|
|
Post by shevii on Apr 21, 2023 10:31:33 GMT
Seeing as my post yesterday went down so well (smiley), another thing worth flagging up on twitter is that they now have a "Readers added context" button. Labour has fallen foul of this twice, fairly I think on the Sunak child abusers advert but also the other day on the vote Labour to save the NHS where the context added was these are local elections and have nothing to do with the NHS. Technically true of course but a little bit twee because everyone knows that locals are a proxy/protest vote indicative of national issues, sometimes with a few specific local issues having an impact. When I was an activist I produced ward leaflets totally on national issues other than your local candidates (who weren't actually ward local anyway!).
For my sins I then went on the Tory twitter account to see if they had had similar and couldn't see any. I'm regretting this now because the "For you" function now brings up a lot of Tory propaganda as opposed to Tory opinion that is more interesting from a point of view of where they are coming from. It was interesting that Tory posts don't get as many likes as Labour posts but both have almost 100% negative comments to them. Makes we wonder how many people just browse through the header tweet and how many read the criticism below the line.
The twitter format, which I ran through allows you to sign up for "adding context" if you have a clean twitter bill of health (no violations) but then there seems to be a period where you are still not allowed to add context, so perhaps need to prove yourself in some way via active participation or perhaps just a time period. Added contexts cannot be taken down according to the rules and this potentially feels like an political abuse waiting to happen, unless you are going to get removed again if people vote down your added context which in itself becomes political to vote up or down.
Presumably the added context on Labour were political in nature as opposed to some which might be scientific or factual as in anti vax comments being rebutted. It's interesting to see though that Labour are the first to get hit with this. I presume again left wing activists as it seems unlikely the Tories would have cottoned on this quickly but seems like Labour may be behind on utilising this function.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Apr 21, 2023 10:33:42 GMT
Raab resigns but couldn't resist the opportunity for victim blaming in his cringe worthy resignation whinge. He didn't exactly shower Sunak with compliments either in his letter. Bitter and angry! |
|
|
|
Post by JohnC on Apr 21, 2023 10:40:38 GMT
But you don't prevent it. All you do is get increasingly right wing Tory governments forever. You will note that core Tory voters (say c30-33% of the population) happily voted for Cameron's 2010 social liberalism and Johnson's 2019 populist authoritarianism without all this angst, indeed likely without even a second thought. They vote Tory regardless of what it is offering at the time. That's the reality that has to be overcome. Just to say as a footnote, that the real villain here is FPTP. Under a PR system everyone could vote exactly as they thought best and know their vote has a chance of counting. , I have a lot of sympathy with shevii on this. What slightly baffles me is that the Tory's manage their 'right-wing' in a manner that tends to keep those types of voters on board, adopting policies from that wing of the party that in many areas have broader electoral appeal. Many of the positions held by the left are similarly popular with the electorate, but you don't currently see the Starmer leadership adopting them, to the contrary they seem to be jettisoning them.
Prior to the 80/90's the Party and its leadership did a relatively better job in managing the relationship with the left; but since then there seems to be a Madelsonian obsession, held by many on the right of the party, that you can only win by attacking the left. Personally, I think it is counter-productive and plays into the hands of the Tories.People may say in opinion polls that they support certain left wing policies but when it comes to which way to vote it will be such as the cost of living, the state of the economy, perceptions of the relative competence of the parties, 'time for a change' that will be the determining factors. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Apr 21, 2023 10:41:17 GMT
Dominic Raab latest: Deputy PM 'keeps word' and quitsnews.sky.com/story/politics-latest-pm-to-give-major-speech-in-belfast-as-the-snp-fears-sturgeon-arrest-is-imminent-12593360?I doubt that was an easy decision for Rishi but 25hrs is a reasonable window to allow Raab to 'resign' rather than force Rishi to sack him. TBC if there is any other 'skeletons' to be thrown out of the closet elsewhere within Team Rishi but Rishi can now keep the moral high ground that Starmer abandoned with his racist personal attacks on Rishi and Rishi's family. Certainly a change from the 'Owen Goal' approach of Boris trying to protect Paterson. Unlikely to be any VI impact but Rishi has broken a potential 'stick' that LAB could used have against CON, which is now "under new management". Sunak has clearly displayed poor judgement in appointing him in the first place, given the detail of these allegations has been generally known for months. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,127
|
Post by domjg on Apr 21, 2023 10:41:59 GMT
I'm coming to the conclusion that those of us who are ABCON and those who think they need to be wooed by a party that will say it will deliver their Christmas present list have brains that are wired very differently. That was exactly my point, and I'm glad that you can at least agree with it. I don't hold the view that Conservatives are deluded and demonic - for the most part they are acting in the public interest as they see it, even if in my view their sight is distorted. I don't think the present Labour party is promoting the public interest either as they see it, or in my view at all. "for the most part they are acting in the public interest as they see it" - That seems to be extraordinarily generous. I believe they are mostly (not all of course) interested in maintaining their party in office for it's own sake alone and responding to the lobbying of their business associates and donors. Many of the few who do believe they have the country's 'interest' at heart are crazed, ideological brexiters for whom Europe is a dirty word. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 21, 2023 10:51:14 GMT
Seeing as my post yesterday went down so well (smiley), another thing worth flagging up on twitter is that they now have a "Readers added context" button. Labour has fallen foul of this twice, fairly I think on the Sunak child abusers advert but also the other day on the vote Labour to save the NHS where the context added was these are local elections and have nothing to do with the NHS. Technically true of course but a little bit twee because everyone knows that locals are a proxy/protest vote indicative of national issues, sometimes with a few specific local issues having an impact. When I was an activist I produced ward leaflets totally on national issues other than your local candidates (who weren't actually ward local anyway!). For my sins I then went on the Tory twitter account to see if they had had similar and couldn't see any. I'm regretting this now because the "For you" function now brings up a lot of Tory propaganda as opposed to Tory opinion that is more interesting from a point of view of where they are coming from. It was interesting that Tory posts don't get as many likes as Labour posts but both have almost 100% negative comments to them. Makes we wonder how many people just browse through the header tweet and how many read the criticism below the line. The twitter format, which I ran through allows you to sign up for "adding context" if you have a clean twitter bill of health (no violations) but then there seems to be a period where you are still not allowed to add context, so perhaps need to prove yourself in some way via active participation or perhaps just a time period. Added contexts cannot be taken down according to the rules and this potentially feels like an political abuse waiting to happen, unless you are going to get removed again if people vote down your added context which in itself becomes political to vote up or down. Presumably the added context on Labour were political in nature as opposed to some which might be scientific or factual as in anti vax comments being rebutted. It's interesting to see though that Labour are the first to get hit with this. I presume again left wing activists as it seems unlikely the Tories would have cottoned on this quickly but seems like Labour may be behind on utilising this function. If I have this 'empathy' thing correct then I can 'empathise' with you on a few things 1/ If you read stuff from the 'enemy' you get more of that kind of stuff prompted 'for you' in your news feeds, etc. (Advice - make sure to also read enough from the 'friendly' side to balance it out) 2/ I would never have voted for Truss-CON in a GE (and appreciated that Boris had to go). Rishi, however.. đ I appreciate that different people want different things and some don't like Rishi, some don't like Starmer - fair enough - we're all entitled to an opinion (and a vote). We then of course have opinion polling to see a broader representative view rather than the small sample of UKPR2. Folks are welcome to look at the LAB'19 x-breaks for Starmer v the CON'19 x-breaks for Rishi. Although for now LAB'19 have very high 'loyalty' so despite some misgivings then few LAB'19 have moved to DK or elsewhere (although whether they actually GOTV on the day is TBC and polls will change between now and GE'24) WRT to the twitter aspects you mention then CCHQ are perhaps a bit more careful to 'bend' not 'break' the need for "adding context" rulings on the 'honesty'* of the content of a tweet - the 'moral high ground' being relative when both parties fight in the gutter. Also WRT to the trolls who comment BTL on twitter feeds then that isn't confined to political parties (or twitter  ) but politics does seem to bring out the worst in some people. * The rulings against LAB's attack ads being because they are lies (by making them about the opinion of a British-Asian individual and his family rather than the track record of CON HMG) |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,366
Member is Online
|
Post by Danny on Apr 21, 2023 10:51:17 GMT
The only proposal I've seen from Labour for investment in the heath service is via increased taxes from Nom Dom which quite frankly isn't guaranteed to raise a penny and will no doubt get watered down. Even then it's mostly about training more doctors and nurses when retention is the issue and to my mind this is only done via terms and conditions (wages) which ultimately means substantial payrises (the 35% only taking them back to 2010 real pay levels). There's no evidence Labour will do anything like this and their response to pay demands is a) to say 35% is not affordable, b) to accept government biased pay review bodies recommendations, c) to not even give any indication of what they might pay to fix the problem and d) to oppose the strikes. Last time NHS pay review came up Tories actually beat the Labour "more than 3%" "offer", just as they have now beaten the Labour minimum wage offer which is yet to be updated. I agree its insane doctors pay has slipped so much. However various media reports have suggested the working conditions are at least as important. Pay can only partially compensate for over working anyone. But you have to ask to what extent con are to blame for the terrible economic performanc of the UK during their time in office. Brexit is only the most obvious anti-uk economic mistake. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,649
|
Post by steve on Apr 21, 2023 10:56:12 GMT
Have had a brief read of the report on Raab's bullying it's evident that he was lying in his resignation letter.
It isn't just two incidents he was found culpable over it's two named witnesses who have evidence of multiple incidents.
Is lying in a ministerial resignation letter sufficient grounds to trigger a conduct committee investigation with a view to parliamentary suspension.
Or is repeated lying just what this awful regime regard as a normal Friday.
*An example from the report of the multiple incidents that Raab pretended were only one.
"On a number of occasions at meetings with policy officials, the DPM acted in a manner which was intimidating, in the sense of going further than was necessary or appropriate in delivering critical feedback, and also insulting, in the sense of making unconstructive critical comments about the quality of work done (whether or not as a matter of substance any criticism was justified). By way of example, he complained about the absence of what he referred to as âbasic informationâ or âthe basicsâ, about âobstructivenessâ on the part of officials whom he perceived to be resistant to his policies, and described some work as âutterly uselessâ and âwoefulâ."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2023 10:58:29 GMT
On the whole on-line left attacks on Starmer, and Labour are 'no different to the Tories', its a classic voter suppression tactic. In the 2016 US election, the on-line campaign teams/companies/Russia working for the Trump campaign targeted Bernie Saunders and black voters with content along the lines of Hilary was in the pocket of Wall Street, and no different to the Republicans etc. - now Clinton wasn't perfect but was a whole lot better than Trump.
These campaigns are targeted at the likes of me, to get me either to abstain or vote for another party such as the Greens - and some of the content will come from the left but pushed by the right, some will be created/fabricated by the right - but personally I do see that Labour is a much better option than the Tories. Others may decide to abstain or vote for another Party because Labour aren't left-wing enough etc - that is their right. From the perspective of my own conscience I would not be able to live with myself if I abstained and the Tories won. I may feel very differently after one term of disappointment with a Labour government - but another 4-5 years of Tory rule would be unbearable. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of these so-called 'leftie' Twitter accounts criticising Starmer and co are actually Tory/Russian stooges. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Apr 21, 2023 10:59:51 GMT
Very good piece about Starmer by Gaby Hinsliff in this morningâs Guardian. (Sorry, donât know how to do a link!) it could be that, in the longer term, some of the judgments about him will prove premature.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,366
Member is Online
|
Post by Danny on Apr 21, 2023 11:03:09 GMT
whether he has gone, his twitter web page claims to be gone. (update:now 6.1m views) |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 21, 2023 11:04:01 GMT
I find it quite amusing. Are these the same people who pour orange powder on snooker tables and glue themselves to roads, or are they even further left? The right of the party put purity over power, sabotaging Corbyn. Theyâre still trying to get rid of what remains of the left even now. This is all nonsense. I voted for Corbyn as I was a member in 2010. I was energised by his views and thought it would be refreshing to have a leader more from the left. It took about 3 months for me to realise that he was supremely unsuited to the role of leader of anything and was in despair about the future of the party under him and also some of his clearly useless cabinet colleagues. I still voted Labour in both 2017 and 2019 and I'm quite sure that lots of others did in a vain attempt to minimise the damage of Brexit more than anything else. Corbyn was never going to be PM. After the debacle of Corbyn I've had it with ideologues. I want a Labour Party that will persuade non Labour voters to put it into power and I simply don't care who that is. The Tories have and continue to wreak havoc on this country and I would vote for a toy monkey on a stick if I thought it would stop them from winning in 2024. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,649
|
Post by steve on Apr 21, 2023 11:06:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 21, 2023 11:11:48 GMT
I'm coming to the conclusion that those of us who are ABCON and those who think they need to be wooed by a party that will say it will deliver their Christmas present list have brains that are wired very differently. That was exactly my point, and I'm glad that you can at least agree with it. I don't hold the view that Conservatives are deluded and demonic - for the most part they are acting in the public interest as they see it, even if in my view their sight is distorted. I don't think the present Labour party is promoting the public interest either as they see it, or in my view at all. I simply cannot believe you think the Tories are acting in what they believe to be the national interest. How can it be in the national interest to channel huge amounts of public funding to their mates in the private sector while at the same time starving the public sector of funding. You are sitting so hard on the fence it's a wonder your bottom can stand it. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,649
|
Post by steve on Apr 21, 2023 11:14:14 GMT
Sunak in response to Raab's departure.
"But your resignation should not make us forget your record of delivery in both this government and previous administrations. These achievements should make you extremely proud."
Yes indeed I think he should be particularly proud of his patience waiting for the sea to open on holiday in Crete while friends of the U.K. in Afghanistan faced death.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,366
Member is Online
|
Post by Danny on Apr 21, 2023 11:17:07 GMT
wb61Well at least 6 days! "Lib Dems says Raab should resign as MP The Liberal Democrats say Dominic Raab should now resign as an MP. This is from Daisy Cooper, the partyâs deputy leader." So what she is saying is that if an MP breaks the rules written by the majority party, then they must resign as MPs. Rather an unfortunate precedent for any opposition MP to set. It fundamentally undermines the power of MPs to oppose a government. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Apr 21, 2023 11:17:52 GMT
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,127
|
Post by domjg on Apr 21, 2023 11:25:20 GMT
The right of the party put purity over power, sabotaging Corbyn. Theyâre still trying to get rid of what remains of the left even now. This is all nonsense. I voted for Corbyn as I was a member in 2010. I was energised by his views and thought it would be refreshing to have a leader more from the left. It took about 3 months for me to realise that he was supremely unsuited to the role of leader of anything and was in despair about the future of the party under him and also some of his clearly useless cabinet colleagues. I still voted Labour in both 2017 and 2019 and I'm quite sure that lots of others did in a vain attempt to minimise the damage of Brexit more than anything else. Corbyn was never going to be PM. After the debacle of Corbyn I've had it with ideologues. I want a Labour Party that will persuade non Labour voters to put it into power and I simply don't care who that is. The Tories have and continue to wreak havoc on this country and I would vote for a toy monkey on a stick if I thought it would stop them from winning in 2024. I may rail against what I perceive as attempts of the Labour left to put principle before electability but I was also enthused by Corbyn initially. It's not his policies I ever had a problem with but presentation and ability to get them past an innately sceptical electorate at the mercy of a highly manipulative right wing media that you don't need to give much ammunition to for them to cause trouble. I happily voted for Labour under Corbyn in 17 and 19 and if he were still leader now I'd do it again. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,366
Member is Online
|
Post by Danny on Apr 21, 2023 11:26:48 GMT
On the whole on-line left attacks on Starmer, and Labour are 'no different to the Tories', its a classic voter suppression tactic. Which is rather analogous to the saying, 'the fact I am paranoid does not mean they are not out to get me.' What a voter has to do is decide whether it is better to accept labour as a bit better than con, or refuse to do so and vote for a no hoper. However, given the libs seem to be moving into second place again in some constituencies, it seems there are rather a lot of voters desperate enough to support someone other than lab and con. Which suggests there is significant truth in lab not being a very attractive offer. Moreover, labour changes do not seem to be seeing off libs creeping back towards their 2010 position, which was also created by disaffection with both lab and con. Had libs not so ridiculously caved in to con in 2010, then they could now be a significant block in the commons holding the balance of power. And we would not have left the EU. And I dont see how lab could have prevented us leaving the EU because they didnt seem to believe in doing so. So on the biggest issue of recent years, a fail. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Apr 21, 2023 11:31:53 GMT
I agree its insane doctors pay has slipped so much. However various media reports have suggested the working conditions are at least as important. Pay can only partially compensate for over working anyone. That's true- pay is the headline thing but working conditions are just as important (especially if you live in cheaper areas of the country). But without pay as a starting point you don't set in train a course of events leading to where the NHS isn't understaffed because it's a signal that you are respected and that there is hope for the future it will get fixed. Without vacancies then many of the quality of life issues go away so pay remains key to this I think. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2023 11:32:11 GMT
In an almost certainly vain effort to lighten the mood on UKPR2 after a pretty turgid week's postings, I offer a prescient little piece from 1952 contributed by a Mr N Coward of Teddington. youtu.be/tSA5C8mQcLQAs a fan of NC since I was a little girl, this is one of my favourites, alongside "Don't Let's Be Beastly to the Germans", which was banned by the BBC in case people missed the satire and thought he was being serious. Absolutely. How one person could be so outrageously talented in so many areas as "The Master" is astonishing. Playwright, composer, lyricist, actor, singer, producer, director etc. In this particular case, ('Bad times just around the corner'), the rhyming of 'Kettering' with 'rather vulgar lettering' is a gem that has made me laugh since I first heard it 50 years ago or more. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Apr 21, 2023 11:43:35 GMT
Many thanks! Much appreciated. |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 21, 2023 11:48:33 GMT
As a fan of NC since I was a little girl, this is one of my favourites, alongside "Don't Let's Be Beastly to the Germans", which was banned by the BBC in case people missed the satire and thought he was being serious. Absolutely. How one person could be so outrageously talented in so many areas as "The Master" is astonishing. Playwright, composer, lyricist, actor, singer, producer, director etc. In this particular case, ('Bad times just around the corner'), the rhyming of 'Kettering' with 'rather vulgar lettering' is a gem that has made me laugh since I first heard it 50 years ago or more. Or: "It was just those nasty Nazis who persuaded them to fight and their Beethoven and Bach are surely far worse than their bite" "Let's be sweet to them and day by day repeat to them that sterilisation simply isn't done." ""The shrieks and wails of the Yorkshire Dales have even depressed the sheep" Or from Nina from Argentina who wouldn't dance: "She refused to begin the beguine when they besought her to, and in language profane and obscene she cursed the man who taught her to, she cursed Cole Porter too." Magnificent beyond belief. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blipâŚ
Posts: 6,728
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Apr 21, 2023 11:50:40 GMT
The right of the party put purity over power, sabotaging Corbyn. Theyâre still trying to get rid of what remains of the left even now. This is all nonsense. I voted for Corbyn as I was a member in 2010. I was energised by his views and thought it would be refreshing to have a leader more from the left. It took about 3 months for me to realise that he was supremely unsuited to the role of leader of anything and was in despair about the future of the party under him and also some of his clearly useless cabinet colleagues. I still voted Labour in both 2017 and 2019 and I'm quite sure that lots of others did in a vain attempt to minimise the damage of Brexit more than anything else. Corbyn was never going to be PM. After the debacle of Corbyn I've had it with ideologues. I want a Labour Party that will persuade non Labour voters to put it into power and I simply don't care who that is. The Tories have and continue to wreak havoc on this country and I would vote for a toy monkey on a stick if I thought it would stop them from winning in 2024. Yes, we went through this on the old board. A lot of people on the right, for example, say that they voted for Corbyn as if it were some kind of get out of jail free card. But when you look at their actions, they never said anything good about the guy, they rarely say anything good about the policies, not even the centrist stuff, they donât seem to ever refer to the policies even, itâs like they bareiy even know the policies. Some said they âcampaigned for Corbynâ on the doorstep even, but when you ask what positive things they had to say⌠silence. And they only said bad stuff about him, and the left, on the board. Not hard to see what kind of campaigning they might really have been doing. The right only ever seem to be bothered about the more Liberal concerns for equality, they never care much for the left wing concerns, they donât put the same vigour into the damage done by unemployment, or the house price inflation done by Blair et al., or the problems with privatised energy and water. And they donât have a problem with the way the right behaved over Corbyn and how the left are being attacked and expunged now. They have little problem with the breaking of the pledges and letting down those people, many of them young. If pressed, they might concede itâs not good, but theyâll turn a blind eye to a lot of it, and they show very little interest in left wing policies. This isnât about ideology and the left being purist. Numerous of the leftâs policies polled well, are still popular, and the right of the party arenât interested. Things have been steadily moving left, adopting more left wing policies, even by Tories, and the right act like itâs purism. When it isnât, itâs the right being purist. |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 21, 2023 11:53:14 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,366
Member is Online
|
Post by Danny on Apr 21, 2023 12:06:23 GMT
2/ I would never have voted for Truss-CON in a GE (and appreciated that Boris had to go). Rishi, however.. đ Ah, I have been reading your posts for years now. Always delighted with the new leader. Alway delighted to see them gone. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blipâŚ
Posts: 6,728
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Apr 21, 2023 12:16:55 GMT
barbara - well moby gave your post a like, wasnât surprising, take this quote below of his to ptarmigan , key points put in bold⌠See the classic right wing approach: how the entirety of Corbynâs program is dismissed out of hand as âradicalâ and not viable due to âeconomic realitiesâ. The classic arguments of the right, even as we keep moving leftward in practic, showing that left wing policies are not only viable but essential. Price subsidies are no longer radical. Furlough no longer radical. Nationalising energy even favoured by many Tories now. Increasing use of state subsidy for business etc. Note too, the Liberal priority instead: the concern for equality of opportunity, which can accept a lot more inequality in practice. Whereas the left are often more concerned with equality of outcome. At the risk of restarting the Jeremy Corbyn discourse, Iâm baffled by this idea that Labour simply had to bar him for their electoral prospects. ⌠Isn't it naive though to see politics as attractive in any sense. The reality is in a modern democracy there are a set of options limited by economic and political realities, (Truss found that out recently when she tried to introduce her version of Trussonomics. She and her supporters really believed they could move the dial. They were excited by their radical ideas for 'growth'. The markets didn't agree however and she was gone within 40 odd days! for reasons not initiated by political decisions in this country. Her removal was a decision made by her own Party reacting to international markets and the polls. Many of the tories I'm sure agreed with her but knew it wouldn't wash, so compromised their beliefs and got rid of her pronto to save their own necks. We left of centre are no different; we are constrained by exactly the same forces. I always knew this when I campaigned and voted for Corbyn's Labour. His manifesto was radical but his choices were always going to be constrained by economic realities. I believe that you have to be realistic about this and look at the wider pictu re. Social justice, equality of opportunity etc are always prioritised by Labour more than the tories (imo).....even if those choices are not being defined in they way that you want them to be. That's the stark reality of our voting system. The Greens under the present system are a wasted vote. The Tories don't fear you voting Green, they fear you voting Labour.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,366
Member is Online
|
Post by Danny on Apr 21, 2023 12:18:06 GMT
I simply cannot believe you think the Tories are acting in what they believe to be the national interest. How can it be in the national interest to channel huge amounts of public funding to their mates in the private sector while at the same time starving the public sector of funding. You are sitting so hard on the fence it's a wonder your bottom can stand it. "The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate: God made them high and lowly, and ordered their estate" (punctuation seems to matter a little) |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Apr 21, 2023 12:22:13 GMT
Oh those Russians......https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65344370
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,649
|
Post by steve on Apr 21, 2023 12:28:06 GMT
It took Sunak 24 hours to decide to wait for the throbbing vein dpm to sulk off on his own without being sacked, strong and transparent honesty at its finest.
Ironically if Sunak had worked for Raab, this slow pace of work would have resulted in him getting belittled and publicly insulted for being a useless waste of space.
|
|
) but politics does seem to bring out the worst in some people. 
