Saturday 3rd & Sunday 4th September 2016

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 4:26 pm

Willow904 wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:
Willow904 wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... -the-obese
I shall simply echo the first comment I came across btl - totally wrong.

Thanks a bunch, Tory voters.

Edited for stupid predictive text.
I don't see how this would save nhs money,
unless people opt for private treatment,
it's just delaying treatment, so overal they'll be same throughput, except possibly with added cost if patients health deteriorates.
So either this is just a cover for trying to improve long term health(and it's either badly reported or I've misread it), possibly saving money, or it's the start of a more sinister rationing.
You raise some good points. In the case of breast reduction surgery, losing weight could avoid the need for surgery at all. And for some surgical procedures, giving up smoking could reduce risks and speed recovery. These are things that can be arranged with individual patients on an ad hoc basis, however. The blanket one year ban suggests cost cutting through rationing and it isn't so very different to the NHS of the 80s when people faced years waiting for hip replacements and ended up going private in desperation. At least back then everyone faced the same wait, to single out certain groups is appalling discrimination. No one deliberately sets out to get overweight and it's really hard to lose weight once you've put it on. Not to mention more and more evidence is coming to light that overweight people have very different levels of fitness and health. Are they going to deny a rugby player a knee op because of a high bmi? Medical professionals of all people know how arbitrary a measurement bmi can be. To use it in defined policy is shoddy.

Definitely discrimination, also there's been research reported about obesity not necessarily being due to lifestyle, but related to bacteria in gut.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 00086.html

Link isn't the best example, as it involves junk food, but NHS definitely shouldn't be restricting treatment on adhoc moral judgements rather than actual health reasons, also I'd have thought any actual doctors making that decision could be going against the Hippocratic oath.

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 4:47 pm

nickyinnorfolk wrote:The one thing that keeps me going is the thought that the Tories will inevitably implode in the manner of the Major years.

We do need somebody other than Corbyn at the helm though.

I've heard that senior Labour figures have *begged* May to hold a snap election as the only way to offload Jezza.

Heard from who? Which "senior Labour figures"?

If "senior" Labour people are intending, or briefing the intent for whatever reason, to go into a general election with the intent of losing it because they would rather have a Tory government than the leader the party elected then they need naming and expelling. Both for bringing the party into disrepute and aiding another party to election success. No if, no buts, they should go.

If people can be refused a vote in the leadership election or denied membership because they Facebooked a liking for the Greens in the last couple of years or because they said they wouldn't support a Labour party led by certain people, then those people conniving at losing a general election don't have a leg to stand on.

And given that some "senior anonymous Labour figures and Watson" insist that the "Corbynite Horde" must be defeated because they actively want Labour to lose elections to bring about the Trotskyite Revolution, I'd rather like to hear the deputy leader's view on those in the party establishment who are plotting to lose an election, and what he and the general secretary intend to do about them.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 4:50 pm

PorFavor wrote:
ChrisDean wrote:The man behind SavingLabour is Reg Race?

Can't say I'd heard of him until just now.

Thoughts, anyone?
I'd never heard of him, either. However, I've just looked him up on Wikipedia and well - see for yourself. Suffice it to say, I wasn't enamoured.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/red ... 93,00.html

Blairite Poodle

Admittedly that was in 2001, suppose he may have improved.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 4:55 pm

Reg Race (then MP for Wood Green) was one of *the* bogeymen for the right wing press during Labour's previous move to the left after the 1979 GE. It is widely thought the party machine (by then back in the hands of the right) played a part in ensuring he was left without a seat following the boundary changes that preceded the 1983 election.

He vanished from public view following a few unsuccessful attempts to get a seat in the following years, only to re-emerge as Tony Benn's putative successor as Labour candidate for Chesterfield following the former's retirement in 2001. His main rival for the selection was a young ambitious "Labour centrist" (as she then styled herself, apparently - a "centrist" internally speaking, I mean).......a certain Elizabeth Kendall. She might have done better than Race, who lost the seat to the LibDems on a hefty swing

55DegreesNorth · Post by **55DegreesNorth** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 5:28 pm

tinybgoat wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
tinybgoat wrote: I don't see how this would save nhs money,
unless people opt for private treatment,
it's just delaying treatment, so overal they'll be same throughput, except possibly with added cost if patients health deteriorates.
So either this is just a cover for trying to improve long term health(and it's either badly reported or I've misread it), possibly saving money, or it's the start of a more sinister rationing.
You raise some good points. In the case of breast reduction surgery, losing weight could avoid the need for surgery at all. And for some surgical procedures, giving up smoking could reduce risks and speed recovery. These are things that can be arranged with individual patients on an ad hoc basis, however. The blanket one year ban suggests cost cutting through rationing and it isn't so very different to the NHS of the 80s when people faced years waiting for hip replacements and ended up going private in desperation. At least back then everyone faced the same wait, to single out certain groups is appalling discrimination. No one deliberately sets out to get overweight and it's really hard to lose weight once you've put it on. Not to mention more and more evidence is coming to light that overweight people have very different levels of fitness and health. Are they going to deny a rugby player a knee op because of a high bmi? Medical professionals of all people know how arbitrary a measurement bmi can be. To use it in defined policy is shoddy.
Definitely discrimination, also there's been research reported about obesity not necessarily being due to lifestyle, but related to bacteria in gut.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 00086.html

Link isn't the best example, as it involves junk food, but NHS definitely shouldn't be restricting treatment on adhoc moral judgements rather than actual health reasons, also I'd have thought any actual doctors making that decision could be going against the Hippocratic oath.

Evening folks,
Regarding the above, there is some medical justification for withholding treatment for smokers in some circumstances. When I had my spinal operations, I was repeatedly asked if i was a smoker, as the bone grafts essential to a spinal fusion do not take properly in smokers. They have to quit for a period of 6 months IIRR. A friend who was a heart surgeon told me he wouldn't carry out a heart transplant on a smoker ("Whats the point?").

In other news, my mate wanted to take his boat out for a last trip before the end of summer, so he took me on as apprentice for the day. 25mph winds don't sound much, but in the North Sea a few miles off Blyth, in a yacht that felt the size of my camper van, its scared the pants off me. Will definitely go back for more.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 5:46 pm

tinybgoat wrote: Definitely discrimination, also there's been research reported about obesity not necessarily being due to lifestyle, but related to bacteria in gut.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 00086.html

Link isn't the best example, as it involves junk food, but NHS definitely shouldn't be restricting treatment on adhoc moral judgements rather than actual health reasons, also I'd have thought any actual doctors making that decision could be going against the Hippocratic oath.

Personal anecdote, I think there must be something in the gut bacteria theory. I have a problem with acid reflux and made various adjustments to my diet a couple of years ago in the hope of being able to give up the tablets, mainly giving up dairy almost entirely, including cheese, and later chocolate, and cutting down on fruit although I won't stop eating it altogether. I don't think I've reduced my calorie intake overall but I've lost nearly a stone, can only think it's triggered some kind of internal change.
Hasn't worked on the acid reflux though, still taking the tablets.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 5:53 pm

March for Europe: pro-EU campaigners join demos around UK

Protesters in London and other UK cities call for UK to strengthen ties to continent following Brexit vote
(Guardian)

The article says "thousands" march. How many, I wonder? The article seems mostly concerned for Eddie Izzard's pink beret.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -around-uk

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 6:03 pm

Oh - pissing down here and has been for most of the day.

Edited - typo

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 6:12 pm

I love a pink beret

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 6:22 pm

55DegreesNorth wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:
Willow904 wrote: You raise some good points. In the case of breast reduction surgery, losing weight could avoid the need for surgery at all. And for some surgical procedures, giving up smoking could reduce risks and speed recovery. These are things that can be arranged with individual patients on an ad hoc basis, however. The blanket one year ban suggests cost cutting through rationing and it isn't so very different to the NHS of the 80s when people faced years waiting for hip replacements and ended up going private in desperation. At least back then everyone faced the same wait, to single out certain groups is appalling discrimination. No one deliberately sets out to get overweight and it's really hard to lose weight once you've put it on. Not to mention more and more evidence is coming to light that overweight people have very different levels of fitness and health. Are they going to deny a rugby player a knee op because of a high bmi? Medical professionals of all people know how arbitrary a measurement bmi can be. To use it in defined policy is shoddy.
Definitely discrimination, also there's been research reported about obesity not necessarily being due to lifestyle, but related to bacteria in gut.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 00086.html

Link isn't the best example, as it involves junk food, but NHS definitely shouldn't be restricting treatment on adhoc moral judgements rather than actual health reasons, also I'd have thought any actual doctors making that decision could be going against the Hippocratic oath.
Evening folks,
Regarding the above, there is some medical justification for withholding treatment for smokers in some circumstances. When I had my spinal operations, I was repeatedly asked if i was a smoker, as the bone grafts essential to a spinal fusion do not take properly in smokers. They have to quit for a period of 6 months IIRR. A friend who was a heart surgeon told me he wouldn't carry out a heart transplant on a smoker ("Whats the point?").

In other news, my mate wanted to take his boat out for a last trip before the end of summer, so he took me on as apprentice for the day. 25mph winds don't sound much, but in the North Sea a few miles off Blyth, in a yacht that felt the size of my camper van, its scared the pants off me. Will definitely go back for more.

I've just looked up Blyth. Have you ever been to Seaton Delavel House? More in my line than what you've been doing, I think!

ChrisDean · Post by **ChrisDean** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 6:49 pm

Thanks for all the replies to my query re Reg Race.

@refitman

Hope you enjoyed the game despite the atrocious weather! I certainly did and thought Bristol did very well in their first game back in the Premiership.

Good to see Robinson smile now and then.

Post by **refitman** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 7:10 pm

ChrisDean wrote:Thanks for all the replies to my query re Reg Race.

@refitman

Hope you enjoyed the game despite the atrocious weather! I certainly did and thought Bristol did very well in their first game back in the Premiership.

Good to see Robinson smile now and then.

We wuz cheated by the ref!!!!

Seriously, good showing by Brizzle. Quins came back into the game well and we conceded far too many penalties. Should be a fun, if nerve racking season.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 7:15 pm

Lack of working-class Labour MPs has 'alienated voters'

Jonathan Ashworth, a shadow cabinet member who represents Leicester South, said: “This is a problem for politics across the piste, but the Labour party needs to increase its efforts to find candidates who come from the communities we want to represent. That is more working-class, female and more black and ethnic minority candidates.” (Guardian - my emphasis)

Surely he didn't say that (the emphasised bit). Across the piece, maybe (with the Guardian putting its own slant on how it views the world)?

I'm not convinced by the article, anyway. Too many holes in the theory.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 8:13 pm

@citizenJA

Hello!

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 8:22 pm

citizenJA wrote:I love a pink beret

I prefer a raspberry beret.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 8:30 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
citizenJA wrote:I love a pink beret
I prefer a raspberry beret.

Well, that's a sign of the times...

And yeah, I know - wrong album but hey gimme a break here!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 8:36 pm

Hi, PorFavor!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 8:54 pm

I feel sick inside over this Brexit thing. Some imagery has gone through my mind for some time now and I need to write about it.
It's a deep dread. It's like hearing a leader tell the people the country has formally declared war on another country and everyone
is a solider, the leader say it's necessary. I've not been alive in a nation where the whole country was plunged into war and I don't
mean to belittle either war or Brexit. I hope that's clear. The feeling of dread is what I'm trying to convey. It feels doomed.
Destruction and death.

I don't trust the leaders because they're untrustworthy. Current government have done this irresponsible thing, offering an EU
referendum in the sloppiest of manners and then failed to even do what they promised after the thing was decided. I'm not
complaining about the reneging on the deal Dave Cameron did, I'm describing an unreliable, wicked Tory government.
Dave Cameron may no longer be PM but he's still MP of the same Tory government he led. No one is gone.
Tory leadership remains. And they'll do whatever they want to nation and people.

55DegreesNorth · Post by **55DegreesNorth** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 8:55 pm

PorFavor wrote:
55DegreesNorth wrote:
tinybgoat wrote: Definitely discrimination, also there's been research reported about obesity not necessarily being due to lifestyle, but related to bacteria in gut.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 00086.html

Link isn't the best example, as it involves junk food, but NHS definitely shouldn't be restricting treatment on adhoc moral judgements rather than actual health reasons, also I'd have thought any actual doctors making that decision could be going against the Hippocratic oath.
Evening folks,
Regarding the above, there is some medical justification for withholding treatment for smokers in some circumstances. When I had my spinal operations, I was repeatedly asked if i was a smoker, as the bone grafts essential to a spinal fusion do not take properly in smokers. They have to quit for a period of 6 months IIRR. A friend who was a heart surgeon told me he wouldn't carry out a heart transplant on a smoker ("Whats the point?").

In other news, my mate wanted to take his boat out for a last trip before the end of summer, so he took me on as apprentice for the day. 25mph winds don't sound much, but in the North Sea a few miles off Blyth, in a yacht that felt the size of my camper van, its scared the pants off me. Will definitely go back for more.

I've just looked up Blyth. Have you ever been to Seaton Delavel House? More in my line than what you've been doing, I think!

Oh yes. Seaton Delaval is very nice, with a small but authentic garden. The house is mostly derelict but still amazing. I'd happily live there, if I could pay for all the staff needed. Seaton Sluice, a harbour nearby, is where i spent my childhood, mostly trying to kill myself on cliffs and tidal gulleys. Nowadays, I'm more likely to be found eating mussels and beer in the Kings Arms than tombstoning. If you're ever up this way, give me a shout.

55DegreesNorth · Post by **55DegreesNorth** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 9:00 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
citizenJA wrote:I love a pink beret
I prefer a raspberry beret.

Surely a Ras Beret?

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 9:21 pm

spot the difference

But a Cabinet Office spokesperson said: “The British people spoke decisively at the referendum, with one of the highest turnouts of any vote seen in a UK-wide poll in a generation. They voted to leave the European Union – and this government will deliver on the people’s verdict.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -around-uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But a Cabinet Office spokesperson said: “The British people spoke decisively at the referendum, with one of the highest turnouts of any vote seen in a UK-wide poll in a generation. They voted to leave the European Union – and this government will deliver on half the people’s verdict.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -around-uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 9:24 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Lack of working-class Labour MPs has 'alienated voters'

Jonathan Ashworth, a shadow cabinet member who represents Leicester South, said: “This is a problem for politics across the piste, but the Labour party needs to increase its efforts to find candidates who come from the communities we want to represent. That is more working-class, female and more black and ethnic minority candidates.” (Guardian - my emphasis)
Surely he didn't say that (the emphasised bit). Across the piece, maybe (with the Guardian putting its own slant on how it views the world)?

I'm not convinced by the article, anyway. Too many holes in the theory.

He's not the first offender (though if there's an irony category for the MP razzies, maybe he deserves an dishonourable mention):-

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/po ... ced-angela

Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell told BBC News Owen Smith's Labour leadership campaign "forced" Angela Eagle off the ballot paper.
"It looks as though there is abuse right the way across the piste - Jeremy has been getting quite a bit of abuse and so have I. Jeremy has been moving heaven and earth to say to people abuse is just not acceptable in our political system wherever it is...

http://theconversation.com/translated-t ... rgon-52795

The version of Chinese whispers through which such language spreads can result in embarrassing gaffes. Across the piste , a phrase inspired by skiing, became fashionable not long ago to mean something like “taking the widest perspective” or “affecting a wide range of people”. Through mishearing or misunderstanding, many professionals now say across the piece, while a hapless few are guilty of across the beast.

..and they say Labour isn't the party of business.

ChrisDean · Post by **ChrisDean** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 9:26 pm

@cJA

I'm concerned by your last post and I'm going to make a little suggestion here, which I hope, you will not consider offensive.

If you are able to, get out doing what you enjoy...walking/hiking.

Become physically tired, do not be tempted to peak-in here, go to bed and hopefully fall asleep thinking about all of the lovely things that you have seen/experienced that day.

Do this for a week if possible.

Take care of yourself x

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 9:40 pm

march for murdered Polish man in Essex

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 24341.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(from Wikipedia):
Poles provided crucial help to the Allies throughout the war, fighting on land, sea and air. Notable was the service of the Polish Air Force, not only in the Allied victory in the Battle of Britain but also the subsequent air war.

...

Unlike in France, the Nazis did not set up a collaborationist government. Instead Poland was governed directly by a purely German administration known as the Generalgouvernement. This administration was in turn opposed by the Polish Underground State, which not only fielded one of the three largest partisan forces in existence, but was a rare example of an underground government, a phenomenon not witnessed in many other occupied countries.

The Polish forces as a whole are considered to have been the 4th largest Allied army in Europe, after the Soviet Union, United States and Britain.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 9:46 pm

ChrisDean wrote:@cJA

I'm concerned by your last post and I'm going to make a little suggestion here, which I hope, you will not consider offensive.

If you are able to, get out doing what you enjoy...walking/hiking.

Become physically tired, do not be tempted to peak-in here, go to bed and hopefully fall asleep thinking about all of the lovely things that you have seen/experienced that day.

Do this for a week if possible.

Take care of yourself x

Thank you, my friend.

xx
cJA

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 9:51 pm

pk1 wrote:
Willow904 wrote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 22221.html

A second European Union referendum should be held in order to confirm or reject the final Brexit package, the Green Party’s new leader has said.
I agree with this. I hope the Greens keep pushing for it.
I was pleasantly surprised to see Lucas & Bartley agreeing with Owen Smith's idea. I hope they succeed in convincing Theresa May but I rather doubt they will

I think the Green's approach looks a lot cleverer & smoother, it's worded to appeal to those who voted in and out, as it's a continuation of 'people power' having a continual say on the direction of brexit & making a second referendum sound like a natural & logical conclusion.
Owen Smith's approach seems likely to only appeal to disappointed 'remainers' and would only be realised if Labour were elected.

edited to add: having looked at comments on the independent article, I'm probably wrong & (if they're typical examples )it won't appeal to outers.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 03 Sep, 2016 10:56 pm

Goodnight, everyone.
love,
cJA

Post by **adam** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 8:39 am

Best news quote and favourite new item of trivia of the day/week/year, from the Guardian

South Carolina clown sightings could be part of film marketing stunt

The restiveness in Greenville was enough for police to warn that South Carolina law prohibits anyone over age 18 from dressing up as a clown. Chief Miller said a city ordinance related to “molesting or disturbing the public” could also lead to prosecution of clowns taken into custody

.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 9:18 am

Polls often inaccurate

http://www.pollingdigest.com/home/2016/ ... -survation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 9:45 am

tinybgoat wrote:
pk1 wrote:
Willow904 wrote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 22221.html
I agree with this. I hope the Greens keep pushing for it.
I was pleasantly surprised to see Lucas & Bartley agreeing with Owen Smith's idea. I hope they succeed in convincing Theresa May but I rather doubt they will
I think the Green's approach looks a lot cleverer & smoother, it's worded to appeal to those who voted in and out, as it's a continuation of 'people power' having a continual say on the direction of brexit & making a second referendum sound like a natural & logical conclusion.
Owen Smith's approach seems likely to only appeal to disappointed 'remainers' and would only be realised if Labour were elected.

edited to add: having looked at comments on the independent article, I'm probably wrong & (if they're typical examples )it won't appeal to outers.

The proposals to have a further referendum to ask people what kind of Brexit they want has exposed a lack of genuine support for direct democracy among Brexiters. A referendum was appropriate for deciding to leave but not any other kind of decision, apparently. There's a definite lack of consistency in their arguments. The Greens are being most consistent in their approach to this form of democracy (as are the Libdems in their way). Labour has changed position, but only after being outnumbered on having a referendum in the first place and having to accept referenda as part of the political landscape. The Tories, having been huge champions of referendums, holding 3 in the space of a few years, now feel they are inappropriate, not necessary, can't keep asking the people etc etc. They are a bunch of self-serving hypocrites. I think it's important that the opposition parties keep pressing Theresa May on the lack of mandate for any specific form of new relationship with the EU and highlight the democratic deficit, but I don't expect her to concede.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 10:58 am

So, Keith Vaz.......

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 11:01 am

Blogger AnotherAngryVoice notes how hollow are Clegg's regrets about his time in the Coalition - and how odd that he waited until he had a book to flog to get it all off his chest (rather than actually doing anything about it at the time).

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk ... -sell.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He lists some other things that Clegg could have cited as regrets - if he wasn't such a Janus faced hypocrite, that is.

By agreeing to throw Proportional Representation on the scrap heap and accept a referendum on an Alternative Vote system that he himself had described as "a miserable little compromise", Clegg massively let down people who want to see the UK electoral system made fairer and more representative.

Clegg also let down political modernisers when he failed to secure the democratisation of the House of Lords. Instead of delivering an elected and accountable upper chamber, Clegg gladly sat back and watched David Cameron stuff almost 200 unelected peers into the £300 a day for life club. The Lib-Dems who ostensibly oppose the unelected House of Lords are now left in the ridiculous position where they have just 8 elected MPs, but 105 unelected peers in the bloated House of Lords.

Clegg and the Lib-Dems didn't just vote through a load of George Osborne's savage welfare cuts, they also worked as ministers in Iain Duncan Smith's DWP. Anyone who witnessed the Lib-Dem MP Steve Webb's excruciating performances trying to defend Bedroom Tax will know how much damage that did to the party.

The failure of the Lib-Dems to challenge Theresa May on savagely illiberal legislation like Secret Courts, her toxic anti-immigrant ranting or her track record of incompetence was completely unacceptable. Had the Lib-Dems tried to hold her to account for her extremism and incompetence instead of biting their tongues for five long years, perhaps this inept and fanatically right-wing authoritarian woman wouldn't now be considered "a safe pair of hands" by quite as many people.

Anyone who started following the Lib-Dems because of Charles Kennedy's principled opposition to the invasion of Iraq must have been horrified by the Lib-Dems involvement in the mess in Libya. Imagine the levels of delusion necessary to believe that Libya is now better off now that it's civil society has been reduced to ruins and the country has been overrun by ISIS.

Andrew Lansley's top-down reorganisation of the NHS designed to carve it up into little pieces and then give them away his private sector mates (who donate hundreds of thousands of pounds to the Tory Party) was only passed thanks to Lib-Dem votes in the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The facts that such an NHS privatisation-by-stealth policy was not included in the manifesto of either coalition party, and that David Cameron had explicitly ruled out a top-down reorganisation of the NHS didn't bother the Lib-Dems at all. Handing huge slices of the NHS to a bunch of Tory donors was part of the price they were willing to pay for a tiny taste of second hand Tory power.

Before the 2015 General Election Vince Cable was popular because he talked a bit of economic sense. After the General Election he switched to parroting George Osborne's austerity gibberish. Switching from talking sense to repeating the exact kind of rubbish he was criticising before the election was one of the most infuriating U-turns I've ever seen, and clearly motivated by political expediency rather than any genuine conversion to austerity fetishism.

Another staggering Lib-Dem U-turn was delivered by the Lib-Dem energy minister Ed Davey, who went from saying "In addition to posing safety and environmental risks, nuclear power will only be possible with vast taxpayer subsidies or a rigged market" in 2006 to lavishing heaps of praise on Cameron and Osborne's crackpot price-rigging scheme to bribe the French and Chinese into building a new nuclear reactor in 2013.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 11:05 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:So, Keith Vaz.......

What about him?

Edited to add -

The story in the Mirror?

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 11:20 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:So, Keith Vaz.......

Pretty awful stuff, very disappointing from a man respected for his work on select committees.

I didn't know he was married - had previously thought he might be gay, but hadn't really given his personal life much thought. I suppose his involvement with prostitutes is his way of letting off steam from a stressful job. Drugs (poppers) involved. I guess that's him finished career wise. Sad.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 11:31 am

SpinningHugo wrote:Polls often inaccurate

Yes, they are.

We all know what public opinion currently is regarding Corbyn and Labour. You think that is all his fault - many others disagree.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 11:37 am

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... ter-brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Obama tells prime minister US won’t prioritise UK trade deal while Tokyo warns of consequences for Japanese businesses

great.
(not)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 11:56 am

Oh - good morfternoon.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 12:40 pm

AK this poll is just about Corbyn, not Labour generally.

So it seems to me that blaming others is even.more ridiculous than usual.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 1:01 pm

Good-~~morning~~ afternoon, everyone.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 1:03 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:So, Keith Vaz.......

Did he break the law? I've not looked at the news yet this afternoon. I'm working up my courage.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 1:06 pm

As a distraction from the neverending story of the labour leadership, a couple of articles Ive done recently.

The origins of Humpty Dumpty.

http://jemahlevans.wixsite.com/jemahlev ... pty-Dumpty" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And since it's a momentous anniversary today, a review of Rideal's new history - which is delightful.

http://jemahlevans.wixsite.com/jemahlev ... cca-Rideal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 1:14 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:AK this poll is just about Corbyn, not Labour generally.

So it seems to me that blaming others is even.more ridiculous than usual.

My point is that his internal enemies set out to rubbish him from the outset, and as this poll shows they have been highly successful.

The problem is, they have harmed - very possibly long term - the party they claim to care about as well......

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 1:28 pm

I'm totally in favour of free speech - just sometimes it's difficult to remember quite why.

Greetings all btw.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 2:43 pm

There was a time when I'd have thought that the Keith Vaz story was, in one way or another, important in terms of the Labour Party and its standing with the electorate.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 3:57 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:AK this poll is just about Corbyn, not Labour generally.

So it seems to me that blaming others is even.more ridiculous than usual.

No it's not, (I think) it's from a wide ranging poll about a number of politicians,
and it also shows that Owen Smith whilst having higher ratings than Corbyn, is doing worse than might be expected. Possibly for same reasons Anatoly has given.

http://survation.com/new-polling-theres ... ty-leader/

Post by **adam** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 4:11 pm

Willow904 wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:
pk1 wrote: I was pleasantly surprised to see Lucas & Bartley agreeing with Owen Smith's idea. I hope they succeed in convincing Theresa May but I rather doubt they will
I think the Green's approach looks a lot cleverer & smoother, it's worded to appeal to those who voted in and out, as it's a continuation of 'people power' having a continual say on the direction of brexit & making a second referendum sound like a natural & logical conclusion.
Owen Smith's approach seems likely to only appeal to disappointed 'remainers' and would only be realised if Labour were elected.

edited to add: having looked at comments on the independent article, I'm probably wrong & (if they're typical examples )it won't appeal to outers.
The proposals to have a further referendum to ask people what kind of Brexit they want has exposed a lack of genuine support for direct democracy among Brexiters. A referendum was appropriate for deciding to leave but not any other kind of decision, apparently. There's a definite lack of consistency in their arguments. The Greens are being most consistent in their approach to this form of democracy (as are the Libdems in their way). Labour has changed position, but only after being outnumbered on having a referendum in the first place and having to accept referenda as part of the political landscape. The Tories, having been huge champions of referendums, holding 3 in the space of a few years, now feel they are inappropriate, not necessary, can't keep asking the people etc etc. They are a bunch of self-serving hypocrites. I think it's important that the opposition parties keep pressing Theresa May on the lack of mandate for any specific form of new relationship with the EU and highlight the democratic deficit, but I don't expect her to concede.

The referendum result is awful and ridiculous - but it's the result and I think it has to go ahead.

Referenda just don't work as tools for complicated questions (and so we should never have had this one in the first place) but they establish principles (Change the electoral system? Move to independence? Leave the EU?) that then follow (or don't).

If we have a referendum on the actual plan, then what happens? Do we vote on 'do you agree with this plan to leave?' as a binary, given that the principle is established? So if we vote 'no' to that question then they have to come up with a new plan to leave for us to vote on?

It feels like the behaviour of governments in prolonged strikes - well, they haven't had a ballot. Well, now they haven't had a ballot on our revised proposals. Well, now ....

We stupidly and ridiculously voted to leave - the only thing that can possibly demonstrate to the lying stupid shits who led that campaign and to those who followed them that this was a stupid and ridiculous decision will be the consequences of leaving - and then someone has to rebuild things again later.

If we give permission for governments to ignore the outcome of popular votes and to try again until they get what they want then we open dangerous and worrying doors that future governments will push through when it suits them.

It's shit, but it's done. A general election can change it - a party coming to power on a manifesto to go back and look again - but not otherwise.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 4:13 pm

PorFavor wrote:There was a time when I'd have thought that the Keith Vaz story was, in one way or another, important in terms of the Labour Party and its standing with the electorate.

I suppose that's an unintended "benefit" of already being pretty much at rock bottom

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 4:48 pm

Good afternoon,
I see that Corbyn is being pilloried in the Mail by "a leading Labour moderate" for daring to go to out of the way places like Stoke & Walthamstowe & hold rallies (i.e. meet the people). Absolutely shocking!

Edited to add missing link.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4JIJzIulS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 5:27 pm

danesclose wrote:Good afternoon,
I see that Corbyn is being pilloried in the Mail by "a leading Labour moderate" for daring to go to out of the way places like Stoke & Walthamstowe & hold rallies (i.e. meet the people). Absolutely shocking!

Edited to add missing link.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4JIJzIulS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Former paratrooper? I had no idea. Sigh.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 04 Sep, 2016 6:17 pm

oh go on then.

--> page 3.