as the type of Brexit we achieve is concerned. So I do worry about who will gain further influence once he is gone.
Finally, whilst he is a moderating influence as far as Brexit is concerned, he is undoubtedly a radical if not a proto-revolutionary when it comes to remodelling the way our country is governed. Again I am a strong advocate of this and do think that when he falls, so will fall the once in a century chance to really reform the civil service and all aspects of Government in Britain. I regret that but still feel that people's lives are more important so he should go.
The issue Cummings has is that he wants Britain to be a techno-libertarian (or even techno-anarchist) society free from the shackles of EU Regulation or, indeed, much regulation at all. I get that - don’t necessarily agree - but I get it.
However many of the people who helped him deliver Brexit, whose mouthpiece is the Daily Mail, are not libertarian, or indeed liberal, let alone anarchist. Many of them don’t much like technology. They are actually quite authoritarian. They don’t like people they perceive as breaking the rules. They like rules. They like order. They like regulation. Not if it’s made in Brussels admittedly, but they like the rules that are made in the U.K. to be kept to the spirit and the letter. British fair play and all that.
This liberal vs traditional Tory beef shows up here on PB in the tension between @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD. It’s the people more like HYUFD he’s upset. HYUFD himself has largely stayed out of it. Traditional Tories who follow the rules and believe in fair play. Cummings believes in disruption. That’s why this is significant. He going to find out he doesn’t understand many (not all by any means, but very many) of the people who achieved Brexit for him. They wanted out for different reasons.
A very astute comment.
Techno libertarian freebooters are much more easily found on message boards than real life. But didn't we always know the Red/Blue wall voters were just cannon fodder to be stirred up with a little nationalist red meat whenever a ballot is needed? Cummings wants their votes not their opinions.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
Presumably because they relaxed the lock down with far lower infection rate in the population along with effective track and trace in place to deal with the subsequent infections effectively.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
Apparently they didn't speak about breaking lockdown.
Why did they say "Durham Constabulary deemed that no further action was required." if wasnt about breaking lockdown?
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Its a very good book and portrays the moral case for capitalism brilliantly.
Got about five pages in once. Only another 1,065 to go.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
Lets hope...that the more out there theory about a level of natural immunity is true and sunshine does reduce transmission....and that one of the vaccines does work and ready by September.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
Its absolutely material and possibly designed to mislead if the papers were not certain?
Yep I get that and I think your analysis is sound. Obviously I am more of the Cummings' school of techno-libertarian which is why I have hoped he would succeed in his endeavours. But as I said, human life is more important for me than political ideology so Cummings has crossed a line which means to me he should resign. This is not about what is good for the Tory party but what is good for the country.
Edit: I would disagree with you on one important point. However much they might wish it, the Daily Mail under Greig is no longer the mouthpiece of any sort of Brexit supporter. Hence its attitude towards Cummings.
It’s still the mouthpiece of the authoritarian wing of the Tory Party, though, and it’s the Tory Party to whom Cummings owes his position. The Mail has not become liberal overnight and Brexit is not the pressing issue it was. Its attitude towards Cummings stems, at least in part, a large part IMHO, from the fact that many of its readership have been happily tut tutting at any breach of lockdown since it began. There’s a page on the Kent plod website for dobbing in lockdown breachers. I’m confident in asserting, even without evidence, that many of those who use it read the Daily Mail
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Weston-Super-Mare Hospital halts admissions this afternoon due to major spike in Coronavirus cases (BBC).
It begins. Give it two weeks and we'll be back in full lockdown as the majority of people have not been following the guidelines to a lesser or greater degree in the past fortnight. There has effectively been no lockdown since Boris eased things.
What do you mean...everybody is acting very sensibly...oh wait...
On the other hand, countries like Denmark, Germany, Austria, etc, have eased their lockdowns and had similar scenes, and there have not been major second waves
Presumably because they relaxed the lock down with far lower infection rate in the population along with effective track and trace in place to deal with the subsequent infections effectively.
No, I believe Germany's R rate was about 0.7: same as ours now
I said the infection rate in the population, not the rate at which it was transmitting.
Cummings and Johnson need to put this rubbish behind them and get back to work.
Will that make a difference? It has not felt like anyone has been in charge recently and we have all just been trundling along trying to do The Right Thing ™
The only clarification in recent days is that we can do whatever we like
Whether we like it or not Mrs C. these clowns are in charge and our lives and livlihoods depend on them at the moment.
Johnson has thrown us all under a bus to save Cummings/himself. Pandemic management is in disarray. Weston-Super- Mare Hospital has halted admissions due to an increase in Covid cases today. Johnson and Cummings (who is clearly the only one of the two who knows what is going on) need to review their chaotic release strategy in case the North Somerset problem is the onset of the second wave or just a random spike.
Today in Bridgend it was a free-for-all, and we are still in lockdown here in Wales. Boris' recent antics are undermining the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish responses as well as his own sorry chaos. He needs to get a grip!
(Anecdata) Saw groups of drinkers on the terrace of the local pub this afternoon. And the old ladies shopping in the M&S food hall have more or less given up on the mask wearing.
Boris may think be the reincarnation of Churchill, he is not!
One of the key mantras of Churchill's government during World War Two was 'loose talk costs lives'. Has there been a more accurate statement regarding Johnson's Sunday evening fireside chat two weeks ago and yesterday's train wreck press conference?
Glad to see they have so much time to do this - rather than trying to offer constructive support in the biggest crisis this country has seen since the war.
Yep I get that and I think your analysis is sound. Obviously I am more of the Cummings' school of techno-libertarian which is why I have hoped he would succeed in his endeavours. But as I said, human life is more important for me than political ideology so Cummings has crossed a line which means to me he should resign. This is not about what is good for the Tory party but what is good for the country.
Edit: I would disagree with you on one important point. However much they might wish it, the Daily Mail under Greig is no longer the mouthpiece of any sort of Brexit supporter. Hence its attitude towards Cummings.
It’s still the mouthpiece of the authoritarian wing of the Tory Party, though, and it’s the Tory Party to whom Cummings owes his position. The Mail has not become liberal overnight and Brexit is not the pressing issue it was. Its attitude towards Cummings stems, at least in part, a large part IMHO, from the fact that many of its readership have been happily tut tutting at any breach of lockdown since it began. There’s a page on the Kent plod website for dobbing in lockdown breachers. I’m confident in asserting, even without evidence, that many of those who use it read the Daily Mail
As I've tried explaining to @HYUFD more times than I can count, the Tory Party has always been an uneasy alliance between libertarians and authoritarians. The Tory Party has never been an authoritarian party, though it certainly has a great many authoritarian voters and MPs.
I'd rather have the mouthpiece of authoritarianism unhappy with us than ecstatic.
Would you be happy to see Diane Abbott, walking home to her kid on her own, being publicly mocked and abused by a street of her neighbours? I would not. That would be an ugly thing. Ditto for Cummings.
I have no wish for Cummings, or anyone else to be harrassed. However, Hosea 8:7 may be relevant.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Of course, if they spoke to Cummings's Dad (presumably also called 'Cummings') then "Police speak to Cummings...." still stands.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
Would you be happy to see Diane Abbott, walking home to her kid on her own, being publicly mocked and abused by a street of her neighbours? I would not. That would be an ugly thing. Ditto for Cummings.
It is possible to believe two things at once. That Cummings did an irresponsible breach of his own government's lockdown rules and deserves to be fired, and that the street abuse of politicians is terrible. Although I don't recall you ever condemning the terrible abuse of Remain politicians on their way to parliament.
Would you be happy to see Diane Abbott, walking home to her kid on her own, being publicly mocked and abused by a street of her neighbours? I would not. That would be an ugly thing. Ditto for Cummings.
I have no wish for Cummings, or anyone else to be harrassed. However, Hosea 8:7 may be relevant.
The newspapers might like to.think.on that too......
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
The headline was "Police Spoke to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
The police didn't speak to Cummings (but may have spoken to his father).
The police didn't speak to anyone about a lockdown breach.
The fact that so many Tory politicians are telling the public - for entirely partisan reasons - that it's perfectly reasonable to travel around the country when you have coronavirus symptoms is really pretty disturbing.
Sometimes it's difficult to avoid thinking Nye Bevan was right about the Tory party.
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Atlas Shrugged is predicated on a man who refuses to had over his work to the company who employed him to do that work.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
The headline was "Police Spoke to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
The police didn't speak to Cummings (but may have spoken to his father).
The police didn't speak to anyone about a lockdown breach.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
Its absolutely material and possibly designed to mislead if the papers were not certain?
How is it material? The police wouldn't have been talking to Cumming's father about himself they would have been questioning him about his son's family's arrival in Durham. What is material about them asking Cumming's himself or his father? Just sounds like another pointless technical detail. The fact is the police questioned Cummin's jaunt to Durham.
Glad to see they have so much time to do this - rather than trying to offer constructive support in the biggest crisis this country has seen since the war.
I would imagine that they think saying get rid of that wizened wee Gollum mofo is offering constructive support.
It is rather graceless when afaik nothing was said about Calderwood by the leadership of the Tory party.
Proof of my laziness is the fact that I was supposed to be reading War & Peace and Atlas Shrugged during this lockdown and haven't started either of them.
Atlas Shrugged reads like a book which was written by an extremely clever person who did a lot of speed and was also inordinately fond of their own voice. Which is, of course, exactly what it was.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Its a very good book and portrays the moral case for capitalism brilliantly.
Of course old Randy's actual life kinda portrayed the case for the state, though not brilliantly it had to be said.
Glad to see they have so much time to do this - rather than trying to offer constructive support in the biggest crisis this country has seen since the war.
I would imagine that they think saying get rid of that wizened wee Gollum mofo is offering constructive support.
It is rather graceless when afaik nothing was said about Calderwood by the leadership of the Tory party.
As leader of the single member Divvie party I don't really feel any obligation to take the conduct of the Tory party as any kind of a model, particularly in the matter of grace.
So, the front page headline that started all of this was a made-up lie materially untrue?
Presumably the Guardian will be apologising to Mr Cummings, and printing their correction on page 1 tomorrow?
They should correct it if it is untrue but wasn't it denied that there had been any contact between the police and the Cummings family? Has it not now been admitted that there was contact between the police and Cumming's father.
They should simply say sorry, the contact was with Cumming's family and not as we originally believed with Cummings personally. Not sure how that improves things from Dom's point of view though.
The headline was "Police Speak to Cummings About Lockdown Breach"
Both the police and Cummings say this is untrue and didn't happen.
Given that the story has led the news for three days despite being materially incorrect, I look forward to seeing what the Guardian's apology looks like tomorrow.
Genuine question, are we quibbling about the fact that the police did speak to Cummings family but not to Cummings himself? I believe the police have confirmed that they have spoken with his father. If that is the case it doesn't seem to be a very material inaccuracy to me but maybe I'm missing something.
Its absolutely material and possibly designed to mislead if the papers were not certain?
How is it material? The police wouldn't have been talking to Cumming's father about himself they would have been questioning him about his son's family's arrival in Durham. What is material about them asking Cumming's himself or his father? Just sounds like another pointless technical detail. The fact is the police questioned Cummin's jaunt to Durham.
Just as a question: @Philip_Thompson - as the father of a young lad yourself, would you, if there was reason to suspect your eyesight might be impaired, test it by going for a 30-mile drive with your son in the car? Rather than, say, wait a few more days and check in over Zoom.
I really wouldn’t, myself, but I’m wondering if I’m overcautious
If I felt my vision currently impaired I wouldn't get behind the wheel.
If I felt safe to drive but was concerned after a serious illness I'd certainly consider a short drive first before setting off on a cross country drive.
With your kid in the car? I wouldn’t, not if there was any reasonable chance I might be incapable. Such as when he was too sick to continue for a while at Barnard’s Castle.
I don't think he said he was too sick to continue did he? I thought he said his child needed to relieve themselves?
Anyway I've regularly driven in the car with my children and felt the need to pull over because I'm tired from the drive and need a break before continuing. Motorways across the country always say to take a break. I don't see that as an issue?
He said that they stopped at Barnard's Castle near the river because he felt to sick to continue.
Note that at this point, Mary (who had been a lot less ill) did not take over the driving duties.
They were spotted by an elderly gentleman, who said hello.
Then he was feeling better and they headed off. The kid said he needed the loo, which was why they were seen outside all playing together and enjoying the woods at the local beauty spot.
That's reasonable to me. If you're driving and feel you need to stop Highway Code advice is to take a rest it's not that someone else has to take over and continue immediately.
Comments
I'm amazed that the Guardian are still pursuing it. After all, there's a very well-known explanation for people like Dominic going blind.
Hypothetically, imagine a PM who has just had a child and got engaged. He is then discovered to be having a fling with another woman, and this makes the news. Completely far-fetched, I know. Has the PM done anything unlawful? Certainly not. In the court of public opinion, would he nonetheless be found guilty of gross misdemeanour and probably lose his job? He certainly would.
I may be right wing economically but I have zero respect for the Daily Mail (or The Sun). The Mail is a hateful, racist, bigoted, authoritarian rag. Being on the wrong side of it is a good sign.
In reality we weren't.
I suspect getting a big localised outbreak as Italy and Spain did made it easier to bring in a lockdown than a more general nationwide outbreak as the UK had.
https://twitter.com/janemerrick23/status/1265003827717120001
Cummings' aim with his press conference was precisely that people do get bogged down with the detail. He deployed lots of bullshit, but importantly he baffled successfully.
The real danger now is if infections and death start going back up again. We have got conditioned to thinking the epidemic is on the way down, if not out. But if people's behaviour changes the epidemic will pick up again. Then people will start remembering Dominic Cummings, who presumably will still be around.
The only clarification in recent days is that we can do whatever we like
The only reason Cummings should go is if he's broken the law. It can't be one law for everyone else but not for him. If he's not broken the law there's nothing morally wrong with looking after your sick wife and child however you lawfully see right.
Someone been having a word with the paper's editor?
Don't know if covid can have an effect though.
No one will be worried about the Guardian headline. Hell, even Labour Governments don’t care much what the Guardian says. The Daily Mail tomorrow will be interesting though.
I have extended family who are generally Tory voters. They are fucking incandescent over this after weeks of lockdown.
Edit: I would disagree with you on one important point. However much they might wish it, the Daily Mail under Greig is no longer the mouthpiece of any sort of Brexit supporter. Hence its attitude towards Cummings.
Despite being massively overwritten and very repetitive in places, it's still worth a read. Simply because nobody before or since has ever managed to put such a comprehensive _moral_ case forward for capitalism - whether you agree with it or not.
Too often on the right we cede the "moral" and the "good" to the left. We are the pragmatists, the realists, who would do the right thing, if only we could. Rand shatters that myth. For that reason alone it's worth a read.
Or does "my ill wife told me to go back" count as a reasonable excuse?
Woman on beach launches tirade at police as she 'didn't realise' Wales wasn't in England
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman-beach-wales-thought-england-18306085.amp
The Government is no less of a shitshow than it was yesterday.
Tomorrow the opposition parties will unite the Tories and secure his position.
Such is life.
Should self-isolation have occurred for any and all symptoms of any and all illnesses? Possibly. But it didn't.
These days the Mail go for the government like they used to for Blair / New Labour. The Dacre days are well and truly gone.
Also, does anybody recognise the "eyesight feeling wrong, but no discernible deterioration" sensation I posted earlier? Nobody has said "yes, I know just how you feel!" so I worry that I'm going mad now!! Perhaps it's bad enough admitting they have something in common with me, worse still to admit they have something in common with Dom...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wales,_South_Yorkshire
https://twitter.com/aetiology/status/1264961181732782080
Unlike some of her marginal colleagues who just lost their seats this weekend.
Johnson has thrown us all under a bus to save Cummings/himself. Pandemic management is in disarray. Weston-Super- Mare Hospital has halted admissions due to an increase in Covid cases today. Johnson and Cummings (who is clearly the only one of the two who knows what is going on) need to review their chaotic release strategy in case the North Somerset problem is the onset of the second wave or just a random spike.
Today in Bridgend it was a free-for-all, and we are still in lockdown here in Wales. Boris' recent antics are undermining the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish responses as well as his own sorry chaos. He needs to get a grip!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8354291/Fears-lockdown-collapse-crowds-hitting-parks-beaches-79F-heatwave.html
Stevenage
Peterborough
Grantham
Newark
Retford
Doncaster
York
Northallerton
Darlington
Durham
I drive these days. Takes a bit longer but less stressful.
I suppose it is possible that there is some local superspreader event.
Saw groups of drinkers on the terrace of the local pub this afternoon.
And the old ladies shopping in the M&S food hall have more or less given up on the mask wearing.
Yet at the same time, we're paying people not to work until October. It's farcical.
Either we're in a pandemic, or we're not.
Techno libertarian freebooters are much more easily found on message boards than real life. But didn't we always know the Red/Blue wall voters were just cannon fodder to be stirred up with a little nationalist red meat whenever a ballot is needed? Cummings wants their votes not their opinions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humberside_Airport#Routes
and noticed the Humberside to Aberdeen route is the second most used.
I couldn't help wondering if you were a big user
One of the key mantras of Churchill's government during World War Two was 'loose talk costs lives'. Has there been a more accurate statement regarding Johnson's Sunday evening fireside chat two weeks ago and yesterday's train wreck press conference?
So which one's Snow White?
This thread has driven off to check its eyesight.
I'd rather have the mouthpiece of authoritarianism unhappy with us than ecstatic.
However, Hosea 8:7 may be relevant.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1264988640494657539?s=20
Have any leading politicians been having trouble hearing questions, by any chance?
The police didn't speak to Cummings (but may have spoken to his father).
The police didn't speak to anyone about a lockdown breach.
Sometimes it's difficult to avoid thinking Nye Bevan was right about the Tory party.