If Corbyn stands as an Independent , he is very likely to win with the active support of most of the Islington North CLP. After close of nominations he might well receive endorsement from John Mcdonell, Diane Abbot and most of the Campaign group of Labour MPs. Starmer would be unwise to reopen this wound , and by doing so he risks lending credibility to Tory attacks which they no longer have with the wider electorate.For the vast majority of voters this is very much 'water under the bridge.'
I can't really even believe he's considering all this. It draws all the attention back to Corbyn and his wing of the party. It seems like a big own goal.
It enables Labour to bat back Tory attack lines on Corbyn: “we removed our batshit crazy wing nut, you put yours in the home office”.
It risks a serious Labour split in the middle of the GE campaign if a significant number of Labour MPs openly declare support for him and proceed to campaign on his behalf.
I personally don't want Corbyn expelled but I'm starting to really trust Starmer on what's best for maximizing the GE24 result. I think he'll do that calculation here and get it right.
"Maximising the GE24 result" is what bothers me about Sir Keir, I think - that's supposed to be a means to an end not an end in itself. I'd rather he had a 40 majority and a decent plan of what to do with it than a 100 majority and no such plan.
A "plan" is a bit much to expect - but hopefully there'll be the impression of integrity and competence plus some workable proposals in the manifesto to improve the lives of ordinary people.
Wow. If that's the case, no wonder I'm bothered by him!
But you weren't bothered by Johnson who had no post Brexit plan.
When Labour propose an economic recovery plan, let's face it, you won't like it anyway.
Boris at least had a plan to end the antidemocratic nonsense of the 2017 parliament.
As for the latter point - we'll have to see it to judge on that!
Anti-democratic? Parliament was sovereign even if you didn't like it.
Johnson's post election plan was simply to "do Brexit". He had no idea what that meant. The biggest dilemma facing the May Parliament was resolving the Irish issue. Johnson "resolved" that by putting a border in the North Channel. How is that working?
Yes, and for about the eleventy billionth time we elect Parliament to do our bidding. A direct instruction in a referendum democratically trumps "we're MPs, so ner".
I'd say we elect Parliament to take well-informed, difficult decisions about subjects we know little about. From this perspective calling a referendum was a dereliction of duty.
Whether it was or not I really do not know why even now people whinge about the referendum not being a binding commitment.
It simply wasn't. Not legally. No amount of indeed legitimate talk of moral cases changes that. Nor statements from ministers. Referendums are not a direct instruction unless the authorising act says so in law, particularly when several so called Brexiteers were the ones refusing to back a Brexit as there were many options.
I voted leave and wanted May's deal to pass, but facts are facts. The public did not like parliament dicking about and voted accordingly in 2019 - that's how it works.
It doesn't undermine Leave to accept that direct instruction was not a legal thing. Indeed, it helps leave to acknowledge that by showing how opponents (and stupid leavers in parliament refusing to play ball) tried to legalese around things.
As they were democratically entitled to. But they faced the consequences for that.
Yes, also for about the eleventy billionth time, legally, they had the right to do what they did. But having a legal right does not mean being democratically right, as the electorate explained to them in words of one syllable at the 2019 election.
This is pissing more money up the wall when we all know what the solution is.
Tory MPs have warned Suella Braverman that she risks throwing “good money after bad” with the government’s new deal with France to stop cross-channel migrants.
The home secretary this morning signed a £70 million deal as part of a bid to reduce the number of migrants crossing the English Channel. However, in the Commons Tory MPs highlighted the risk that it does not oblige French police to detain and arrest people.
Tim Loughton, a former minister, said: “Whilst co-operation with the French is no doubt welcome, is it not the case that since 2015 the British taxpayer has subsidised French police force to tune of £215m.
“There is nothing in this agreement today that obliges the French police to detain and arrest anybody they intercept so they are free to come back the following night and try again, in which case we are throwing good money after bad.”
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
Some names are obvious, though, no need to look them up. Eg you are a biscuit. Although why you chose it is quite interesting. Not that you have to share if it's too personal.
Predictably, just a derivative of my surname, which I chose without more than 30 seconds thought when I first posted back in 2005 (possibly taking issue with NPMP on a matter relating to cheese, though that would have been reaching peak pb on my first post, so maybe I have made that memory up). If I'd thought about it in more detail I might have come up with something more interesting.
Ah, I see. Biscuits not relevant then. Bit disappointing. Still, hats off for sticking with one handle for 17 years. Some people feel the need to chop and change which is great but can also be discombobulating.
What about you then? What's the relevance of kinabalu? A particularly memorable holiday? A childhood nickname? Your actual name (unlikely, but not impossible)?
My childhood nickname was Chimp - due to prowess at climbing trees. Liked it at the time but glad it didn't stick into adolescence.
Kinabalu is after the birthplace of my wife - Kota Kinabalu. I've got to know and like it over the years.
How romantic! If I'd followed your example my name would be Margate.
My understanding of computer networking is a bit ropey, but I thought the basic idea of the internet was to create a computer network that was robust and would carry on working even if multiple parts of the network were lost.
My experience today, described to me as, "a big internet pipe going down" with the provider of our VPN, suggests that with VPNs (and CDNs) the modern internet has bolted on a bunch of single points of failure. Is that a fair summation?
How did that happen?
True diversity is harder than it seems.
Sometimes you are reliant on a service (like a CDN) that is not diversified.
Sometimes the services you thought were diverse turn out not to be. We buy dark fibre from one vendor and circuits from another. We now know they both run through the same manhole...
Sometimes the diverse services merge. One of our ISPs bought the other one...
I was just listening to PM on Radio 4 and there was a Danish lady talking about 'everyone has an app on their phone that shows them the electricity price. So when the wind blows and the price is down we all run our washing machines!'
A very quick google about hasn't shown me anything obvious - does anyone know if this is really a thing? She was some sort of climate campaigner so I was a little suspicious that it might be an exaggeration.
We will see what today's deal with Macron's government brings
A large price tag
The criticism on this can’t come Labour, indeed Starmer welcomed it. It’s not that large a price tag, it’s only gone up a little bit on the millions we were already paying the French for their good help on this.
The criticism can only come from the right, when will this change actually move the dial (Sunak wouldn’t say). If at all? Is this enough of a step in right direction, will be the most cutting criticism of todays announcement.
It’s as HY correctly explained the other day - todays move with the French may help with Blue Wall voters perhaps already lost, but shift other voters to Reform as being a weak and inadequate response to an “invasion”
One of a PMs downfalls of allowing your ministers to raise the rhetoric, action then needs to meet raised rhetoric.
Rumours that Ukraine may have taken a town on the far side of the Dnipro.
News coming in from #Olehsky, UA forces seem to have liberated the town. 🇷🇺 forces left after a heavy barrage of artillery & HIMARS fire all night and morning. Apperently 🇺🇦 SOF entered the city this morning.
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
On the deal with the French, I read that we are coughing up an extra £8m a year (£55m to £63m this year) in an effort to reduce Channel crossings. At the same time, we have apparently paid £140m to Rwanda upfront for a scheme that is yet to have any impact (and probably never will have).
So if we hadn't embarked on the Rwanda scheme, we could have used that £140m (and the future costs of the scheme) instead to increase resources (border force, asylum adjudication staffing etc.) on top of what we're already paying France. Might have made more difference than a mere extra £8m.
That's not necessarily true: the Rwanda deal may never actually result in a single asylum applicant heading off to Rwanda, but could still be a success if it discouraged people from making the crossing.
I was just listening to PM on Radio 4 and there was a Danish lady talking about 'everyone has an app on their phone that shows them the electricity price. So when the wind blows and the price is down we all run our washing machines!'
A very quick google about hasn't shown me anything obvious - does anyone know if this is really a thing? She was some sort of climate campaigner so I was a little suspicious that it might be an exaggeration.
Scott is about to link to something explains all Europeans use EuroWind app, the UK equivalent will be released soon in 2028 unless there are further delays. 😆
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
So I guess "The Faith" is now OK with adultery, since its Defender is an adulterer?
I nice line up of adulterous Tory ex-PMs at the Cenotaph yesterday, btw.
The Church of England was established by an adulterer, Henry VIII, so he could break with Rome and Papal Supremacy and marry Anne Boleyn. What a ridiculous question. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor of the Church of England, its Leader is the Archbishop of Canterbury.
I haven't heard any evidence May, Cameron or Sunak have been adulterers even if Major, Johnson and Truss have. Of the 2 Labour PMs Blair has had the Wendy Deng rumours of course but we will give him the benefit of that. Not to mention the Marcia Williams rumours around Wilson when he was Labour PM
Was Henry an adulterer? Or did he wait until the previous wife was divorced or dead before he started banging the next one?
Either way, less of a role model than Jesus, the Buddha or Guru Nanak. Maybe on a par with the Prophet. And yet his is the faith you choose to follow.
So only 50% of recent Tory PMs are adulterers. Fair enough.
It is not Henry's faith, the Church of England is a denomination of the Christian faith, just the Monarch is Supreme Governor of it to stop the Pope being its head on earth with its Leader the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Of the 2 recent Labour PMs, we know the Wendy Deng rumours about Blair as I said. That would be 50% of living Labour PMs if true but I give Blair the benefit of the doubt and say not true
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
So I guess "The Faith" is now OK with adultery, since its Defender is an adulterer?
I nice line up of adulterous Tory ex-PMs at the Cenotaph yesterday, btw.
Idly wondering how many monarchs since Henry VIII were NOT adulterers....
Queens Elizabeth I, Mary, Anne, Victoria and Elizabeth II would be my nominations.
Mary & Vicki NOT being married when they had their flings (Earl of Essex & John Brown respectively) though personally doubt that the fellows involved actually scored any royal home runs, as opposed to (maybe) getting to first base.
Elizabeth II? Hmmm.
Did say nomination, not certification!
And am thinking, that any hanky-panky by QEII would likely NOT have gone as far as our depraved age (my own being 60+) might assume . . .
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
Theee are so many assumptions and hostages to fortune packed into two paragraphs it’s almost a work of art.
Fmr Environment Sec George Eustice has spoken about the post-Brexit UK/Australia trade deal in the Commons. He says now no longer a minister: "I no longer have to put such a positive gloss on what was agreed...the Australia deal is not actually a very good trade deal for the UK." https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592208294684557312
On the header -> have people actually had their pensions directly reduced over this? I didn't realize that.
I assumed any costs are just going to be passed onto future pensioners.
There aren’t really any costs (AIUI).
Essentially the plan assets fell but the funding liability fells as well (as interest l rates go up the capitalised value of the future payment obligation goes down).
So hedging worked as it was intended to.
But the media, in the interests of drama, only reports one half of the story.
Where there was a risk - and hence the BofE intervention - was the speed of the change triggered some meeting calls, which could have resulted in forced sales of other assets. That’s why - for example - BT lent its pension fund £300m during the process.
That's pretty much my understanding too. Also 'vicious circle' risk - gilts falling triggering sales of gilts to meet margin calls on money borrowed against gilts.
Yea - that’s the next step from my forced sales point
Eustice: "We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation of beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interests to do so. And neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession."
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
So are you chocolate chip or Maryland?
Had to google "Maryland cookie" as was previously unknown to me and about 99.46% of Americans, including Marylanders.
Anyway, seems it's a brand and not a specific cookie (or biscuit for you biscuit-taking Brits!)
Reminds me of the first time I was in London, and saw signs advertising "Tennessee Fried Chicken" which struck me as semi-hilarious.
Fried chicken being well-known in Tennessee (naturally) but "Tennessee Fried Chicken" being unknown in the Volunteer State as well as other 49.
If you’d come here in the 90s you could have quenched your thirst at the “Seattle Coffee Company”…
Lol SpaceX has just went and made a bog old advertising purchase on Twitter.
SpaceX needs to advertise ? I thought free publicity was Musk's special genius.
Probably for Starlink.
But it sniffs a bit. I really hope that they purchased the ads at the going rate...
Why does it sniff?
Private company buying services from another private company.
On the assumption that there are processes to ensure that the minority investors on both sides are fairly treated there is absolutely nothing wrong with it
In this case, Elon Musk-melon is using money from one of his companies to (try to) throw a lifeline to another one of his companies.
Impure and simple. Reckon investors are impressed - NOT.
On the deal with the French, I read that we are coughing up an extra £8m a year (£55m to £63m this year) in an effort to reduce Channel crossings. At the same time, we have apparently paid £140m to Rwanda upfront for a scheme that is yet to have any impact (and probably never will have).
So if we hadn't embarked on the Rwanda scheme, we could have used that £140m (and the future costs of the scheme) instead to increase resources (border force, asylum adjudication staffing etc.) on top of what we're already paying France. Might have made more difference than a mere extra £8m.
That's not necessarily true: the Rwanda deal may never actually result in a single asylum applicant heading off to Rwanda, but could still be a success if it discouraged people from making the crossing.
Of course. Though the early evidence on that is not at all promising, is it?
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
So are you chocolate chip or Maryland?
Had to google "Maryland cookie" as was previously unknown to me and about 99.46% of Americans, including Marylanders.
Anyway, seems it's a brand and not a specific cookie (or biscuit for you biscuit-taking Brits!)
Reminds me of the first time I was in London, and saw signs advertising "Tennessee Fried Chicken" which struck me as semi-hilarious.
Fried chicken being well-known in Tennessee (naturally) but "Tennessee Fried Chicken" being unknown in the Volunteer State as well as other 49.
If you’d come here in the 90s you could have quenched your thirst at the “Seattle Coffee Company”…
Eustice: "The UK went into this negotiation holding the strongest hand, the best cards but at some point in early summer 2021, the then Trade Secretary [Truss] took a decision to set an arbitrary target to conclude it by G7- from that moment we were on the backfoot."
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
Eustice: "We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation of beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interests to do so. And neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession."
That piece starts with a sentence usingt data as singular and goes downhill from there. Comparing the FTSE 250 with the CAC 40, and impolicitly thinking that companies listed in UK are UK companies, are particular low spots.
France is prospering because the Chinese rich are buying watches and suitcases to celebrate end of covid. This has as little to do with brexit as one could reasonably imagine.
Fmr Environment Sec George Eustice has spoken about the post-Brexit UK/Australia trade deal in the Commons. He says now no longer a minister: "I no longer have to put such a positive gloss on what was agreed...the Australia deal is not actually a very good trade deal for the UK." https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592208294684557312
Eustice: "We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation of beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interests to do so. And neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession."
Perhaps she had a, not unreasonable, view that free trade was a good thing, and that British consumers would benefit from cheaper lamb?
Eustice: "In my view the best clause of this treaty we have with Australia, is the final clause, because it does gives any UK govt...an unbridled right to terminate and renegotiate the FTA at any time with just six months notice."
when I interviewed the EU's top trade official, Sabine Weyand, she said that Brussels would never have fully opened up its agriculture sector in trade deals with Aus/ NZ as the UK had done. now Eustice has said the UK shouldn't have done it either! https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592209448986198016
EXCLUSIVE: Cabinet Secretary Simon Case was told by senior officials of concerns about Dominic Raab's behaviour, according to three people with direct knowledge
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
Sunak gave a robust defence of Raab, having already been criticised over his judgment after promoting other controversial ministers including Suella Braverman and Gavin Williamson.
“I don’t recognise that characterisation of Dominic and I’m not aware of any formal complaints about him,” he told reporters onboard his plane en route to the G20 summit in Bali.
“Of course, there are established procedures for civil servants if they want to bring to light any issues. I’m not aware of any formal complaint about Dominic.”
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
So I guess "The Faith" is now OK with adultery, since its Defender is an adulterer?
I nice line up of adulterous Tory ex-PMs at the Cenotaph yesterday, btw.
The Church of England was established by an adulterer, Henry VIII, so he could break with Rome and Papal Supremacy and marry Anne Boleyn. What a ridiculous question. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor of the Church of England, its Leader is the Archbishop of Canterbury.
I haven't heard any evidence May, Cameron or Sunak have been adulterers even if Major, Johnson and Truss have. Of the 2 Labour PMs Blair has had the Wendy Deng rumours of course but we will give him the benefit of that. Not to mention the Marcia Williams rumours around Wilson when he was Labour PM
Was Henry an adulterer? Or did he wait until the previous wife was divorced or dead before he started banging the next one?
To answer in reverse order:
No. Mary was still alive and still legally married to Henry when Anne conceived Elizabeth.
And yes he was. Even if he had waited until the official divorce from Mary you have forgotten Elizabeth Blount and Mary Boleyn, at least one of whom bore him a child before divorce was even a possibility.
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
And Art 26 says it doesn't make too much difference if priests are baddies, anyway
XXVI. OF THE UNWORTHINESS OF THE MINISTERS, WHICH HINDERS NOT THE EFFECT OF THE SACRAMENT
ALTHOUGH in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.
Nevertheless, it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences; and finally being found guilty, by just judgement be deposed.
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
So are you chocolate chip or Maryland?
Had to google "Maryland cookie" as was previously unknown to me and about 99.46% of Americans, including Marylanders.
Anyway, seems it's a brand and not a specific cookie (or biscuit for you biscuit-taking Brits!)
Reminds me of the first time I was in London, and saw signs advertising "Tennessee Fried Chicken" which struck me as semi-hilarious.
Fried chicken being well-known in Tennessee (naturally) but "Tennessee Fried Chicken" being unknown in the Volunteer State as well as other 49.
If you’d come here in the 90s you could have quenched your thirst at the “Seattle Coffee Company”…
I went to Seattle in the 90s and tried to quench my thirst at a wayside coffee stall but was unimpressed to be given two tablespoons of coffee at the bottom of a half-pint paper cup. Meekly complaining in the politest possible way I was assured that this was the local custom.
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
So I guess "The Faith" is now OK with adultery, since its Defender is an adulterer?
I nice line up of adulterous Tory ex-PMs at the Cenotaph yesterday, btw.
The Church of England was established by an adulterer, Henry VIII, so he could break with Rome and Papal Supremacy and marry Anne Boleyn. What a ridiculous question. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor of the Church of England, its Leader is the Archbishop of Canterbury.
I haven't heard any evidence May, Cameron or Sunak have been adulterers even if Major, Johnson and Truss have. Of the 2 Labour PMs Blair has had the Wendy Deng rumours of course but we will give him the benefit of that. Not to mention the Marcia Williams rumours around Wilson when he was Labour PM
Was Henry an adulterer? Or did he wait until the previous wife was divorced or dead before he started banging the next one?
To answer in reverse order:
No. Mary was still alive and still legally married to Henry when Anne conceived Elizabeth.
And yes he was. Even if he had waited until the official divorce from Mary you have forgotten Elizabeth Blount and Mary Boleyn, at least one of whom bore him a child before divorce was even a possibility.
Catherine of Aragon I assume you mean? Mary was their daughter
Actually not much hanging fire re: King Co results, except for:
City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B - to change primary election process for municipal office.
> First question is whether or not to make any change at all from current Top Two primary where top two vote-getters advance to general:
Yes 129,161 50.35 % No 127,364 49.65 %
> Second question is which alternative method to adopt
Prop 1A = Approval voting for primary; voters can vote once for more than one candidate, with total votes added up, and Top Two advance to general = 56,982 24.58 %
Prop 1B = Ranked choice primary, with Top Two advancing to general = 174,860 75.42 %
NOTE that even if voters say "No" on 1st question, they still get to "pick their poison" so to speak on 2nd question.
Also note that while total ballots cast so far in City of Seattle = 273k, total votes cast one way or another on Prop 1 Question 1 = 257k (6% falloff), while total votes cast on Q2 = 41k (15% falloff).
Further note that approximately 25k voters who voted Yes or No on Q1, did NOT vote for either alternative proposal. My guess is the bulk of them were No voters.
Based on trend of later ballot counts, would anticipate that Prop 1 will pass, thus enacting RCV for Seattle municipal primaries.
On the deal with the French, I read that we are coughing up an extra £8m a year (£55m to £63m this year) in an effort to reduce Channel crossings. At the same time, we have apparently paid £140m to Rwanda upfront for a scheme that is yet to have any impact (and probably never will have).
So if we hadn't embarked on the Rwanda scheme, we could have used that £140m (and the future costs of the scheme) instead to increase resources (border force, asylum adjudication staffing etc.) on top of what we're already paying France. Might have made more difference than a mere extra £8m.
I do sometimes suspect "Rwanda" is more about playing to the gallery than resolving the problem.
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
So I guess "The Faith" is now OK with adultery, since its Defender is an adulterer?
I nice line up of adulterous Tory ex-PMs at the Cenotaph yesterday, btw.
The Church of England was established by an adulterer, Henry VIII, so he could break with Rome and Papal Supremacy and marry Anne Boleyn. What a ridiculous question. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor of the Church of England, its Leader is the Archbishop of Canterbury.
I haven't heard any evidence May, Cameron or Sunak have been adulterers even if Major, Johnson and Truss have. Of the 2 Labour PMs Blair has had the Wendy Deng rumours of course but we will give him the benefit of that. Not to mention the Marcia Williams rumours around Wilson when he was Labour PM
Was Henry an adulterer? Or did he wait until the previous wife was divorced or dead before he started banging the next one?
To answer in reverse order:
No. Mary was still alive and still legally married to Henry when Anne conceived Elizabeth.
And yes he was. Even if he had waited until the official divorce from Mary you have forgotten Elizabeth Blount and Mary Boleyn, at least one of whom bore him a child before divorce was even a possibility.
Catherine of Aragon I assume you mean? Mary was their daughter
Yes, sorry. Not feeling very well today. Fecking insomnia.
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
So Sunak can appoint a CoE bishop while Johnson could not?
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
A bit of a shame they kept putting the nutters in whose imagination it existed in charge of things in Brussels, though.
Especially since so many of them would have made Al Capone look positively honest.
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
So are you chocolate chip or Maryland?
Had to google "Maryland cookie" as was previously unknown to me and about 99.46% of Americans, including Marylanders.
Anyway, seems it's a brand and not a specific cookie (or biscuit for you biscuit-taking Brits!)
Reminds me of the first time I was in London, and saw signs advertising "Tennessee Fried Chicken" which struck me as semi-hilarious.
Fried chicken being well-known in Tennessee (naturally) but "Tennessee Fried Chicken" being unknown in the Volunteer State as well as other 49.
If you’d come here in the 90s you could have quenched your thirst at the “Seattle Coffee Company”…
I went to Seattle in the 90s and tried to quench my thirst at a wayside coffee stall but was unimpressed to be given two tablespoons of coffee at the bottom of a half-pint paper cup. Meekly complaining in the politest possible way I was assured that this was the local custom.
You must have ordered an espresso? Not saying that's what you wanted, but sounds like what you got.
Most Seattle coffee fiends order milk drinks flavored with coffee (hot or cold) and whatever (pumpkin spice very popular this time of year).
Some do get espressos and cappuccinos & suchlike.
Personally go for drip coffee (cheapest and lowliest option) with a bit of cream. Could ask for host of other options re: latter. Though am always disappointed when I request goats milk!
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
So are you chocolate chip or Maryland?
Had to google "Maryland cookie" as was previously unknown to me and about 99.46% of Americans, including Marylanders.
Anyway, seems it's a brand and not a specific cookie (or biscuit for you biscuit-taking Brits!)
Reminds me of the first time I was in London, and saw signs advertising "Tennessee Fried Chicken" which struck me as semi-hilarious.
Fried chicken being well-known in Tennessee (naturally) but "Tennessee Fried Chicken" being unknown in the Volunteer State as well as other 49.
If you’d come here in the 90s you could have quenched your thirst at the “Seattle Coffee Company”…
I went to Seattle in the 90s and tried to quench my thirst at a wayside coffee stall but was unimpressed to be given two tablespoons of coffee at the bottom of a half-pint paper cup. Meekly complaining in the politest possible way I was assured that this was the local custom.
You must have ordered an espresso? Not saying that's what you wanted, but sounds like what you got.
Most Seattle coffee fiends order milk drinks flavored with coffee (hot or cold) and whatever (pumpkin spice very popular this time of year).
Some do get espressos and cappuccinos & suchlike.
Personally go for drip coffee (cheapest and lowliest option) with a bit of cream. Could ask for host of other options re: latter. Though am always disappointed when I request goats milk!
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
So Sunak can appoint a CoE bishop while Johnson could not?
It's only Jews and RCs who are disqualified, it says here
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
So Sunak can appoint a CoE bishop while Johnson could not?
Yes. As could Lloyd George (Baptist) Neville Chamberlain (Unitarian) and Thatcher (Methodist, although she was a member of an Anglican Church).
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
Ever closer union is not imaginary. The institutions are not imaginary. EU law is not imaginary.
The only thing you can say that we were clearly not part of was the Euro, and to that extent Brexit was perhaps inevitable.
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
So Sunak can appoint a CoE bishop while Johnson could not?
It's only Jews and RCs who are disqualified, it says here
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
A bit of a shame they kept putting the nutters in whose imagination it existed in charge of things in Brussels, though.
Especially since so many of them would have made Al Capone look positively honest.
The big path is set by national leaders though. And they are constrained by their electorates. No way is a USE coming in by stealth. Might be possible one day but it's far far off and it'd need a sea change in circumstances and popular sentiment. Grains of truth in it but in essence it's a bogeyman, that's my view.
when I interviewed the EU's top trade official, Sabine Weyand, she said that Brussels would never have fully opened up its agriculture sector in trade deals with Aus/ NZ as the UK had done. now Eustice has said the UK shouldn't have done it either! https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592209448986198016
Quite a good thing that we Brexited if the EU would never do that.
Free trade in agriculture is the best thing for UK consumers. Why would you oppose free trade in agriculture, and how can you justify that without also demanding tariffs on imports from Europe?
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
So are you chocolate chip or Maryland?
Had to google "Maryland cookie" as was previously unknown to me and about 99.46% of Americans, including Marylanders.
Anyway, seems it's a brand and not a specific cookie (or biscuit for you biscuit-taking Brits!)
Reminds me of the first time I was in London, and saw signs advertising "Tennessee Fried Chicken" which struck me as semi-hilarious.
Fried chicken being well-known in Tennessee (naturally) but "Tennessee Fried Chicken" being unknown in the Volunteer State as well as other 49.
If you’d come here in the 90s you could have quenched your thirst at the “Seattle Coffee Company”…
I went to Seattle in the 90s and tried to quench my thirst at a wayside coffee stall but was unimpressed to be given two tablespoons of coffee at the bottom of a half-pint paper cup. Meekly complaining in the politest possible way I was assured that this was the local custom.
You must have ordered an espresso? Not saying that's what you wanted, but sounds like what you got.
Most Seattle coffee fiends order milk drinks flavored with coffee (hot or cold) and whatever (pumpkin spice very popular this time of year).
Some do get espressos and cappuccinos & suchlike.
Personally go for drip coffee (cheapest and lowliest option) with a bit of cream. Could ask for host of other options re: latter. Though am always disappointed when I request goats milk!
Yes, I ordered an espresso. I was in a hurry.
What about 99.46% of the "fancy" drinks sold by Seattle barristas have in common, is a couple shots (or more) of espresso.
You just skipped the vanilla, chocolate, mint, hemp milk (maybe not a thing yet in 90s), etc., etc.
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
The European Constitution Lisbon Treaty wasn't imaginary, however much Gordon Brown tried to pretend it so
Your avatar is terribly familiar but I can't place it. Put me out my misery. What is it?
Selby town seal. Adoptive town (nearest town to where I live).
ETA: This example lifted from Wikipedia (public domain by the creator)
Hence also, I suppose 'Selebian'. Oddly, never crossed my mind to wonder what a Selebian was. Just as it never crossed my mind to wonder what a kinabalu was until I was looking at a wikipedia list of the world's highest islands. I bet there's loads of interesting names out there I never wondered about. How disappointingly incurious of me.
Some names are obvious, though, no need to look them up. Eg you are a biscuit. Although why you chose it is quite interesting. Not that you have to share if it's too personal.
Predictably, just a derivative of my surname, which I chose without more than 30 seconds thought when I first posted back in 2005 (possibly taking issue with NPMP on a matter relating to cheese, though that would have been reaching peak pb on my first post, so maybe I have made that memory up). If I'd thought about it in more detail I might have come up with something more interesting.
Ah, I see. Biscuits not relevant then. Bit disappointing. Still, hats off for sticking with one handle for 17 years. Some people feel the need to chop and change which is great but can also be discombobulating.
What about you then? What's the relevance of kinabalu? A particularly memorable holiday? A childhood nickname? Your actual name (unlikely, but not impossible)?
My childhood nickname was Chimp - due to prowess at climbing trees. Liked it at the time but glad it didn't stick into adolescence.
Kinabalu is after the birthplace of my wife - Kota Kinabalu. I've got to know and like it over the years.
How romantic! If I'd followed your example my name would be Margate.
PalmSprings has a certain je ne c’est quoi
It does! That's more glam than mine. Birthplace, I mean, not actual wife.
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
A bit of a shame they kept putting the nutters in whose imagination it existed in charge of things in Brussels, though.
Especially since so many of them would have made Al Capone look positively honest.
The big path is set by national leaders though. And they are constrained by their electorates. No way is a USE coming in by stealth. Might be possible one day but it's far far off and it'd need a sea change in circumstances and popular sentiment. Grains of truth in it but in essence it's a bogeyman, that's my view.
Bluntly, I think that is naive.
In fact, I will go further. It's already been created by stealth, through the creation of the Euro and the increasing pooling of financial sovereignty to pay for it.
At some point, either the EU will have to give up the euro, or it will have to federate. There are no middle paths. Indeed, that was a key reason behind the creation of the euro, based on the Zollverein of the nineteenth century. It didn't quite happen with the crash of 2008, but with the disaster that are public finances across the EU it will have to face this choice next time, which you would assume will be in the next two to three years.
And as we saw in Scotland, people will be very reluctant to break away from a currency unit, with all the chaos that entails. There is a very strong chance they will prefer political union even if it isn't what they actually want.
I would have considerably more respect for the leaders of the EU if they were honest about this, but most of them aren't. And the ones like Delors, Giscard and Juncker, who are, tend to be loathsome scum anyway whom only a genuine lunatic would respect.
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
Ever closer union is not imaginary. The institutions are not imaginary. EU law is not imaginary.
The only thing you can say that we were clearly not part of was the Euro, and to that extent Brexit was perhaps inevitable.
USE is like world peace or equal opportunities. A noble aspiration and the desired direction of travel - and destined always to be a noble aspiration and the desired direction of travel.
This is pissing more money up the wall when we all know what the solution is.
Tory MPs have warned Suella Braverman that she risks throwing “good money after bad” with the government’s new deal with France to stop cross-channel migrants.
The home secretary this morning signed a £70 million deal as part of a bid to reduce the number of migrants crossing the English Channel. However, in the Commons Tory MPs highlighted the risk that it does not oblige French police to detain and arrest people.
Tim Loughton, a former minister, said: “Whilst co-operation with the French is no doubt welcome, is it not the case that since 2015 the British taxpayer has subsidised French police force to tune of £215m.
“There is nothing in this agreement today that obliges the French police to detain and arrest anybody they intercept so they are free to come back the following night and try again, in which case we are throwing good money after bad.”
Whilst that's true, without it interceptions would be 0%, rather than between 45-50%, and that would probably lead to a tripling of crossings (not just a doubling) as people realised it was a free-for-all. The damage that would do to the UK and HMG is way more than £215m, by an order of magnitude.
So, whilst it pisses us off, and the French are taking the piss, we also don't have much of a choice but to continue with it.
This is pissing more money up the wall when we all know what the solution is.
Tory MPs have warned Suella Braverman that she risks throwing “good money after bad” with the government’s new deal with France to stop cross-channel migrants.
The home secretary this morning signed a £70 million deal as part of a bid to reduce the number of migrants crossing the English Channel. However, in the Commons Tory MPs highlighted the risk that it does not oblige French police to detain and arrest people.
Tim Loughton, a former minister, said: “Whilst co-operation with the French is no doubt welcome, is it not the case that since 2015 the British taxpayer has subsidised French police force to tune of £215m.
“There is nothing in this agreement today that obliges the French police to detain and arrest anybody they intercept so they are free to come back the following night and try again, in which case we are throwing good money after bad.”
A toddler having a temper tantrum, except it costs us billions and trashed the future for millions.
But the Brexiteers will continue to scweam and scweam about how unfair it to mock them, and I shall continue to do so
If you want to get better at mocking them, you should try harder to understand them. Brexit was not about renouncing all international cooperation, just withdrawing from the project to create a European superstate.
A project more imaginary than real and of which we weren't in any case a part.
A bit of a shame they kept putting the nutters in whose imagination it existed in charge of things in Brussels, though.
Especially since so many of them would have made Al Capone look positively honest.
The big path is set by national leaders though. And they are constrained by their electorates. No way is a USE coming in by stealth. Might be possible one day but it's far far off and it'd need a sea change in circumstances and popular sentiment. Grains of truth in it but in essence it's a bogeyman, that's my view.
Bluntly, I think that is naive.
In fact, I will go further. It's already been created by stealth, through the creation of the Euro and the increasing pooling of financial sovereignty to pay for it.
At some point, either the EU will have to give up the euro, or it will have to federate. There are no middle paths. Indeed, that was a key reason behind the creation of the euro, based on the Zollverein of the nineteenth century. It didn't quite happen with the crash of 2008, but with the disaster that are public finances across the EU it will have to face this choice next time, which you would assume will be in the next two to three years.
And as we saw in Scotland, people will be very reluctant to break away from a currency unit, with all the chaos that entails. There is a very strong chance they will prefer political union even if it isn't what they actually want.
I would have considerably more respect for the leaders of the EU if they were honest about this, but most of them aren't. And the ones like Delors, Giscard and Juncker, who are, tend to be loathsome scum anyway whom only a genuine lunatic would respect.
Except they gave up their marks, pesetas, punts, lira, francs, drachmas and schillings pretty readily.
Weird to think I have used all those currencies, and it's now an effort of memory to recall some of them.
An interesting view, though why they couldn't do what they've always done and ignore us, I don't know.
Best thing Twitter did for the world in general was to allow anyone to yell directly at rich and powerful people, which drove many of them insane, including the richest guy on earth
Eustice: "We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation of beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interests to do so. And neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession."
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
So Sunak can appoint a CoE bishop while Johnson could not?
It's only Jews and RCs who are disqualified, it says here
So of the last 6 published polls the Con vote share is up in one (by one percent), level in one and down in four. I'm not yet ready to call the Con revival having peaked but that isn't too promising for them.
This is pissing more money up the wall when we all know what the solution is.
Tory MPs have warned Suella Braverman that she risks throwing “good money after bad” with the government’s new deal with France to stop cross-channel migrants.
The home secretary this morning signed a £70 million deal as part of a bid to reduce the number of migrants crossing the English Channel. However, in the Commons Tory MPs highlighted the risk that it does not oblige French police to detain and arrest people.
Tim Loughton, a former minister, said: “Whilst co-operation with the French is no doubt welcome, is it not the case that since 2015 the British taxpayer has subsidised French police force to tune of £215m.
“There is nothing in this agreement today that obliges the French police to detain and arrest anybody they intercept so they are free to come back the following night and try again, in which case we are throwing good money after bad.”
Eustice: "We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation of beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interests to do so. And neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession."
Perhaps she had a, not unreasonable, view that free trade was a good thing, and that British consumers would benefit from cheaper lamb?
I never understand why pork is so cheap and lamb is so expensive.
I mean, pork requires more infra and work than sheep.
Weird.
Looking at pig farms (notably in Norfolk), and sheep farms; pigs can be kept in much closer captivity than sheep. My *guess* is that you get far fewer sheep per hectare (*) than pigs, much reducing the cost.
As an aside, my dad says that pigs are not dirty; they are very clean animals. It's only the way we keep them that makes them dirty.
An aspect of the US mid-terms that had passed me by till now.
There were 6 GOP candidates up for election as Secretary of State in swing states that claimed that the 2020 election was "stolen". SOS is the top election official in a state . All 6 lost.
Begins to restore my faith in the American electorate a little.
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
But your King and your PM ARE religious leaders. C of E, remember.
No they are not.
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
And Art 26 says it doesn't make too much difference if priests are baddies, anyway
XXVI. OF THE UNWORTHINESS OF THE MINISTERS, WHICH HINDERS NOT THE EFFECT OF THE SACRAMENT
ALTHOUGH in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.
Nevertheless, it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences; and finally being found guilty, by just judgement be deposed.
It makes clear if found guilty of evil offences they can be deposed in the final paragraph. Even if they have administered the word and sacraments not in their own name but Christ's
Eustice: "We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation of beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interests to do so. And neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession."
Perhaps she had a, not unreasonable, view that free trade was a good thing, and that British consumers would benefit from cheaper lamb?
I never understand why pork is so cheap and lamb is so expensive.
I mean, pork requires more infra and work than sheep.
Weird.
Looking at pig farms (notably in Norfolk), and sheep farms; pigs can be kept in much closer captivity than sheep. My *guess* is that you get far fewer sheep per hectare (*) than pigs, much reducing the cost.
As an aside, my dad says that pigs are not dirty; they are very clean animals. It's only the way we keep them that makes them dirty.
(*) Acre for you
The other strange thing about sheep is how the fleece these days has virtually no value.
I think they get something like 50p for a fleece? And it's much more sustainable to use wool for clothes than synthetics.
Eustice: "We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation of beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interests to do so. And neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession."
Perhaps she had a, not unreasonable, view that free trade was a good thing, and that British consumers would benefit from cheaper lamb?
I never understand why pork is so cheap and lamb is so expensive.
I mean, pork requires more infra and work than sheep.
Weird.
Looking at pig farms (notably in Norfolk), and sheep farms; pigs can be kept in much closer captivity than sheep. My *guess* is that you get far fewer sheep per hectare (*) than pigs, much reducing the cost.
As an aside, my dad says that pigs are not dirty; they are very clean animals. It's only the way we keep them that makes them dirty.
(*) Acre for you
The other strange thing about sheep is how the fleece these days has virtually no value.
I think they get something like 50p for a fleece? And it's much more sustainable to use wool for clothes than synthetics.
Learnt from Clarkson's farm. More weird.
Sheepswool is fabulous home insulation. Very effective, lovely to work with (non itchy) no nasty chemicals. I don't know what central Government can do to incentivise its use, but it would be a very good idea.
“Afghanistan’s supreme leader has ordered judges to fully implement aspects of Islamic law that include public executions, stonings, floggings and the amputation of limbs for thieves, the Taliban’s chief spokesman said.”
The new 'moderate' Taliban. Merely amputation of limbs for thieves rather than being hung drawn and quartered and public executions not televised, merely first come first served for best view in the crowd?
And yet they were allowed to play in the cricket world cup a few days ago.
Saudi Arabia has similar laws and gets to play in the Football World Cup.
(Death by stoning is the punishment for adultery in Saudi Arabia.)
An utter scandal that in this country we make adulterers King and Queen.
Well Charles has a less prolific record of adultery than virtually every French President except De Gaulle or many US Presidents, notably JFK and Clinton.
"It's OK for our Kings to be mass murderers because Genghis Khan was a bigger mass murderer."
Seriously, that's the coruscating logic and quality of apologetics on display here.
Half the Presidents in the world and half the monarchs in history have been adulterers. Being a Saint in your personal life does not mean you will be an effective Head of your country, see Jimmy Carter.
Religious leaders should normally have impeccable personal lives like the Archbishop of Canterbury or Pope. For Presidents or Kings or PMs it is an optional extra, desirable but not a requirement
So I guess "The Faith" is now OK with adultery, since its Defender is an adulterer?
I nice line up of adulterous Tory ex-PMs at the Cenotaph yesterday, btw.
The Church of England was established by an adulterer, Henry VIII, so he could break with Rome and Papal Supremacy and marry Anne Boleyn. What a ridiculous question. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor of the Church of England, its Leader is the Archbishop of Canterbury.
I haven't heard any evidence May, Cameron or Sunak have been adulterers even if Major, Johnson and Truss have. Of the 2 Labour PMs Blair has had the Wendy Deng rumours of course but we will give him the benefit of that. Not to mention the Marcia Williams rumours around Wilson when he was Labour PM
Was Henry an adulterer? Or did he wait until the previous wife was divorced or dead before he started banging the next one?
Either way, less of a role model than Jesus, the Buddha or Guru Nanak. Maybe on a par with the Prophet. And yet his is the faith you choose to follow.
So only 50% of recent Tory PMs are adulterers. Fair enough.
It is not Henry's faith, the Church of England is a denomination of the Christian faith, just the Monarch is Supreme Governor of it to stop the Pope being its head on earth with its Leader the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Of the 2 recent Labour PMs, we know the Wendy Deng rumours about Blair as I said. That would be 50% of living Labour PMs if true but I give Blair the benefit of the doubt and say not true
Seeing as Henry VIIIth had illegitimate children, one of whom nearly became legitamized, I’d say he definitely had adulterous relations.
If Corbyn stands as an Independent , he is very likely to win with the active support of most of the Islington North CLP. After close of nominations he might well receive endorsement from John Mcdonell, Diane Abbot and most of the Campaign group of Labour MPs. Starmer would be unwise to reopen this wound , and by doing so he risks lending credibility to Tory attacks which they no longer have with the wider electorate.For the vast majority of voters this is very much 'water under the bridge.'
I can't really even believe he's considering all this. It draws all the attention back to Corbyn and his wing of the party. It seems like a big own goal.
It enables Labour to bat back Tory attack lines on Corbyn: “we removed our batshit crazy wing nut, you put yours in the home office”.
It risks a serious Labour split in the middle of the GE campaign if a significant number of Labour MPs openly declare support for him and proceed to campaign on his behalf.
I personally don't want Corbyn expelled but I'm starting to really trust Starmer on what's best for maximizing the GE24 result. I think he'll do that calculation here and get it right.
"Maximising the GE24 result" is what bothers me about Sir Keir, I think - that's supposed to be a means to an end not an end in itself. I'd rather he had a 40 majority and a decent plan of what to do with it than a 100 majority and no such plan.
A "plan" is a bit much to expect - but hopefully there'll be the impression of integrity and competence plus some workable proposals in the manifesto to improve the lives of ordinary people.
Wow. If that's the case, no wonder I'm bothered by him!
But you weren't bothered by Johnson who had no post Brexit plan.
When Labour propose an economic recovery plan, let's face it, you won't like it anyway.
Boris at least had a plan to end the antidemocratic nonsense of the 2017 parliament.
As for the latter point - we'll have to see it to judge on that!
Anti-democratic? Parliament was sovereign even if you didn't like it.
Johnson's post election plan was simply to "do Brexit". He had no idea what that meant. The biggest dilemma facing the May Parliament was resolving the Irish issue. Johnson "resolved" that by putting a border in the North Channel. How is that working?
Yes, and for about the eleventy billionth time we elect Parliament to do our bidding. A direct instruction in a referendum democratically trumps "we're MPs, so ner".
The EURef was advisory, so no it doesn't trump "we're (Sovereign Parliament) MPs so there".
Comments
Tory MPs have warned Suella Braverman that she risks throwing “good money after bad” with the government’s new deal with France to stop cross-channel migrants.
The home secretary this morning signed a £70 million deal as part of a bid to reduce the number of migrants crossing the English Channel. However, in the Commons Tory MPs highlighted the risk that it does not oblige French police to detain and arrest people.
Tim Loughton, a former minister, said: “Whilst co-operation with the French is no doubt welcome, is it not the case that since 2015 the British taxpayer has subsidised French police force to tune of £215m.
“There is nothing in this agreement today that obliges the French police to detain and arrest anybody they intercept so they are free to come back the following night and try again, in which case we are throwing good money after bad.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-suella-braverman-latest-news-channel-migrants-deal-france-uk-7hw96r6w8
We need to get rid of Sunak and Braverman.
Sometimes you are reliant on a service (like a CDN) that is not diversified.
Sometimes the services you thought were diverse turn out not to be. We buy dark fibre from one vendor and circuits from another. We now know they both run through the same manhole...
Sometimes the diverse services merge. One of our ISPs bought the other one...
A very quick google about hasn't shown me anything obvious - does anyone know if this is really a thing? She was some sort of climate campaigner so I was a little suspicious that it might be an exaggeration.
The UKCA mark, a totally useless parallel system to the CE mark, has been put off another 2 years.
More proof that Brexit only works if it's never implemented.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-ukca-quality-mark-business-b2224663.html
Tedious and completely fucking pointless, having no effect but to make you look childish? Yes.
The criticism can only come from the right, when will this change actually move the dial (Sunak wouldn’t say). If at all? Is this enough of a step in right direction, will be the most cutting criticism of todays announcement.
It’s as HY correctly explained the other day - todays move with the French may help with Blue Wall voters perhaps already lost, but shift other voters to Reform as being a weak and inadequate response to an “invasion”
One of a PMs downfalls of allowing your ministers to raise the rhetoric, action then needs to meet raised rhetoric.
France
Which is confusing…
They must be going through a different war in Ukraine, global energy spike & interest rate crisis to us.
By the way, is everyone enjoying Brexit?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63623502
Of the 2 recent Labour PMs, we know the Wendy Deng rumours about Blair as I said. That would be 50% of living Labour PMs if true but I give Blair the benefit of the doubt and say not true
And am thinking, that any hanky-panky by QEII would likely NOT have gone as far as our depraved age (my own being 60+) might assume . . .
I hardly know where to begin!
This is before Jeremy Hunt announces deep spending cuts and tax rises on Thursday. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1592208298782380032/photo/1
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592208294684557312
✍️ Matthew Lynn
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-sad-decline-of-the-london-stock-market/
Says best bits were negotiated by DEFRA and worst bits by Dept for Trade, at the time headed by Liz Truss.
Says if we don't recognise mistakes they'll be repeated.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592208961909948419
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592209448986198016
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592211132814852097
Losing out to France hurts.
I haven’t felt this bad since I was nearly tear-gassed by the French.
France is prospering because the Chinese rich are buying watches and suitcases to celebrate end of covid. This has as little to do with brexit as one could reasonably imagine.
you are having a bad day.
Extraordinary stuff.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592210735459106817
Dover MP brands it ‘more of the same’, telling @TimesRadio that UK should have pushed for joint patrols on French beaches; joint Channel security zone; & migrant returns
https://twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/1592212342753861632
Case privately took steps to improve his conduct
MoJ boss Antonia Romeo raised it with Raab
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-14/uk-civil-service-chief-was-warned-about-raab-behaviour-concerns
As the 37th Article Ishmael identified showed the Monarch can neither administer the sacraments or preach the word of the Bible.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is leader of the Church of England not the monarch. The Monarch is only Supreme Governor and Protector of it.
The PM has no position in it at all other than if they are not Roman Catholic being able to confirm the appointment of Bishops
Bear in mind this is especially wounding given it's one of the only genuinely new post-Brexit deals we've signed. And Eustice was a Brexiter.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1592213982383058944
“I don’t recognise that characterisation of Dominic and I’m not aware of any formal complaints about him,” he told reporters onboard his plane en route to the G20 summit in Bali.
“Of course, there are established procedures for civil servants if they want to bring to light any issues. I’m not aware of any formal complaint about Dominic.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/14/rishi-sunak-says-he-does-not-recognise-bullying-claims-against-dominic-raab
Don't call that robust, with "don’t recognise that characterisation," and "formal" twice in 3 sentences. looking a lot like Pinchergate.
No. Mary was still alive and still legally married to Henry when Anne conceived Elizabeth.
And yes he was. Even if he had waited until the official divorce from Mary you have forgotten Elizabeth Blount and Mary Boleyn, at least one of whom bore him a child before divorce was even a possibility.
XXVI. OF THE UNWORTHINESS OF THE MINISTERS, WHICH HINDERS NOT THE EFFECT OF THE SACRAMENT
ALTHOUGH in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.
Nevertheless, it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences; and finally being found guilty, by just judgement be deposed.
https://kingcounty.gov/depts/elections/about-us/security-and-accountability/watch-us-in-action.aspx
Actually not much hanging fire re: King Co results, except for:
City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B - to change primary election process for municipal office.
> First question is whether or not to make any change at all from current Top Two primary where top two vote-getters advance to general:
Yes 129,161 50.35 %
No 127,364 49.65 %
> Second question is which alternative method to adopt
Prop 1A = Approval voting for primary; voters can vote once for more than one candidate, with total votes added up, and Top Two advance to general = 56,982 24.58 %
Prop 1B = Ranked choice primary, with Top Two advancing to general = 174,860 75.42 %
NOTE that even if voters say "No" on 1st question, they still get to "pick their poison" so to speak on 2nd question.
Also note that while total ballots cast so far in City of Seattle = 273k, total votes cast one way or another on Prop 1 Question 1 = 257k (6% falloff), while total votes cast on Q2 = 41k (15% falloff).
Further note that approximately 25k voters who voted Yes or No on Q1, did NOT vote for either alternative proposal. My guess is the bulk of them were No voters.
Based on trend of later ballot counts, would anticipate that Prop 1 will pass, thus enacting RCV for Seattle municipal primaries.
Especially since so many of them would have made Al Capone look positively honest.
Most Seattle coffee fiends order milk drinks flavored with coffee (hot or cold) and whatever (pumpkin spice very popular this time of year).
Some do get espressos and cappuccinos & suchlike.
Personally go for drip coffee (cheapest and lowliest option) with a bit of cream. Could ask for host of other options re: latter. Though am always disappointed when I request goats milk!
https://reaction.life/will-rishi-sunak-want-to-appoint-the-bishops/
This sums it up:
https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/boris-can-no-longer-pick-bishops
The only thing you can say that we were clearly not part of was the Euro, and to that extent Brexit was perhaps inevitable.
Free trade in agriculture is the best thing for UK consumers. Why would you oppose free trade in agriculture, and how can you justify that without also demanding tariffs on imports from Europe?
You just skipped the vanilla, chocolate, mint, hemp milk (maybe not a thing yet in 90s), etc., etc.
European ConstitutionLisbon Treaty wasn't imaginary, however much Gordon Brown tried to pretend it soThe French and Irish even had votes on it
They were already in trouble but Truss & Kwarteng trashed the brand for a generation.
In fact, I will go further. It's already been created by stealth, through the creation of the Euro and the increasing pooling of financial sovereignty to pay for it.
At some point, either the EU will have to give up the euro, or it will have to federate. There are no middle paths. Indeed, that was a key reason behind the creation of the euro, based on the Zollverein of the nineteenth century. It didn't quite happen with the crash of 2008, but with the disaster that are public finances across the EU it will have to face this choice next time, which you would assume will be in the next two to three years.
And as we saw in Scotland, people will be very reluctant to break away from a currency unit, with all the chaos that entails. There is a very strong chance they will prefer political union even if it isn't what they actually want.
I would have considerably more respect for the leaders of the EU if they were honest about this, but most of them aren't. And the ones like Delors, Giscard and Juncker, who are, tend to be loathsome scum anyway whom only a genuine lunatic would respect.
So, whilst it pisses us off, and the French are taking the piss, we also don't have much of a choice but to continue with it.
Weird to think I have used all those currencies, and it's now an effort of memory to recall some of them.
Best thing Twitter did for the world in general was to allow anyone to yell directly at rich and powerful people, which drove many of them insane, including the richest guy on earth
https://twitter.com/hamiltonnolan/status/1591438763598958593?cxt=HHwWgsDSofXH9pUsAAAA
I mean, pork requires more infra and work than sheep.
Weird.
As an aside, my dad says that pigs are not dirty; they are very clean animals. It's only the way we keep them that makes them dirty.
(*) Acre for you
There were 6 GOP candidates up for election as Secretary of State in swing states that claimed that the 2020 election was "stolen". SOS is the top election official in a state . All 6 lost.
Begins to restore my faith in the American electorate a little.
I think they get something like 50p for a fleece? And it's much more sustainable to use wool for clothes than synthetics.
Learnt from Clarkson's farm. More weird.