RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
is that Bercow now?

Ha ha, looks that way. If he thought the Tories would be sad to lose him, and Labour glad to welcome him, he really has lost the plot.

The Tories should be sad to lose him, but they're assuming for now they pay little to no price for losing people who're free market advocates, who're pro business, pro European, and are reasonably socially liberal. If nativism/populism starts to grind to halt they'll be proved wrong, if they can drag the country down a populist/nativist path, well, they'll also I fear be proved wrong, or at least to date no one has made a success of populism and moving towards autocracy, maybe they'll buck that trend.

Except he's a jumped up knob. IMO- you extrapolate my meaning too far I think. Though I'm shocked to discover he's an Arsenal fan.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Ha ha, looks that way. If he thought the Tories would be sad to lose him, and Labour glad to welcome him, he really has lost the plot.

The Tories should be sad to lose him, but they're assuming for now they pay little to no price for losing people who're free market advocates, who're pro business, pro European, and are reasonably socially liberal. If nativism/populism starts to grind to halt they'll be proved wrong, if they can drag the country down a populist/nativist path, well, they'll also I fear be proved wrong, or at least to date no one has made a success of populism and moving towards autocracy, maybe they'll buck that trend.

Except he's a jumped up knob. IMO- you extrapolate my meaning too far I think.

I like him, though in this I give him little thought, more it perhaps illustrates a wider picture, or maybe not as even throughly pissed off Tories may consider they have nowhere else to go.

He used to be a giant knob, he's actually calmed down an awful lot, though in calming down he's paid something of a political price as he's moved away from what got him the speaker's gig in the first place isolating the support he did have and he's never built a base of support anywhere else, at most for some he was a convenient enemy of my enemy, he never had any actual support for him out of Labour or the Lib Dems, it was just useful to poke the Tories with

No idea if the bullying stories are true, it wouldn't remotely surprise if he was a ranter, most of them are, but he's actually good value in person, even if a bit like Haskell he doesn't exactly mind the attention


Edit - And I had no idea he even liked football, if one hears him talk sport it's tennis, tennis or tennis

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
The Tories should be sad to lose him, but they're assuming for now they pay little to no price for losing people who're free market advocates, who're pro business, pro European, and are reasonably socially liberal. If nativism/populism starts to grind to halt they'll be proved wrong, if they can drag the country down a populist/nativist path, well, they'll also I fear be proved wrong, or at least to date no one has made a success of populism and moving towards autocracy, maybe they'll buck that trend.

Except he's a jumped up knob. IMO- you extrapolate my meaning too far I think.

I like him

I'm not surprised.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:And just on the Lib Dems getting over the line in the by-election in Chesham and Amersham I'm sort of pleased to see any sort of Lib Dem recovery, but again it's come where the the local candidate has somewhat ignored national policy.

Keir will no doubt be delighted this will trigger days of questions on whether he wants an election deal between the centre and centre-left parties, and indeed whether there's already one in place

Who? Oh, the leader of the opposition...

is that Bercow now?

I think the person leading the opposition to the government is Marcus Rashford, isn't it?

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Who? Oh, the leader of the opposition...

is that Bercow now?

I think the person leading the opposition to the government is Marcus Rashford, isn't it?

Puja

It's not an entirely unfair point that Rashford has garnered rather more attention than Starmer. Hard to know how much of that is the pandemic, and how much Starmer has the same political instinct as Gordon Brown when it comes to looking electable.

I don't think Labour know what they want to be and be able to pair that with reality.

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
is that Bercow now?

I think the person leading the opposition to the government is Marcus Rashford, isn't it?

Puja

It's not an entirely unfair point that Rashford has garnered rather more attention than Starmer. Hard to know how much of that is the pandemic, and how much Starmer has the same political instinct as Gordon Brown when it comes to looking electable.

I don't think Labour know what they want to be and be able to pair that with reality.

He's also garnered rather more success in reversing government policy. I say that as someone who thinks most of the "Oppose the government" stuff that people are shouting is nonsense which thinks that the Opposition actually has power to stop a government with a stonking majority.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
I think the person leading the opposition to the government is Marcus Rashford, isn't it?

Puja

It's not an entirely unfair point that Rashford has garnered rather more attention than Starmer. Hard to know how much of that is the pandemic, and how much Starmer has the same political instinct as Gordon Brown when it comes to looking electable.

I don't think Labour know what they want to be and be able to pair that with reality.

He's also garnered rather more success in reversing government policy. I say that as someone who thinks most of the "Oppose the government" stuff that people are shouting is nonsense which thinks that the Opposition actually has power to stop a government with a stonking majority.

The only power that one has to stop a government with a stonking majority is to harness public opprobrium when they're doing something maleficent, which Rashford has done admirably despite it not being his job.

I cannot imagine Starmer leading a popular campaign of any kind, let alone through charisma and harnessing the press. He's just kinda there.

Puja

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:Sterling work over the last year or so by Johnson and Patel to protect rapists from prosecution

https://victimscommissioner.org.uk/news ... f-justice/

I suspect they will claim they're not intentionally acting to protect rapists, which would lead one to conclude they merely don't give a shit

Unfortunately this is the pendulum swinging back after the false accusations of child abuse scandals various. However in fairness to the CPS, it’s hard to prosecute a case where there is little evidence , which there often isn’t in rape cases.

It is tough to make a case, but their solution of prosecuting less cases is a shitty answer. We weren't exactly prosecuting 50% before they took a massive step back from the problem. Whether it stems from child abuse accusations proving faulty I don't know, I wouldn't want to say that without some more info, the most I'd be willing to say is the CPS have been told they needed to raise the successful prosecution rate and they did that by refusing to even take forward tougher cases, which as so often happens when presented with a target is middle managers finding a way to meet a target that doesn't actually address a problem

If anyone enjoyed listening to PMQs earlier the piss artist known as Fat B was questioned by Starmer about the failure to act on the worryingly inactive stance taken across the criminal system when it comes to prosecuting rapes, and about the best responses from Fat B were it'd be good to have support from Labour, and that the vaccine rollout has been going well. About a year ago it wouldn't have been entirely unfair to refer to the Conservative leadership as pro rape, a year down the line, a year, and there's little need to be so polite

Stay home, protect the NHS, save lives. Not unreasonable words, up to and including not being able to say goodbye to dying friends and family.

Unless you're a corrupt cabinet official, in which case by all means give it the full Dominic Cummings, cheat on your wife and claim you can stay in your job because it's not like the PM can fire you for an affair.

Quite simply Boris and Hanock are not failing as members of cabinet, they're failing as humans, utter wastes of oxygen the pair of them

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/polit ... te-281381/

No black MPs chosen to speak in Commons racism debate
Thirty MPs are on the call sheet for an urgent question in Parliament this afternoon - but not one of them is black.
Not a single black MP has been chosen to speak in a House of Commons debate about online racist abuse in Parliament on Wednesday afternoon.
Thirty MPs are on the call sheet for an urgent question in Parliament this afternoon – including Labour’s Yvette Cooper, Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana.
But no black MPs have been selected to participate in the debate, which asks Priti Patel – the home secretary – to “make a statement on the prevalence of racist abuse on social media”.

ARTICLE CONTINUES...

I mean - what would black people know about the racism of white folk?

Which Tyler wrote:https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/polit ... te-281381/

No black MPs chosen to speak in Commons racism debate
Thirty MPs are on the call sheet for an urgent question in Parliament this afternoon - but not one of them is black.
Not a single black MP has been chosen to speak in a House of Commons debate about online racist abuse in Parliament on Wednesday afternoon.
Thirty MPs are on the call sheet for an urgent question in Parliament this afternoon – including Labour’s Yvette Cooper, Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana.
But no black MPs have been selected to participate in the debate, which asks Priti Patel – the home secretary – to “make a statement on the prevalence of racist abuse on social media”.

ARTICLE CONTINUES...

I mean - what would black people know about the racism of white folk?

I mean, it's possibly a kindness give the effect that Priti Patel evading questions has upon one's blood pressure.

Puja

Wetherspoons TV (AKA GB News), the anti-cancel channel, who believe to the hilt in free speech, free of consequence; have cancelled Guto Harri as a consequence of his free speech
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/ ... ee-281631/

Thundering cunts of hell, I am so sick of the phrase "cancel culture" through which all manner of fuckwittery is promoted for nothing other than to allow racist bigots to make a spurious living peddling utter shit.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... en-network

gruniad wrote:Katie Hopkins fined by NSW police and deported from Australia after visa cancelled

Far-right commentator who entered country with support of NSW government to appear on Big Brother fined $1,000 for not wearing a mask

The Australian government has cancelled Katie Hopkins’ visa and deported the far-right commentator after she boasted about breaching hotel quarantine conditions.

The cancellation was announced by the home affairs minister, Karen Andrews, on Monday and followed a decision by Endemol Shine Australia to cancel her contract to appear on Seven Network’s Big Brother VIP. Hopkins was then deported from the country on a Monday afternoon flight.

article continues...

Any chance we could refuse to accept her?

Which Tyler wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... en-network

gruniad wrote:Katie Hopkins fined by NSW police and deported from Australia after visa cancelled

Far-right commentator who entered country with support of NSW government to appear on Big Brother fined $1,000 for not wearing a mask

The Australian government has cancelled Katie Hopkins’ visa and deported the far-right commentator after she boasted about breaching hotel quarantine conditions.

The cancellation was announced by the home affairs minister, Karen Andrews, on Monday and followed a decision by Endemol Shine Australia to cancel her contract to appear on Seven Network’s Big Brother VIP. Hopkins was then deported from the country on a Monday afternoon flight.

article continues...

Any chance we could refuse to accept her?

Best story of the day. It would be nice if we could deport thundering idiots like this. But sadly they are mostly our citizens.

Banquo wrote:Best story of the day. It would be nice if we could deport thundering idiots like this. But sadly they are mostly our citizens.

"You can pack your bongo and get out of the county!

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... en-network

gruniad wrote:Katie Hopkins fined by NSW police and deported from Australia after visa cancelled

Far-right commentator who entered country with support of NSW government to appear on Big Brother fined $1,000 for not wearing a mask

The Australian government has cancelled Katie Hopkins’ visa and deported the far-right commentator after she boasted about breaching hotel quarantine conditions.

The cancellation was announced by the home affairs minister, Karen Andrews, on Monday and followed a decision by Endemol Shine Australia to cancel her contract to appear on Seven Network’s Big Brother VIP. Hopkins was then deported from the country on a Monday afternoon flight.

article continues...

Any chance we could refuse to accept her?

Best story of the day. It would be nice if we could deport thundering idiots like this. But sadly they are mostly our citizens.

TBH, I would rather accept Shamima Begum and strip Hopkins of her citizenship. Begum's far less likely to be involved in dangerous extremism that is a threat to British values and which could result in terrorist behaviour and loss of life.

Which Tyler wrote:Wetherspoons TV (AKA GB News), the anti-cancel channel, who believe to the hilt in free speech, free of consequence; have cancelled Guto Harri as a consequence of his free speech
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/ ... ee-281631/

Latest on this - they didn't tell him they were hanging him out to dry; they just said that his show was going on a break over the summer and he could go on holiday. Just incredible levels of professionalism. He's now resigned and I suspect the constructive dismissal lawsuit will be settled very shortly with non-disclosures all around.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... en-network



Any chance we could refuse to accept her?

Best story of the day. It would be nice if we could deport thundering idiots like this. But sadly they are mostly our citizens.

TBH, I would rather accept Shamima Begum and strip Hopkins of her citizenship. Begum's far less likely to be involved in dangerous extremism that is a threat to British values and which could result in terrorist behaviour and loss of life.

Which Tyler wrote:Wetherspoons TV (AKA GB News), the anti-cancel channel, who believe to the hilt in free speech, free of consequence; have cancelled Guto Harri as a consequence of his free speech
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/ ... ee-281631/

Latest on this - they didn't tell him they were hanging him out to dry; they just said that his show was going on a break over the summer and he could go on holiday. Just incredible levels of professionalism. He's now resigned and I suspect the constructive dismissal lawsuit will be settled very shortly with non-disclosures all around.

Puja

neither is the best answer.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote: Best story of the day. It would be nice if we could deport thundering idiots like this. But sadly they are mostly our citizens.

TBH, I would rather accept Shamima Begum and strip Hopkins of her citizenship. Begum's far less likely to be involved in dangerous extremism that is a threat to British values and which could result in terrorist behaviour and loss of life.

Which Tyler wrote:Wetherspoons TV (AKA GB News), the anti-cancel channel, who believe to the hilt in free speech, free of consequence; have cancelled Guto Harri as a consequence of his free speech
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/ ... ee-281631/

Latest on this - they didn't tell him they were hanging him out to dry; they just said that his show was going on a break over the summer and he could go on holiday. Just incredible levels of professionalism. He's now resigned and I suspect the constructive dismissal lawsuit will be settled very shortly with non-disclosures all around.

Puja

neither is the best answer.

I am of the opinion that it is a very bad precedent to set to abandon our international legal responsibilities to not make someone stateless, especially when it's done to a child that was groomed and abused while underage, because it's populist to do so. This counts double for doing it when that decision can be so easily weaponised by extremist recruiters as, "Look how they abandoned this child and left her baby to die because she didn't look like them or worship the same god as them."

Sadly, it's also bad precedent to abandon our international legal responsibilities to not make someone stateless, even when that someone is a grade A cuntpuffin like Hopkins.

Puja

"Will trade racists for immigrants"

Oh, and I'm with Puja on Begum - both morally because she was a brainwashed child; but also in thinking that breaking international law is a bad thing - which probably applies to our inability to refuse Hopkins as well

Of course, the Beghun case has been done to death already - no-one's likely to change their mind at this point

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
TBH, I would rather accept Shamima Begum and strip Hopkins of her citizenship. Begum's far less likely to be involved in dangerous extremism that is a threat to British values and which could result in terrorist behaviour and loss of life.


Latest on this - they didn't tell him they were hanging him out to dry; they just said that his show was going on a break over the summer and he could go on holiday. Just incredible levels of professionalism. He's now resigned and I suspect the constructive dismissal lawsuit will be settled very shortly with non-disclosures all around.

Puja

neither is the best answer.

I am of the opinion that it is a very bad precedent to set to abandon our international legal responsibilities to not make someone stateless, especially when it's done to a child that was groomed and abused while underage, because it's populist to do so. This counts double for doing it when that decision can be so easily weaponised by extremist recruiters as, "Look how they abandoned this child and left her baby to die because she didn't look like them or worship the same god as them."

Sadly, it's also bad precedent to abandon our international legal responsibilities to not make someone stateless, even when that someone is a grade A cuntpuffin like Hopkins.

Puja

Everyone entitled to an opinion, apparently.

Banquo wrote:Everyone entitled to an opinion, apparently.

Now those should definitely be banned.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:Everyone entitled to an opinion, apparently.

Now those should definitely be banned.

Puja

As ever it only seems to make them more popular, and yet the hope remains the incompetence and corruption eventually carry a price

Digby wrote:As ever it only seems to make them more popular, and yet the hope remains the incompetence and corruption eventually carry a price

It'll only carry a price when the Sun, Mail, Express or Telegraph starts complaining about it.