"This reporter is already on record pledging to eat a bag of rusty nails if the real estate tycoon with the high hair manages to snag the GOP nomination, much less takes down likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton next fall."
"He's solidified his position in Iowa" "Scott Walker is where he wants to be right now" "Marco Rubio has a lot of room to grow" "Bush has bad numbers" (the only thing consistent)
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I'm not a Putinista but I can only think it's the Tories starving the corporation of cash that has tempted threm to put out such a poorly researched piece of work. It was pretty indistinguishable from 'ITV's Dispatches
What was poorly researched about it?
The bit where they got the average Russian in the street to say Putin was brilliant.
Jeremy Corbyn played a central role in leading a purge of moderate Labour councillors in 1982, according to newly unearthed reports from the time.
The Labour leader was involved in moves to deselect at least 20 London councillors while another 130 Labour moderates stepped down after the party moved radically to the left.
The revelation is likely to increase fears among moderate Labour councillors and the central wing of the parliamentary Labour party that Corbynistas may seek to oust them
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I'm not a Putinista but I can only think it's the Tories starving the corporation of cash that has tempted threm to put out such a poorly researched piece of work. It was pretty indistinguishable from 'ITV's Dispatches
Look at the number of legal actions Panorama have lost or settled in the last few years. They were nothing to do with cuts, just sloppy journalism.
Never had you down as a friend of Vlad. Is he a drinking chum in the South of France?
If Donald Trump wins in Iowa, he will be anointed the hair apparent.
You should be able to do better than that !
No, I really am that low standard.
I still think Trump is hair today; gone tommorow!
"They"
'They' wrote off the Tories 'They' wrote off Corbyn 'They' wrote off Trump. 'They' wrote off Leicester xD
I've been suggesting that Trump is the Leicester of the presidential campaign. Or perhaps Trump is the Leicester. Either way, both are lasting a lot longer than many expected and both could yet go all the way.
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I'm not a Putinista but I can only think it's the Tories starving the corporation of cash that has tempted threm to put out such a poorly researched piece of work. It was pretty indistinguishable from 'ITV's Dispatches
What was poorly researched about it?
Did you watch it? "Someone told us though he didn't give us any evidence that Putin owns........" wouldn't pass muster on 'Loose Women'
I can go all day long having fun at this thread, posting useless but comical predictions from the past "Scott Walker will be president, Marco Rubio will be president, Jeb will be president, Trump will implode" ect ect.
If Donald Trump wins in Iowa, he will be anointed the hair apparent.
You should be able to do better than that !
No, I really am that low standard.
I still think Trump is hair today; gone tommorow!
"They"
'They' wrote off the Tories 'They' wrote off Corbyn 'They' wrote off Trump. 'They' wrote off Leicester xD
I've been suggesting that Trump is the Leicester of the presidential campaign. Or perhaps Trump is the Leicester. Either way, both are lasting a lot longer than many expected and both could yet go all the way.
I think Trump could easily go all the way, and I'd reckon he'd definitely beat Sanders in a head-to-head, and probably beat Hillary. I also think he'd be a pretty good President.
What I do doubt is the sincerity of all his policy statements. Either he's been lying his entire life up until the point he decided to run for President, or he had a sudden change of heart about October last year, or he's actually a pretty liberal pragmatist with a flair for publicity.
The sort of politician that makes politics an acceptable profession.'
A smarmy odious little creep. Bloody good riddance as he joins Thatcher in the pits of Hell!
Does anyone know if he ever got round to see the daughter he fathered ?
No - see what I put fpt
I specifically did not criticise him for not leaving his wife. If you have an affair with a married man with children, you do so at your own risk.
But I can see no reason for a Mary Bell order which had the effect that his child could not even appear in school photographs. Imagine that: not being allowed to have any record of your existence as a child and your school achievements because your father does not want to know of your existence and does not want anyone else to know of it either.
It speaks of someone with money and access to legal advice using that power to crush an innocent child and her mother, a woman with whom he had been having an affair for a number of years, so not some one-off drunken fling.
There are dignified ways of dealing with one's obligations - and he did have a moral obligation to the child he fathered - even when there are conflicts between your wife and family and your "love child". I don't think seeking an order normally used for child criminals in such circumstances is either dignified or moral.
The sort of politician that makes politics an acceptable profession.'
A smarmy odious little creep. Bloody good riddance as he joins Thatcher in the pits of Hell!
Does anyone know if he ever got round to see the daughter he fathered ?
No - see what I put fpt
I specifically did not criticise him for leaving his wife. If you have an affair with a married man with children, you do so at your own risk.
But I can see no reason for a Mary Bell order which had the effect that his child could not even appear in school photographs. Imagine that: not being allowed to have any record of your existence as a child and your school achievements because your father does not want to know of your existence and does not want anyone else to know of it either.
It speaks of someone with money and access to legal advice using that power to crush an innocent child and her mother, a woman with whom he had been having an affair for a number of years, so not some one-off drunken fling.
There are dignified ways of dealing with one's obligations - and he did have a moral obligation to the child he fathered - even when there are conflicts between your wife and family and your "love child". I don't think seeking an order normally used for child criminals in such circumstances is either dignified or moral.
It's an indictment of the legal system that he was able to do that.
Indeed. Then encouraging Apple to move production back to the US has the benefit of encouraging the local component supply businesses. It's even possible - shock, horror - that the the Chinese and others might open factories in the US as well.
But that's not a four year problem to solve. What's the lead time on a cutting edge chip fabrication plant? Four years, minimum I'd reckon for a green field. Plus you'd have to persuade Global Foundry or TSMC or UMC or SMIC to build a plant in the US, which would require state level agreements, and probably a whole bunch of subsidies.
If Donald Trump were to go down this route, you'd have to reckon Google would be the principle beneficiaries, as raising the cost of iPhones relative to Android devices would play entirely into its hands.
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I'm not a Putinista but I can only think it's the Tories starving the corporation of cash that has tempted threm to put out such a poorly researched piece of work. It was pretty indistinguishable from 'ITV's Dispatches
What was poorly researched about it?
Did you watch it? "Someone told us though he didn't give us any evidence that Putin owns........" wouldn't pass muster on 'Loose Women'
Oddly, many Labour people seem to think "someone told me it happened, and they had a photo they couldn't let me see" was enough reason to believe the story about Cameron and the pig ...
OT. Does anyone know if John Leech ex MP for Withington was one of only two Lib Dem MP's who voted against the coalition agreement (the other being Charles Kennedy)? I can't find it in wikipedia....
That's a famous Tommy Dochertyism "To answer that I'd have to have christal balls" together with other classics like his solution to young boys causing trouble at football matches "I believe they need a dose of capital punishment"
Indeed. Then encouraging Apple to move production back to the US has the benefit of encouraging the local component supply businesses. It's even possible - shock, horror - that the the Chinese and others might open factories in the US as well.
But that's not a four year problem to solve. What's the lead time on a cutting edge chip fabrication plant? Four years, minimum I'd reckon for a green field. Plus you'd have to persuade Global Foundry or TSMC or UMC or SMIC to build a plant in the US, which would require state level agreements, and probably a whole bunch of subsidies.
If Donald Trump were to go down this route, you'd have to reckon Google would be the principle beneficiaries, as raising the cost of iPhones relative to Android devices would play entirely into its hands.
I totally agree. However, he might get some kind of fig-leaf. There was talk of FoxConn opening a factory in California a while back?
Indeed. Then encouraging Apple to move production back to the US has the benefit of encouraging the local component supply businesses. It's even possible - shock, horror - that the the Chinese and others might open factories in the US as well.
But that's not a four year problem to solve. What's the lead time on a cutting edge chip fabrication plant? Four years, minimum I'd reckon for a green field. Plus you'd have to persuade Global Foundry or TSMC or UMC or SMIC to build a plant in the US, which would require state level agreements, and probably a whole bunch of subsidies.
If Donald Trump were to go down this route, you'd have to reckon Google would be the principle beneficiaries, as raising the cost of iPhones relative to Android devices would play entirely into its hands.
True enough on some of those, although there are already some plants for some of these sorts of components in the US.
But I'm not sure a slight increase in price would hurt Apple too much. People already pay a massive premium for Apple products, hence their vast profits. Increasing the cost slightly might even give them more cachet amongst the feeble-minded idiots who buy Apple products.
Indeed. Then encouraging Apple to move production back to the US has the benefit of encouraging the local component supply businesses. It's even possible - shock, horror - that the the Chinese and others might open factories in the US as well.
But that's not a four year problem to solve. What's the lead time on a cutting edge chip fabrication plant? Four years, minimum I'd reckon for a green field. Plus you'd have to persuade Global Foundry or TSMC or UMC or SMIC to build a plant in the US, which would require state level agreements, and probably a whole bunch of subsidies.
If Donald Trump were to go down this route, you'd have to reckon Google would be the principle beneficiaries, as raising the cost of iPhones relative to Android devices would play entirely into its hands.
I totally agree. However, he might get some kind of fig-leaf. There was talk of FoxConn opening a factory in California a while back?
Yes; just as with Mexico paying for the wall, there is no doubt some "token" that can be achieved.
The sort of politician that makes politics an acceptable profession.'
A smarmy odious little creep. Bloody good riddance as he joins Thatcher in the pits of Hell!
Does anyone know if he ever got round to see the daughter he fathered ?
No - see what I put fpt
I specifically did not criticise him for leaving his wife. If you have an affair with a married man with children, you do so at your own risk.
But I can see no reason for a Mary Bell order which had the effect that his child could not even appear in school photographs. Imagine that: not being allowed to have any record of your existence as a child and your school achievements because your father does not want to know of your existence and does not want anyone else to know of it either.
It speaks of someone with money and access to legal advice using that power to crush an innocent child and her mother, a woman with whom he had been having an affair for a number of years, so not some one-off drunken fling.
There are dignified ways of dealing with one's obligations - and he did have a moral obligation to the child he fathered - even when there are conflicts between your wife and family and your "love child". I don't think seeking an order normally used for child criminals in such circumstances is either dignified or moral.
It's an indictment of the legal system that he was able to do that.
Indeed it is. Sara Keays agreed to the injunction because she did not know any better and had other things to deal with - not least a child who had some severe disabilities - and did not get appropriate legal advice. But ultimately, he made the decision to do this. It was IMO unnecessary and spiteful. He made the decision to stay with his wife - which is understandable and right (in many people's eyes). And he may have felt that a clean break with his mistress was best and that not getting involved in the child's life was a part of that. Hard for outsiders to judge. But why do this? Why try to erase a child from the record in such a way?
It feels like the act of a weak man, somehow. A stronger man would have been able to cope with his daughter appearing in a school photo or of there being a report in a local paper about her winning a Brownie badge or whatever.
Anyway, he was a flawed politician (one of the lawyers working on the electricity privatisation bill when Parkinson was Energy Secretary described him as one of the thickest people he had ever met) and a flawed human being, like others.
E.g., there is no chance he would actually build a wall versus Mexico And there is little chance he would actually bar Muslim tourists, cleaners, academics, etc He has simply worked out that the route to power for a moderate Republican is through the id
...
....
We shall see. He can definitely find a way to squeeze Mexico, it's within his powers as president regarding foreign affairs.
Apple is a private company though, it will require a lot of cunning, but I suspect that he will mount an all out publicity campaign on Apple so at least to make it's stock tumble, like what he did to Macy's. Their stock halved in value since Trump declared war on it in July.
Of course he might find other ways too, Apple is dependant on bond sales since they can't get hold on their cash, since Ichan will be his treasury secretary he'll know all the tricks to bring down a company financially.
But of course all this is speculation at this point.
In a battle between Apple and Trump, Apple would win. They are far too popular with people in general (especially the chattering classes) and the media.
Also, brining Apple even partially down might cause more damage to the US economy than the benefit of the factories would bring.
They don't generate any domestic value, they don't pay taxes, they only have 80 thousand employed in the US. It will cripple the chinese economy and Apple bondholders though.
It will be a relative test of how much a company that bases it's entire production out of a country, pays no taxes and has few employed, can affect a country's economy if something happens to it.
It wouldn't cripple Apple bond holders; Apple has far more cash (albeit abroad) than it has debt.
But they can't access that cash for tax reasons, that's why they issue bonds to fund themselves.
They would repatriate cash to repay bond holders rather than go bust.
This whole argument is absurd. From what I read Trump would build a wall and make the Mexicans pay for it?? Trump would save the American economy by closing Apple down? Does he realise the size of the Chinese market and exports to it.? 8% of all American exports go to China - thats twice that to Japan. I think it is the 3rd largest. Laughably considering the great wall of Mexico - that county takes 14% of US exports. BTW What has Trump got against the Canadians?
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I'm not a Putinista but I can only think it's the Tories starving the corporation of cash that has tempted threm to put out such a poorly researched piece of work. It was pretty indistinguishable from 'ITV's Dispatches
What was poorly researched about it?
Did you watch it? "Someone told us though he didn't give us any evidence that Putin owns........" wouldn't pass muster on 'Loose Women'
Yet you were pant wettingly excited about pig gate.
It's an indictment of the legal system that he was able to do that.
Indeed it is. Sara Keays agreed to the injunction because she did not know any better and had other things to deal with - not least a child who had some severe disabilities - and did not get appropriate legal advice. But ultimately, he made the decision to do this. It was IMO unnecessary and spiteful. He made the decision to stay with his wife - which is understandable and right (in many people's eyes). And he may have felt that a clean break with his mistress was best and that not getting involved in the child's life was a part of that. Hard for outsiders to judge. But why do this? Why try to erase a child from the record in such a way?
It feels like the act of a weak man, somehow. A stronger man would have been able to cope with his daughter appearing in a school photo or of there being a report in a local paper about her winning a Brownie badge or whatever.
Anyway, he was a flawed politician (one of the lawyers working on the electricity privatisation bill when Parkinson was Energy Secretary described him as one of the thickest people he had ever met) and a flawed human being, like others.
I find it disturbing that something like this can happen even though we have a very well-developed body of Family Law, something we, collectively, take very seriously. We have very clever, well-intentioned people working in that field.
Not being naive, I understand that he was smart, rich and had the best advice; Sara Keays wasn't. But it brings the system into disrepute if it can be misused like that.
I think that in calling him "weak" and "flawed" you are being generous. One should be generous when speaking of the dead but let's not beat about the bush. A decent human being would have done everything he could to support his child.
The sort of politician that makes politics an acceptable profession.'
A smarmy odious little creep. Bloody good riddance as he joins Thatcher in the pits of Hell!
Does anyone know if he ever got round to see the daughter he fathered ?
No - see what I put fpt
I specifically did not criticise him for not leaving his wife. If you have an affair with a married man with children, you do so at your own risk.
But I can see no reason for a Mary Bell order which had the effect that his child could not even appear in school photographs. Imagine that: not being allowed to have any record of your existence as a child and your school achievements because your father does not want to know of your existence and does not want anyone else to know of it either.
It speaks of someone with money and access to legal advice using that power to crush an innocent child and her mother, a woman with whom he had been having an affair for a number of years, so not some one-off drunken fling.
There are dignified ways of dealing with one's obligations - and he did have a moral obligation to the child he fathered - even when there are conflicts between your wife and family and your "love child". I don't think seeking an order normally used for child criminals in such circumstances is either dignified or moral.
Something which reflects very poorly on him.
In my professional life, I've often seen people treat their own illegitimate children very badly.
It's an indictment of the legal system that he was able to do that.
Indeed it is. Sara Keays agreed to the injunction because she did not know any better and had other things to deal with - not least a child who had some severe disabilities - and did not get appropriate legal advice. But ultimately, he made the decision to do this. It was IMO unnecessary and spiteful. He made the decision to stay with his wife - which is understandable and right (in many people's eyes). And he may have felt that a clean break with his mistress was best and that not getting involved in the child's life was a part of that. Hard for outsiders to judge. But why do this? Why try to erase a child from the record in such a way?
It feels like the act of a weak man, somehow. A stronger man would have been able to cope with his daughter appearing in a school photo or of there being a report in a local paper about her winning a Brownie badge or whatever.
Anyway, he was a flawed politician (one of the lawyers working on the electricity privatisation bill when Parkinson was Energy Secretary described him as one of the thickest people he had ever met) and a flawed human being, like others.
That is not the way I remember the story at the time. The story at the time was that it was supposed to be a protection for the child to prevent the media from harassing the girl and her mother by constantly running stories about her. Maybe some of this was convenient although it seemed to do Parkinson himself no favours at all.
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
The Russian State could acquire polonium at no cost to any individual or state organisation. The perpetrators knew that the substance used would not be an expected one but was uncovered by British scientists. "Fort Russ" seems to be a lackey of the Russian State.
@hugorifkind: George Osborne in a lab coat, now? Hi-vis and hard hats are so 2 months ago. He'll be a deep sea diver by 2020. He's like Mr fucking Benn.
If Donald Trump wins in Iowa, he will be anointed the hair apparent.
You should be able to do better than that !
No, I really am that low standard.
I still think Trump is hair today; gone tommorow!
"They"
'They' wrote off the Tories 'They' wrote off Corbyn 'They' wrote off Trump. 'They' wrote off Leicester xD
I've been suggesting that Trump is the Leicester of the presidential campaign. Or perhaps Trump is the Leicester. Either way, both are lasting a lot longer than many expected and both could yet go all the way.
I think Trump could easily go all the way, and I'd reckon he'd definitely beat Sanders in a head-to-head, and probably beat Hillary. I also think he'd be a pretty good President.
What I do doubt is the sincerity of all his policy statements. Either he's been lying his entire life up until the point he decided to run for President, or he had a sudden change of heart about October last year, or he's actually a pretty liberal pragmatist with a flair for publicity.
My money is on the last option.
I don't think his backers care.
What those opposed to Trump totally fail to understand is that it's precisely the attacks on him that increase his support, which then further even more outlandish statements by him and ever more desperate attacks by them.
Such is the contempt in which the average American voter holds the American political establishment, they're willing to do anything to almost anything that aggravates them. Even if it involves cutting off their nose to spite their face.
The sort of politician that makes politics an acceptable profession.'
A smarmy odious little creep. Bloody good riddance as he joins Thatcher in the pits of Hell!
Does anyone know if he ever got round to see the daughter he fathered ?
It's an indictment of the legal system that he was able to do that.
Indeed it is. Sara Keays agreed to the injunction because she did not know any better and had other things to deal with - not least a child who had some severe disabilities - and did not get appropriate legal advice. But ultimately, he made the decision to do this. It was IMO unnecessary and spiteful. He made the decision to stay with his wife - which is understandable and right (in many people's eyes). And he may have felt that a clean break with his mistress was best and that not getting involved in the child's life was a part of that. Hard for outsiders to judge. But why do this? Why try to erase a child from the record in such a way?
It feels like the act of a weak man, somehow. A stronger man would have been able to cope with his daughter appearing in a school photo or of there being a report in a local paper about her winning a Brownie badge or whatever.
Anyway, he was a flawed politician (one of the lawyers working on the electricity privatisation bill when Parkinson was Energy Secretary described him as one of the thickest people he had ever met) and a flawed human being, like others.
There's a lot here we'll never know.
From reading Charles Moore's biography of Thatcher (volume 2) I understand Sara Keays was under the impression that Parkinson would leave his wife for her, and was keen to have more children with her.
When he reneged, she became incandescent and vindictive (not unlike Vicky Pryce) and determined to bring his political career down.
Personally, I think they both showed poor judgement and acted beneath themselves.
"This reporter is already on record pledging to eat a bag of rusty nails if the real estate tycoon with the high hair manages to snag the GOP nomination, much less takes down likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton next fall."
"He's solidified his position in Iowa" "Scott Walker is where he wants to be right now" "Marco Rubio has a lot of room to grow" "Bush has bad numbers" (the only thing consistent)
Lol Jeb Bush has hardly moved
Not exactly the mortgage but I've laid £54 on Bush at 10/1, which cost me just shy of £500, which is all I can afford and all I can afford to lose.
I'm viewing it as a form of instant ISA. Hopefully, pretty instant tax-free winnings!
Trump would be a lousy president. Its pretty clear he knows nowt about foreign policy and is prone to rash judgments with a huge ego to boot. That is dangerous in a dangerous world. On top of that he clearly has bigoted views about a third of his country's citizens.
It's an indictment of the legal system that he was able to do that.
Indeed it is. Sara Keays agreed to the injunction because she did not know any better and had other things to deal with - not least a child who had some severe disabilities - and did not get appropriate legal advice. But ultimately, he made the decision to do this. It was IMO unnecessary and spiteful. He made the decision to stay with his wife - which is understandable and right (in many people's eyes). And he may have felt that a clean break with his mistress was best and that not getting involved in the child's life was a part of that. Hard for outsiders to judge. But why do this? Why try to erase a child from the record in such a way?
It feels like the act of a weak man, somehow. A stronger man would have been able to cope with his daughter appearing in a school photo or of there being a report in a local paper about her winning a Brownie badge or whatever.
Anyway, he was a flawed politician (one of the lawyers working on the electricity privatisation bill when Parkinson was Energy Secretary described him as one of the thickest people he had ever met) and a flawed human being, like others.
That is not the way I remember the story at the time. The story at the time was that it was supposed to be a protection for the child to prevent the media from harassing the girl and her mother by constantly running stories about her. Maybe some of this was convenient although it seemed to do Parkinson himself no favours at all.
That is how it was presented. And the press were harassing her while she was pregnant, causing her distress and her family anger. But an order to stop the press doing that is one thing and a "Mary Bell" order quite another. Parkinson would have been advised as to what the difference was. That he chose this option speaks badly of him. It is a very Victorian way of dealing with an illegitimate child - hiding the child away as if she were a huge embarrassment, never to be spoken of again.
He chose not to leave his wife and marry his mistress - assuming that was ever on the cards. But do the decent thing nonetheless - pay for your child without quibbling and let mother and child get on with their lives, without having this ludicrously insulting "Mark of Cain" type order hanging over both of them.
You see, instinctively I'm a Labour supporter in the true sense of the movement. I believe in social justice above mostly all else politically.
But Kezia Dugdale couldn't inspire me to jump out a burning building and I'd be suspicious Jeremy Corbyn and his cohorts had lit the match in the first place. My local constituency Labour party is being probed by its own bosses over bullying claims linked to former MPs. It's all messy and ugly and distinctly unappealing.
But then there's Pete Wishart.
...
My problem is I know a Conservative candidate on the regional list.
But he's a Tory. Is a vote for him a vote for George Osborne?
Or in this age of Scottish politics - where the landscape has changed beyond all recognition - is it time to move on and vote with head not heart?
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
The Russian State could acquire polonium at no cost to any individual or state organisation. The perpetrators knew that the substance used would not be an expected one but was uncovered by British scientists. "Fort Russ" seems to be a lackey of the Russian State.
Indeed Polonium is extremely traceable. Its almost as if Putin was wanting to send out a message to his enemies that a terrible fate awaits them. Icelicks to the neck are so old school.
Trump would be a lousy president. Its pretty clear he knows nowt about foreign policy and is prone to rash judgments with a huge ego to boot. That is dangerous in a dangerous world. On top of that he clearly has bigoted views about a third of his country's citizens.
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
The Russian State could acquire polonium at no cost to any individual or state organisation. The perpetrators knew that the substance used would not be an expected one but was uncovered by British scientists. "Fort Russ" seems to be a lackey of the Russian State.
Indeed Polonium is extremely traceable. Its almost as if Putin was wanting to send out a message to his enemies that a terrible fate awaits them. Icelicks to the neck are so old school.
That's the point. surely. It was meant to be obvious who was responsible. Plus there's something gothic and stagy about it: horrible lingering death, body interred in a lead casket.
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
The Russian State could acquire polonium at no cost to any individual or state organisation. The perpetrators knew that the substance used would not be an expected one but was uncovered by British scientists. "Fort Russ" seems to be a lackey of the Russian State.
Indeed Polonium is extremely traceable. Its almost as if Putin was wanting to send out a message to his enemies that a terrible fate awaits them. Icelicks to the neck are so old school.
If it was something untraceable, it would be clear evidence it wasn't Putin. And if it was something traceable, it would clear evidence that someone else was trying to frame Putin, and it wasn't Putin.
It's an indictment of the legal system that he was able to do that.
That is not the way I remember the story at the time. The story at the time was that it was supposed to be a protection for the child to prevent the media from harassing the girl and her mother by constantly running stories about her. Maybe some of this was convenient although it seemed to do Parkinson himself no favours at all.
That is how it was presented. And the press were harassing her while she was pregnant, causing her distress and her family anger. But an order to stop the press doing that is one thing and a "Mary Bell" order quite another. Parkinson would have been advised as to what the difference was. That he chose this option speaks badly of him. It is a very Victorian way of dealing with an illegitimate child - hiding the child away as if she were a huge embarrassment, never to be spoken of again.
He chose not to leave his wife and marry his mistress - assuming that was ever on the cards. But do the decent thing nonetheless - pay for your child without quibbling and let mother and child get on with their lives, without having this ludicrously insulting "Mark of Cain" type order hanging over both of them.
I think that there was a genuine concern that it was going to do the child no good at all to have her paternity in the press from time to time with stories about her and the concerns increased when it became apparent that she had disabilities. Flora was protected from that sort of intervention and disruption throughout her childhood. Who is to say that was not the best for her?
The fights in later years seemed to be whether the mother/mistress could make money out of selling her story. I don't recall this involving the child as such. I am not sure why you take such a dim view of this. I also am not aware that Parkinson "quibbled" about paying for his child.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Because the other Republican candidates, like some of the posters on this site, assumed Trump would rapidly fade
You can add me to the list - I never thought for a minute he would last this long.
He spent the weekend staying at a Holiday Inn Express in Iowa doing retail politics - he really wants this now, it's not an ego trip any more (not entirely anyway).
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The sort of politician that makes politics an acceptable profession.'
A smarmy odious little creep. Bloody good riddance as he joins Thatcher in the pits of Hell!
Does anyone know if he ever got round to see the daughter he fathered ?
No - see what I put fpt
I specifically did not criticise him for not leaving his wife. If you have an affair with a married man with children, you do so at your own risk.
But I can see no reason for a Mary Bell order which had the effect that his child could not even appear in school photographs. Imagine that: not being allowed to have any record of your existence as a child and your school achievements because your father does not want to know of your existence and does not want anyone else to know of it either.
It speaks of someone with money and access to legal advice using that power to crush an innocent child and her mother, a woman with whom he had been having an affair for a number of years, so not some one-off drunken fling.
There are dignified ways of dealing with one's obligations - and he did have a moral obligation to the child he fathered - even when there are conflicts between your wife and family and your "love child". I don't think seeking an order normally used for child criminals in such circumstances is either dignified or moral.
Were you replying to me ? I didn't ask all those questions. But your reply is illuminating nonetheless.
Speaking ill of the dead is not a good thing. But what I read above, this guy was a son of a bitch. Shame on English law even to allow that.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
It's the last of those that's the real crime to the mainstream American establishment.
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Is freedom of movement and passport free travel the same thing ? An EU citizen will still have the right to travel to another EU country but will have to carry his/her passport. Is there anything else in the story ?
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Because the other Republican candidates, like some of the posters on this site, assumed Trump would rapidly fade
I reckon its cos no-one wanted to be the assassin, as they all wanted to scoop up Trump's support after someone else knifed him.
That's probably partly it. But I think it's also that they assume Trump voters are so idiosyncratic that there's no particular point in other candidates trying to target them.
For example, the "establishment candidates" (Rubio, Bush, Christie, kasich) have in recent weeks mainly been attacking eachother rather than attacking Trump, because they're all fishing in the same pool of voters and know that likely only one of them will still be a viable candidate after New Hampshire.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
CNN and Fox News - and MsNBC on steroids - have all run this stuff for ages. There's nothing secret about Trump's political evolution. The question remains about just how 'conservative' he is at this point. Hence the National Review issue.
I doubt the magazine or the ad will have any effect. If you're for Trump you're all in. Ditto most Clinton base supporters.
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Is freedom of movement and passport free travel the same thing ? An EU citizen will still have the right to travel to another EU country but will have to carry his/her passport. Is there anything else in the story ?
Schengen allows free movement of non EU citizens once they have been allowed in. A common visa policy. Under normal circumstances refugees and asylum seekers did not qualify. In order to check for non EU citizens then everyone else will have to be checked, but that does not prevent them travelling any more than it does for UK citizens who are not part of Schengen.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
CNN and Fox News - and MsNBC on steroids - have all run this stuff for ages. There's nothing secret about Trump's political evolution. The question remains about just how 'conservative' he is at this point. Hence the National Review issue.
I doubt the magazine or the ad will have any effect. If you're for Trump you're all in. Ditto most Clinton supporters.
My impression of grassroots Republicans is that they will forgive anything except "not being a real conservative". Is this angle not quite dangerous for Trump?
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
It does rather make our rather tame PPBs look rather quaint.
Though if Trump is really a pro-Obamacare, pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-peace with Iran candidate then I may warm to him. I guess that I am not the target audience though!
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
Yes the BBC and most of the media, like the loons on here, have become a parody of themselves to such an extent that one need just sit back and laugh.
Very good article, not unlike this one. More truth than in the official inquiry. http://www.sras.org/news2.php?m=821 A very clear case of a nuclear smuggling operation gone wrong, that implicated MI6 and their links to shady characters like Berezovsky and Litvinenko. Of course the idea that Lugovoi, who was a very good bodyguard and as such knows how an assassination would work, needed three attempts to get his man, would leave a clear trail for investigators, utilising a method that leaves the victim talking for three weeks and, last but not least, that Lugovoi brought his wife and young children with him on the assassination mission exposing them to a notably unstable and deadly materiel is beyond absurd.
The concept is hilarious but alas the potential for acceptance of the image as real is worrisome.
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
Yes the BBC and most of the media, like the loons on here, have become a parody of themselves to such an extent that one need just sit back and laugh.
Very good article, not unlike this one. More truth than in the official inquiry. http://www.sras.org/news2.php?m=821 A very clear case of a nuclear smuggling operation gone wrong, that implicated MI6 and their links to shady characters like Berezovsky and Litvinenko. Of course the idea that Lugovoi, who was a very good bodyguard and as such knows how an assassination would work, needed three attempts to get his man, would leave a clear trail for investigators, utilising a method that leaves the victim talking for three weeks and, last but not least, that Lugovoi brought his wife and young children with him on the assassination mission exposing them to a notably unstable and deadly materiel is beyond absurd.
The concept is hilarious but alas the potential for acceptance of the image as real is worrisome.
Trump and Sanders gaining momentum, Rubio down to 5th. Seems the so called "establishment" voters are coalescing behind Trump and Kasich.
If there are any other polls from Iowa or N.H. tonight I'll post them, if not goodnight.
The interesting one there is Kasich, who does seem to have built momentum this last fortnight. Can he make a challenge? It seems extraordinary to me that anyone who was associated with Lehmann Bros at a senior level (taking home a $400k bonus in 2008!) could have a high-level political career but he's won state office since, so what do I know?
Still, you'd think it'd be a drag on his popularity?
I was responding to someone (cannot remember who) on an earlier thread who described Parkinson as some sort of ideal politician and I just wanted to correct the record a little.
There are ways of protecting someone from harassment but surely that should be for the child's mother to do. Whereas this was imposed by Parkinson, apparently later against the mother's wishes and with bizarre consequences - such as the child not being allowed to appear in a school photo. Nothing to do with press harassment, for heaven's sake. When this was later pointed out, Parkinson refused, I understand, to agree to any variation.
This is the only case where a "Mary Bell" order has been granted where the child was not a ward of court and/or the true identity was being hidden.
Put yourself in the mother's position: foolishly perhaps she embarks on a long-standing affair with a married man. Maybe he makes promises. Maybe she hopes he will leave his wife. Who know? She falls pregnant. He does not stay with her. But still she has a child and her family. Then she learns that the child has disabilities: a difficult enough situation when there are two of you, let alone on your own. And your chances perhaps of finding another life partner are much diminished, you may think. But you love your child and want the best for her and hang on to every achievement, to every improvement, to every milestone, no matter what and like any mother to the records of these steps: first steps, first day in school, the swimming prize, whatever. And the father is not there in any sense but is still interfering in some way because there is a court order telling you how your child's life can be recorded - or not. And how very dare he involve himself when he's not bloody there - and made his choice - and how very dare he claim that it's for the child's benefit when it's also for him because there's no chance of any press articles reminding him of how he betrayed two women and is not around for a third. And why should you and your child be airbrushed in such a way when for years you were in his life and bed and it was an open secret in Westminster that you and he were lovers.
Of course she was a bloody fool. But she's paying for it and how. Not the same as getting your lawyer to organise a bank transfer.
Parkinson is not the first politician to sire a child outside marriage. And yet others manage to keep their children out of the public eye without resorting to such measures.
Though if Trump is really a pro-Obamacare, pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-peace with Iran candidate then I may warm to him. I guess that I am not the target audience though!
Indeed. I think it's possible that a President Trump would turn out to be quite good from a lefty viewpoint, whereas I'm sure Cruz would not. Trump is a complete shot in the dark.
Trump and Sanders gaining momentum, Rubio down to 5th. Seems the so called "establishment" voters are coalescing behind Trump and Kasich.
If there are any other polls from Iowa or N.H. tonight I'll post them, if not goodnight.
The interesting one there is Kasich, who does seem to have built momentum this last fortnight. Can he make a challenge? It seems extraordinary to me that anyone who was associated with Lehmann Bros at a senior level (taking home a $400k bonus in 2008!) could have a high-level political career but he's won state office since, so what do I know?
Still, you'd think it'd be a drag on his popularity?
All the GOP candidates have some pretty big negatives though No ?
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
It does rather make our rather tame PPBs look rather quaint.
Though if Trump is really a pro-Obamacare, pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-peace with Iran candidate then I may warm to him. I guess that I am not the target audience though!
Trump is a very successful candidate because he appeals to a lot of different demographics, and because people can project on to him. Furthermore, recent Republicans - by spending their time pandering to the base (guns, gods, etc.) - have alienated the great mass of people out there who are not politically engaged.
The average voter is worrying about feeding their family, and ensuring their kids have education, healthcare and jobs - not about abortion.
The Democrats - despite a motley coalition - got that, and that is why of the last six Presidential elections, five of them saw a Democrat get most votes.
Trump also gets that. And gets it at a time where the Democrats are monumentally weak. He also has a gift for publicity that has enable him to steal the limelight from traditional Republicans.
He would be a good pragmatic President, I suspect. But - like Obama - he will not achieve one tenth of what his supporters expect from him.
Trump and Sanders gaining momentum, Rubio down to 5th. Seems the so called "establishment" voters are coalescing behind Trump and Kasich.
If there are any other polls from Iowa or N.H. tonight I'll post them, if not goodnight.
The interesting one there is Kasich, who does seem to have built momentum this last fortnight. Can he make a challenge? It seems extraordinary to me that anyone who was associated with Lehmann Bros at a senior level (taking home a $400k bonus in 2008!) could have a high-level political career but he's won state office since, so what do I know?
Still, you'd think it'd be a drag on his popularity?
All the GOP candidates have some pretty big negatives though No ?
Yes, but that attack ad writes itself. I was watching Despicable Me yesterday; the Bank of Evil has on its plaque "(formerly Lehmann Bros)". Yes, it's a while ago now but it's not going to help. It's one thing being a Washington insider - politicians running for political jobs is par for the course but still ...
That said, while he looks like another bubble candidate whose popularity will rise under the radar then fade in the spotlight, he might just be timing his surge right.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
CNN and Fox News - and MsNBC on steroids - have all run this stuff for ages. There's nothing secret about Trump's political evolution. The question remains about just how 'conservative' he is at this point. Hence the National Review issue.
I doubt the magazine or the ad will have any effect. If you're for Trump you're all in. Ditto most Clinton supporters.
My impression of grassroots Republicans is that they will forgive anything except "not being a real conservative". Is this angle not quite dangerous for Trump?
It depends on how you look at it - do you want a 'real conservative' or do you want a winner. At present Trump looks like a winner. Clinton is hemorrhaging except her base.
But nobody has cast a vote yet and all we have are voodoo polls. We will start to find out next week.
"This reporter is already on record pledging to eat a bag of rusty nails if the real estate tycoon with the high hair manages to snag the GOP nomination, much less takes down likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton next fall."
"He's solidified his position in Iowa" "Scott Walker is where he wants to be right now" "Marco Rubio has a lot of room to grow" "Bush has bad numbers" (the only thing consistent)
Lol Jeb Bush has hardly moved
Not exactly the mortgage but I've laid £54 on Bush at 10/1, which cost me just shy of £500, which is all I can afford and all I can afford to lose.
I'm viewing it as a form of instant ISA. Hopefully, pretty instant tax-free winnings!
I suppose the simple way of viewing this is that you will probably be right ten times out of eleven (if the odds are broadly correct). It's therefore very likely that the bet will prove a winner. I sincerely hope so for your sake.
"This reporter is already on record pledging to eat a bag of rusty nails if the real estate tycoon with the high hair manages to snag the GOP nomination, much less takes down likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton next fall."
"He's solidified his position in Iowa" "Scott Walker is where he wants to be right now" "Marco Rubio has a lot of room to grow" "Bush has bad numbers" (the only thing consistent)
Lol Jeb Bush has hardly moved
Not exactly the mortgage but I've laid £54 on Bush at 10/1, which cost me just shy of £500, which is all I can afford and all I can afford to lose.
I'm viewing it as a form of instant ISA. Hopefully, pretty instant tax-free winnings!
I suppose the simple way of viewing this is that you will probably be right ten times out of eleven (if the odds are broadly correct). It's therefore very likely that the bet will prove a winner. I sincerely hope so for your sake.
Lol the odds aren't correct.
At all.
Ben Carson is sitting at around 200-1. Jeb Bush is behind him still.
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The sort of politician that makes politics an acceptable profession.'
A smarmy odious little creep. Bloody good riddance as he joins Thatcher in the pits of Hell!
Does anyone know if he ever got round to see the daughter he fathered ?
No - see what I put fpt
I specifically did not criticise him for not leaving his wife. If you have an affair with a married man with children, you do so at your own risk.
But I can see no reason for a Mary Bell order which had the effect that his child could not even appear in school photographs. Imagine that: not being allowed to have any record of your existence as a child and your school achievements because your father does not want to know of your existence and does not want anyone else to know of it either.
It speaks of someone with money and access to legal advice using that power to crush an innocent child and her mother, a woman with whom he had been having an affair for a number of years, so not some one-off drunken fling.
There are dignified ways of dealing with one's obligations - and he did have a moral obligation to the child he fathered - even when there are conflicts between your wife and family and your "love child". I don't think seeking an order normally used for child criminals in such circumstances is either dignified or moral.
Were you replying to me ? I didn't ask all those questions. But your reply is illuminating nonetheless.
Speaking ill of the dead is not a good thing. But what I read above, this guy was a son of a bitch. Shame on English law even to allow that.
Since when has adultery been some sort of limited preserve? Robin Cooks antics come to mind. IIRC he was installing his mistress as his diary secretary when found out. And when he was found out he promptly left his wife and children on the ultimatum of Campbell - an unelected public official. Thats before we get to John Prescott.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
CNN and Fox News - and MsNBC on steroids - have all run this stuff for ages. There's nothing secret about Trump's political evolution. The question remains about just how 'conservative' he is at this point. Hence the National Review issue.
I doubt the magazine or the ad will have any effect. If you're for Trump you're all in. Ditto most Clinton supporters.
My impression of grassroots Republicans is that they will forgive anything except "not being a real conservative". Is this angle not quite dangerous for Trump?
It depends on how you look at it - do you want a 'real conservative' or do you want a winner. At present Trump looks like a winner. Clinton is hemorrhaging except her base.
But nobody has cast a vote yet and all we have are voodoo polls. We will start to find out next week.
I only bet in cash these days and I am sitting on my money until Heidi has made her views known.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
Remind me - which Party did George Wallace belong to? Remind me - which Party has had a long association with the KKK? Go ahead make my day.
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
Comments
Never had you down as a friend of Vlad. Is he a drinking chum in the South of France?
This beats the cake:
July 13th
http://spectator.org/articles/63423/six-reasons-why-scott-walker-will-be-elected-president
or
Vision of (......)
But I'm saving some for the Iowa caucus results.
I leave you with this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/01/scott-walker-2016_n_6589544.html
"Scott Walker On 2016: 'I Wouldn't Bet Against Me'"
Goodnight.
What I do doubt is the sincerity of all his policy statements. Either he's been lying his entire life up until the point he decided to run for President, or he had a sudden change of heart about October last year, or he's actually a pretty liberal pragmatist with a flair for publicity.
My money is on the last option.
I specifically did not criticise him for not leaving his wife. If you have an affair with a married man with children, you do so at your own risk.
But I can see no reason for a Mary Bell order which had the effect that his child could not even appear in school photographs. Imagine that: not being allowed to have any record of your existence as a child and your school achievements because your father does not want to know of your existence and does not want anyone else to know of it either.
It speaks of someone with money and access to legal advice using that power to crush an innocent child and her mother, a woman with whom he had been having an affair for a number of years, so not some one-off drunken fling.
There are dignified ways of dealing with one's obligations - and he did have a moral obligation to the child he fathered - even when there are conflicts between your wife and family and your "love child". I don't think seeking an order normally used for child criminals in such circumstances is either dignified or moral.
If Donald Trump were to go down this route, you'd have to reckon Google would be the principle beneficiaries, as raising the cost of iPhones relative to Android devices would play entirely into its hands.
More evidence the BBC is filled with Labourites.
But I'm not sure a slight increase in price would hurt Apple too much. People already pay a massive premium for Apple products, hence their vast profits. Increasing the cost slightly might even give them more cachet amongst the feeble-minded idiots who buy Apple products.
It feels like the act of a weak man, somehow. A stronger man would have been able to cope with his daughter appearing in a school photo or of there being a report in a local paper about her winning a Brownie badge or whatever.
Anyway, he was a flawed politician (one of the lawyers working on the electricity privatisation bill when Parkinson was Energy Secretary described him as one of the thickest people he had ever met) and a flawed human being, like others.
Trump would save the American economy by closing Apple down? Does he realise the size of the Chinese market and exports to it.? 8% of all American exports go to China - thats twice that to Japan. I think it is the 3rd largest. Laughably considering the great wall of Mexico - that county takes 14% of US exports. BTW What has Trump got against the Canadians?
How much trailer trash will all this employ?
I've been with them for the last 5 years.
http://fortruss.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/litvinenko-what-really-happened.html
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
Not being naive, I understand that he was smart, rich and had the best advice; Sara Keays wasn't. But it brings the system into disrepute if it can be misused like that.
I think that in calling him "weak" and "flawed" you are being generous. One should be generous when speaking of the dead but let's not beat about the bush. A decent human being would have done everything he could to support his child.
In my professional life, I've often seen people treat their own illegitimate children very badly.
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/691747627566768129
https://t.co/7YfWiWJ2NS https://t.co/An1RFbH8dO
Let's say Iowa goes the way of the RCP average:
Trump 34%
Cruz 27%
Rubio 12%
Carson 7%
Paul 4%
Bush 4%
Christie 3%
Huckabee 2%
Kasich 2%
Fiorina 1%
Santorum 1%
Who drops out?
Santorum and Fiorina, Huckabee maybe. Can't see anyone else.
What those opposed to Trump totally fail to understand is that it's precisely the attacks on him that increase his support, which then further even more outlandish statements by him and ever more desperate attacks by them.
Such is the contempt in which the average American voter holds the American political establishment, they're willing to do anything to almost anything that aggravates them. Even if it involves cutting off their nose to spite their face.
From reading Charles Moore's biography of Thatcher (volume 2) I understand Sara Keays was under the impression that Parkinson would leave his wife for her, and was keen to have more children with her.
When he reneged, she became incandescent and vindictive (not unlike Vicky Pryce) and determined to bring his political career down.
Personally, I think they both showed poor judgement and acted beneath themselves.
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
I'm viewing it as a form of instant ISA. Hopefully, pretty instant tax-free winnings!
He chose not to leave his wife and marry his mistress - assuming that was ever on the cards. But do the decent thing nonetheless - pay for your child without quibbling and let mother and child get on with their lives, without having this ludicrously insulting "Mark of Cain" type order hanging over both of them.
The fights in later years seemed to be whether the mother/mistress could make money out of selling her story. I don't recall this involving the child as such. I am not sure why you take such a dim view of this. I also am not aware that Parkinson "quibbled" about paying for his child.
I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
He spent the weekend staying at a Holiday Inn Express in Iowa doing retail politics - he really wants this now, it's not an ego trip any more (not entirely anyway).
Speaking ill of the dead is not a good thing. But what I read above, this guy was a son of a bitch. Shame on English law even to allow that.
Boston Herald, N.H.
Trump 33 +7
Cruz 14 +2
Kasich 12 +4
Bush 9 -2
Rubio 8 -4
Christie 7 -4
Fiorina 5 -1
Carson 4 -1
Paul 3 0
Sanders 55 +7
Hillary 39 -7
O'Malley 1 -1
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_politics/2016/01/clinton_losing_support_among_nh_dems_sanders_ahead_by_16
Trump and Sanders gaining momentum, Rubio down to 5th.
Seems the so called "establishment" voters are coalescing behind Trump and Kasich.
If there are any other polls from Iowa or N.H. tonight I'll post them, if not goodnight.
Amazing poll
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
For example, the "establishment candidates" (Rubio, Bush, Christie, kasich) have in recent weeks mainly been attacking eachother rather than attacking Trump, because they're all fishing in the same pool of voters and know that likely only one of them will still be a viable candidate after New Hampshire.
I doubt the magazine or the ad will have any effect. If you're for Trump you're all in. Ditto most Clinton base supporters.
Though if Trump is really a pro-Obamacare, pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-peace with Iran candidate then I may warm to him. I guess that I am not the target audience though!
Very good article, not unlike this one. More truth than in the official inquiry.
http://www.sras.org/news2.php?m=821
A very clear case of a nuclear smuggling operation gone wrong, that implicated MI6 and their links to shady characters like Berezovsky and Litvinenko. Of course the idea that Lugovoi, who was a very good bodyguard and as such knows how an assassination would work, needed three attempts to get his man, would leave a clear trail for investigators, utilising a method that leaves the victim talking for three weeks and, last but not least, that Lugovoi brought his wife and young children with him on the assassination mission exposing them to a notably unstable and deadly materiel is beyond absurd.
The concept is hilarious but alas the potential for acceptance of the image as real is worrisome.
That is totally ridiculous.
Still, you'd think it'd be a drag on his popularity?
There are ways of protecting someone from harassment but surely that should be for the child's mother to do. Whereas this was imposed by Parkinson, apparently later against the mother's wishes and with bizarre consequences - such as the child not being allowed to appear in a school photo. Nothing to do with press harassment, for heaven's sake. When this was later pointed out, Parkinson refused, I understand, to agree to any variation.
This is the only case where a "Mary Bell" order has been granted where the child was not a ward of court and/or the true identity was being hidden.
Put yourself in the mother's position: foolishly perhaps she embarks on a long-standing affair with a married man. Maybe he makes promises. Maybe she hopes he will leave his wife. Who know? She falls pregnant. He does not stay with her. But still she has a child and her family. Then she learns that the child has disabilities: a difficult enough situation when there are two of you, let alone on your own. And your chances perhaps of finding another life partner are much diminished, you may think. But you love your child and want the best for her and hang on to every achievement, to every improvement, to every milestone, no matter what and like any mother to the records of these steps: first steps, first day in school, the swimming prize, whatever. And the father is not there in any sense but is still interfering in some way because there is a court order telling you how your child's life can be recorded - or not. And how very dare he involve himself when he's not bloody there - and made his choice - and how very dare he claim that it's for the child's benefit when it's also for him because there's no chance of any press articles reminding him of how he betrayed two women and is not around for a third. And why should you and your child be airbrushed in such a way when for years you were in his life and bed and it was an open secret in Westminster that you and he were lovers.
Of course she was a bloody fool. But she's paying for it and how. Not the same as getting your lawyer to organise a bank transfer.
Parkinson is not the first politician to sire a child outside marriage. And yet others manage to keep their children out of the public eye without resorting to such measures.
That's all.
The average voter is worrying about feeding their family, and ensuring their kids have education, healthcare and jobs - not about abortion.
The Democrats - despite a motley coalition - got that, and that is why of the last six Presidential elections, five of them saw a Democrat get most votes.
Trump also gets that. And gets it at a time where the Democrats are monumentally weak. He also has a gift for publicity that has enable him to steal the limelight from traditional Republicans.
He would be a good pragmatic President, I suspect. But - like Obama - he will not achieve one tenth of what his supporters expect from him.
That said, while he looks like another bubble candidate whose popularity will rise under the radar then fade in the spotlight, he might just be timing his surge right.
But nobody has cast a vote yet and all we have are voodoo polls. We will start to find out next week.
I sincerely hope so for your sake.
At all.
Ben Carson is sitting at around 200-1. Jeb Bush is behind him still.
Thats before we get to John Prescott.
Remind me - which Party has had a long association with the KKK?
Go ahead make my day.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.