Still well ahead in deaths per millions (popln over 12m)
There must be some interesting definition issues around "Covid deaths". For instance, the USA has had 10 times the UK's confirmed cases of Covid - but only 5 times the deaths.
I suggest they will all come out in the wash in due course. Your sense of disappointment then will be palpable.
I read once that Prince Charles has a servant who's job it is to put the toothpaste on his toothbrush.
Incredible.
Possibly apocryphal, but I think it was in the same round of stories that it was revealed that Charlie required his valet to extricate the royal member from its Turnbull & Asser hiding place for its morning micturation.
'I shook the hand that shook the hand that...'
Surely not - but it's one you want to believe.
A definitely true one is that somebody irons his morning paper.
Not sure what I think about that. OTOH, oh dear. BOTOH, not a bad idea at all. Why the devil not!
IIRC the original reason for ironing a newspaper was that in the Good Olde Days newsprint was really likely to come off the paper and make a mess. Ironing the paper through a cloth "fixed" the ink.
Yes, I think that's it. But there must also be a certain visceral pleasure in having your paper presented to you, sharply creased and warm to the touch.
Oh good. We're talking about Meghan and Harry again. Can we not have a good argument about Brexit instead?
What we need is a long and florid row about how misunderstandings of the Harry and Meghan saga somehow reflect cultural divides, mutual ignorance and disrespect on Brexit, with anger and recriminations at the pandemic situation somehow worked in as well.
I read once that Prince Charles has a servant who's job it is to put the toothpaste on his toothbrush.
Incredible.
I don't actually have a problem with that. PC has a personal valet / butler who looks after some aspects of his life - clothes, suits, ironing, perhaps planning the day, looking after laundry, towels and so on. Putting toothbrush out is just a part of that.
Diana used to have a "dresser" who was responsible for co-ordinating her wardrobe, jewellery and so on.
They are just outsourcing parts of their personal life, so they can fit more of the rest in.
Is that not just how people in wealthy lifestyles live? Are wealthy pop figures, industrialists, socialites or Heads of Government any different?
How many popstars deal with their own flowers?
One would need to brush one's teeth many times per day in order for that logic to make much sense, though.
I think of Prince Charles valet as a modern Jeeves, without the superman qualities.
I read once that Prince Charles has a servant who's job it is to put the toothpaste on his toothbrush.
Incredible.
Possibly apocryphal, but I think it was in the same round of stories that it was revealed that Charlie required his valet to extricate the royal member from its Turnbull & Asser hiding place for its morning micturation.
'I shook the hand that shook the hand that...'
Surely not - but it's one you want to believe.
A definitely true one is that somebody irons his morning paper.
Not sure what I think about that. OTOH, oh dear. BOTOH, not a bad idea at all. Why the devil not!
IIRC the original reason for ironing a newspaper was that in the Good Olde Days newsprint was really likely to come off the paper and make a mess. Ironing the paper through a cloth "fixed" the ink.
Yes, I think that's it. But there must also be a certain visceral pleasure in having your paper presented to you, sharply creased and warm to the touch.
Yes, as a side effect of the original reason.
Which is why it is done, long after modern inks have fixed the original problem.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 383,618 21,688 405,306 East Of England 41,573 2,582 44,155 London 45,281 3,565 48,846 Midlands 78,837 5,413 84,250 North East And Yorkshire 59,540 2,862 62,402 North West 46,797 1,936 48,733 South East 66,060 2,826 68,886 South West 43,404 2,479 45,883
I read once that Prince Charles has a servant who's job it is to put the toothpaste on his toothbrush.
Incredible.
I don't actually have a problem with that. PC has a personal valet / butler who looks after some aspects of his life - clothes, suits, ironing, perhaps planning the day, looking after laundry, towels and so on. Putting toothbrush out is just a part of that.
Diana used to have a "dresser" who was responsible for co-ordinating her wardrobe, jewellery and so on.
They are just outsourcing parts of their personal life, so they can fit more of the rest in.
Is that not just how people in wealthy lifestyles live? Are wealthy pop figures, industrialists, socialites or Heads of Government any different?
How many popstars deal with their own flowers?
It's not so much the brush aspect - as you say that seems par for the course at the high end where Charles resides - it's the putting of the paste on it. That's what crossed the rubicon for me.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
Little snippet from the Sunday Times for those who think Meghan was just a victim:
Funny how all these "sources" have so much to say when the Daily Mail and others have been running bitter attacks against her for years and years and years now. But this comes out after years of streams of abuse gets followed up with one (1) interview.
How many times has their been a negative attack on Meghan on the Daily Mail in recent years.
But what a coincidence that the team that have nothing to say about Prince Andrew have so much to say now on Meghan. It's pathetic.
Be an interesting question if anyone could see how many times something negative about Meghan had been front-page news in recent years. I can't be bothered to go through that trash though.
Hmm. A bit of whataboutism and flustering there, Philip.
I get you don't like the monarchy. I recognise that frames the picture for you. I understand.
But, that she was just a "victim" and the royal family was nothing but beastly to her?
Please. It's just not true.
That the press have been beastly to her is absolutely 100% true and undeniable.
The royals either did not or could not step in to prevent it or stop it.
I get you like the royal family and that frames the picture for you. I understand. But the idea she's in the wrong or beastly for taking part in just one interview after possibly hundreds of front page assaults on her have been printed in a few years is just ridiculous too.
Now you're just rewriting history. The coverage of their engagement, wedding and the early days following that was overwhelmingly positive. The negative press only started coming out once there was reason for it. In particular, there was rumours of a "feud" between her and Kate, which seems to have been grounded in some sort of fact. And a) there was only going to be one winner there (ie our future Queen) and b) all the evidence we have is that Meghan is not blameless.
It's utterly pointless arguing with Philip once he's set his stall out - he never moves off it.
FWIW, I did. I started off as a Meghan fan, and defended her against criticism based on the fact she was an actress, American and of mixed background. I even pointed out she'd got confirmed in the CoE demonstrating her commitment to the institution, and the role she was looking to undertake in future in the Commonwealth.
It was her subsequent behaviour that changed my mind, and all the stories that came out about how she was at the time and how she'd acted since, which I wasn't aware of at the time.
More fool me.
That's not true. I have strong opinions but am open to persuasion with persuasive arguments just as much as the next person. Heck you personally helped convince me to change my vote in the referendum!
How many people here actually change their minds during a debate?
As far as I'm concerned the Royal family calls outsider a prima donna is not a persuasive argument. Can't you understand that viewpoint?
Well, I post evidence of bullying and resignations (that even her own team don't deny exist) but then you ignored it and just tried to turn my words back on me.
And you keep posting about people having a problem with her because she was black. No doubt there was a constituency for this in the country - which is deeply unpleasant - but the only people I've ever seen make a big deal about this were commentators and her advocates who were hoping it would be a big boon to modernising the royal family. I don't think I've ever heard anyone employ it as an argument against her, either unsourced in the press or publicly. I have heard criticisms based on the fact she's a Hollywood American actress but that's quite a separate thing.
Can you not accept that perhaps she might have been at fault at some level here too, somewhere?
Do I think there may be some level of fault from her? Yes, absolutely, 100%. She's human, everyone has flaws. Nobody is divine or perfect.
Do I think she's so flawed as to justify acres of press coverage for years now? No.
I think a mountain has been made from a molehill and she's justifiably fed up.
I would have a great deal of sympathy for Harry and Meghan if they had just run off and got on with their lives. I have no problem even with them milking the media to raise funds for either their charitable work or their lifestyle. However, turning the media spotlight on internal family dynamics to make a bigger buck is totally naff in my view.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 383,618 21,688 405,306 East Of England 41,573 2,582 44,155 London 45,281 3,565 48,846 Midlands 78,837 5,413 84,250 North East And Yorkshire 59,540 2,862 62,402 North West 46,797 1,936 48,733 South East 66,060 2,826 68,886 South West 43,404 2,479 45,883
Hoping we start seeing some significantly bigger numbers next week.
What would the head of Ofsted know? We've had enough of experts
A long standing problem with the head of OFSTED is that she does not, in fact, know anything about education. As the Education select committee pointed out at the time of her appointment and she has amply confirmed many times since, including failing to know what safeguarding is.
Which is one reason why OFSTED's gradings are becoming increasingly erratic and unreliable.
That's not to say Williamson is necessarily right, although there is mileage in some of his ideas.
I read once that Prince Charles has a servant who's job it is to put the toothpaste on his toothbrush.
Incredible.
Possibly apocryphal, but I think it was in the same round of stories that it was revealed that Charlie required his valet to extricate the royal member from its Turnbull & Asser hiding place for its morning micturation.
'I shook the hand that shook the hand that...'
Surely not - but it's one you want to believe.
A definitely true one is that somebody irons his morning paper.
Not sure what I think about that. OTOH, oh dear. BOTOH, not a bad idea at all. Why the devil not!
IIRC the original reason for ironing a newspaper was that in the Good Olde Days newsprint was really likely to come off the paper and make a mess. Ironing the paper through a cloth "fixed" the ink.
That's why newspapers were only used to outer wrap the fish and chips over white paper. The ink was oil based so the grease in the chips used to make the ink run, dirtying the hands. When the inks became water-based the problem ceased as the water based ink didn't run in grease.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
I read once that Prince Charles has a servant who's job it is to put the toothpaste on his toothbrush.
Incredible.
I don't actually have a problem with that. PC has a personal valet / butler who looks after some aspects of his life - clothes, suits, ironing, perhaps planning the day, looking after laundry, towels and so on. Putting toothbrush out is just a part of that.
Diana used to have a "dresser" who was responsible for co-ordinating her wardrobe, jewellery and so on.
They are just outsourcing parts of their personal life, so they can fit more of the rest in.
Is that not just how people in wealthy lifestyles live? Are wealthy pop figures, industrialists, socialites or Heads of Government any different?
How many popstars deal with their own flowers?
It's not so much the brush aspect - as you say that seems par for the course at the high end where Charles resides - it's the putting of the paste on it. That's what crossed the rubicon for me.
It would be interesting to know whether that is actually true
It could be, or it could be the Mail adding a bit to make it stick.
In David Mellor's affair with Antonia de Sanchez, the "he insisted on sex in a Chelsea Football Strip" was the embroidered eyecatcher.
Is it normal for a Committee of this nature to be quite so selective about the evidence they publish?
Genuine question - I had always assumed that they were very partisan in the report but not necessary in the selection of the facts they disclose
Its getting dirtier by the minute. Frankly , the more ordure that is heaped on Sturgeon, the better it will be for Scotland.
I wonder though whether Unionist tactics - which appear, to judge from their ineptitude,* be to keep her in place for now to maximise damage in May - are altogether wise. Unless Scott Douglas is very confident of holding Edinburgh Central, Angus Robertson would be a far more formidable figure than any likely replacement this Parliament, and he is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
*Of course, this may just be because the Unionists are inept.
The Scottish Greens are contesting the constituency again. In 2016 their votes cost the SNP the seat.
Angus Robertson ... is relatively untainted by the current scandal given he’s currently outside politics and government.
Apart from the fact he already admitted he knew about Eck's "behaviour" years ago and did nothing
If Sturgeon had ‘done nothing’ she would have been fine. It’s the interference in legal process that’s killing her credibility.
I agree it doesn’t speak well for Robertson’s personal integrity - but equally Ruth Davidson seems to have known about these allegations and she never raised it.
That is because as we saw in the court case , they were absolutely nothing and far far away from crimes. Any that did happen were by and with consenting adults. It is all just a few people did not like the boss being a hard barsteward. You still are far short on Robertson.
Morning Malc, hope those turnips are all ready to throw at the Sturgeonites.
Yes. Time for the Tories to wake up from their wet dream. 🙂
I think you will find the government won’t get any lasting credit for beating COVID, politicians are held in too low esteem for this to happen - like a reverse of the last financial crash, was it the banks responsibility (who should have been more risk adverse and diligent with customers deposits) or the the Labour Government? Extremely easy to stitch up politicians on watch for making calls and fail to give them credit because they are held in low esteem.
Which brings us neatly to what destroys this Tory government. One thing that is true, and not arguable really, austerity 2.0 doesn’t run the same course as the first, 2.0 picks up where 1.0 left off. From the start everyone knows, when it comes to pain under a Tory government we won’t all be in it together.
They have to do it, but no amount of leafleting or swish presentation will avoid blame for doing it.
It could have been worse - they could have taken your advice and given our vaccines away to the EU for the sake of Christianity, or something.
I’m sure you know you are spinning it, but I will politely correct you anyway. 🙂
I made a reasoned argument that it is not good in long run to be so ahead of the game, much like how the US allowed the Russians to get the first Sputnik up there - and part of my argument was the practicalities of not sharing the longer it goes on with the claim, not just called impossible on here, but came with abuse, THAT BORIS WILL SHARE SOME OF OUR VACCINE WITH AN EU COUNTRY BEFORE EASTER MONDAY. And I stand by it.
Comments
It's just an action learning project to see for how long Philip can stay Furious at one sitting.
The excess deaths gap is pretty big there.
Which is why it is done, long after modern inks have fixed the original problem.
I also think the pile on, on Meghan, is unjustified.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date
Total 383,618 21,688 405,306
East Of England 41,573 2,582 44,155
London 45,281 3,565 48,846
Midlands 78,837 5,413 84,250
North East And Yorkshire 59,540 2,862 62,402
North West 46,797 1,936 48,733
South East 66,060 2,826 68,886
South West 43,404 2,479 45,883
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
https://twitter.com/timothysheahan/status/1368373948782612489
Which is one reason why OFSTED's gradings are becoming increasingly erratic and unreliable.
That's not to say Williamson is necessarily right, although there is mileage in some of his ideas.
Will come back to this in a minute.
NEW THREAD
It could be, or it could be the Mail adding a bit to make it stick.
In David Mellor's affair with Antonia de Sanchez, the "he insisted on sex in a Chelsea Football Strip" was the embroidered eyecatcher.
I made a reasoned argument that it is not good in long run to be so ahead of the game, much like how the US allowed the Russians to get the first Sputnik up there - and part of my argument was the practicalities of not sharing the longer it goes on with the claim, not just called impossible on here, but came with abuse, THAT BORIS WILL SHARE SOME OF OUR VACCINE WITH AN EU COUNTRY BEFORE EASTER MONDAY. And I stand by it.