FlyTheNest

ohsocynical wrote:

mbc1955 wrote:

PorFavor wrote:
He's handled the whole thing so badly, though. I honestly can't work out what he thought he could gain from his strategy and tactics. He's not standing for re-election so what was going on in his mind? Because even as a career move to bolster his prospects outside mainstream politics it makes no sense to me. He can't have impressed anyone.

The only explanation I can come up with is that Cameron is fantastically more stupid, self-centred and incapable of understanding probable outcomes than the most cynical and pessimistic of us imagined. I cannot conceive of a mindset that thinks that the disaster unfurling before us- which is going to last waaaaay beyond the result - is a desirable thing or even worth the risk, and so I can only put it down to massive stupidity. Cameron really had no idea of what he was doing and what he was unleashing. Already, what we took for normal, for civilised, has vanished. It's not coming back. It really isn't.

My son works on rich people's gardens. Believe me, if you heard how they live and act, you wouldn't question Cameron's behaviour.
It's arrogance, having their every whim granted and being indulged from birth. It's disgusting and beyond our imaginations.

Edited to add: and they're often deeply unhappy.

citizenJA wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:Over at UK Polling Report they're having a discussion about whether a snap general election in October is on the cards if it's a Brexit win and a new Tory leader is installed. Some are querying whether the opposition would actually support a motion of no confidence - which is what it would take - if they don't particularly want, and probably can't afford, an election that quickly. Hmmmm.

It needs more than a motion of no confidence, because of the fixed term thing.

Labour should say "you have a mandatem govern".

Repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 with a majority vote in the House

gilsey wrote:

mbc1955 wrote: Already, what we took for normal, for civilised, has vanished. It's not coming back. It really isn't.

I hope you're wrong, but fear you're not.

Six months ago with the NHS, housing, persecution of the disabled, in other words, the postwar consensus torn up, I thought the outlook for this country was as bad as it could possibly be. How naive of me.

Nationalism is a very ugly thing indeed.

mbc1955 wrote:

ohsocynical wrote:

mbc1955 wrote: The only explanation I can come up with is that Cameron is fantastically more stupid, self-centred and incapable of understanding probable outcomes than the most cynical and pessimistic of us imagined. I cannot conceive of a mindset that thinks that the disaster unfurling before us- which is going to last waaaaay beyond the result - is a desirable thing or even worth the risk, and so I can only put it down to massive stupidity. Cameron really had no idea of what he was doing and what he was unleashing. Already, what we took for normal, for civilised, has vanished. It's not coming back. It really isn't.

My son works on rich people's gardens. Believe me, if you heard how they live and act, you wouldn't question Cameron's behaviour.
It's arrogance, having their every whim granted and being indulged from birth. It's disgusting and beyond our imaginations.

Edited to add: and they're often deeply unhappy.

That's one of the most horrible things I've ever heard. And sadly believable. And it won't be them who suffer.

Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011

"The Act applies until it is repealed..."

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ ... ry/SN06111" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 wrote:So having listened to Radio 4 news at one .... I'm in need of a prop for my jaw after learning that not only did the Queen charge £100 per ticket for attending her birthday bash - but she also had commercial sponsors for the event. What a bloody cheek - if you throw a party you don't charge people for coming surely - especially when someone else is already paying for it.

Plastic ponchos isn't a great look ... but it does seem very British somehow.

Editing to add: Just realised I got the price wrong - it's actually £150 a ticket. As someone else said seems an awful lot to pay to have lunch in the pouring rain and not be allowed to have an umbrella.

ohsocynical wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:So having listened to Radio 4 news at one .... I'm in need of a prop for my jaw after learning that not only did the Queen charge £100 per ticket for attending her birthday bash - but she also had commercial sponsors for the event. What a bloody cheek - if you throw a party you don't charge people for coming surely - especially when someone else is already paying for it.

Plastic ponchos isn't a great look ... but it does seem very British somehow.

Editing to add: Just realised I got the price wrong - it's actually £150 a ticket. As someone else said seems an awful lot to pay to have lunch in the pouring rain and not be allowed to have an umbrella.

Charities were asked but had to pay too. And just to keep things tidy, I believe a relative? Anne's son? his company, got the contract.

I think she's showing her age. Common sense should have told her it wasn't the best idea.

ohsocynical wrote:The Andrew Marr Show ‏@MarrShow 5h5 hours ago

"If we vote to leave, will we carry out that instruction? Yes. Will I stay on as PM? Yes." - @David_Cameron #marr

rebeccariots2 wrote:Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan 2m2 minutes ago
UPDATE: 50 dead, 53 wounded.
Now officially worst mass shooting in U.S. history. #orlando

This is dreadful.

When are the American people going to say enough is enough and introduce some sensible gun control.

ohsocynical wrote:Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair demanded over $500,000 USD to speak at a conference on world hunger.

The organizers disinvited him.

Blair was asked to address the 2015 EAT Food Forum in Stockholm, Sweden, a conference that claims its vision “is a transformation of the global food system to sustainably feed a healthy population of nine billion people by mid-Century.”

http://bennorton.com/tony-blair-demande ... 0-minutes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mbc1955 wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan 2m2 minutes ago
UPDATE: 50 dead, 53 wounded.
Now officially worst mass shooting in U.S. history. #orlando

This is dreadful.

When are the American people going to say enough is enough and introduce some sensible gun control.

They're not. Their gun means more to them than other people's lives.

It's as simple as that.

Channel 4 News ‏@Channel4News 3h3 hours ago
Northern Ireland and Poland fans attacked by French hooligans in Nice, according to local police

mbc1955 wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan 2m2 minutes ago
UPDATE: 50 dead, 53 wounded.
Now officially worst mass shooting in U.S. history. #orlando

This is dreadful.

When are the American people going to say enough is enough and introduce some sensible gun control.

They're not. Their gun means more to them than other people's lives.

It's as simple as that.

rebeccariots2 wrote:Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan 2m2 minutes ago
UPDATE: 50 dead, 53 wounded.
Now officially worst mass shooting in U.S. history. #orlando

This is dreadful.

When are the American people going to say enough is enough and introduce some sensible gun control.

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

mbc1955 wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan 2m2 minutes ago
UPDATE: 50 dead, 53 wounded.
Now officially worst mass shooting in U.S. history. #orlando

This is dreadful.

When are the American people going to say enough is enough and introduce some sensible gun control.

They're not. Their gun means more to them than other people's lives.

It's as simple as that.

It's not that simple.

Of the top of my head, there's the constitution, the Supreme Court, the power of states, where awful Republican governors get elected on bad turnouts and gerrymander the House.

The majority of American people could vote for a strongly pre-control president, and huge barriers would remain to controlling guns like was done by John Howard in Australia.

rebeccariots2 wrote:

mbc1955 wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan 2m2 minutes ago
UPDATE: 50 dead, 53 wounded.
Now officially worst mass shooting in U.S. history. #orlando

This is dreadful.

When are the American people going to say enough is enough and introduce some sensible gun control.

They're not. Their gun means more to them than other people's lives.

It's as simple as that.

I hope you aren't right, but fear you are. It'll be the biggest regret for Obama I reckon - that he couldn't get any kind of reform through.

mbc1955 wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

mbc1955 wrote: They're not. Their gun means more to them than other people's lives.

It's as simple as that.

It's not that simple.

Of the top of my head, there's the constitution, the Supreme Court, the power of states, where awful Republican governors get elected on bad turnouts and gerrymander the House.

The majority of American people could vote for a strongly pre-control president, and huge barriers would remain to controlling guns like was done by John Howard in Australia.

I'm sorry, I disagree. These 'controls' exist because of a massive political will among the American population to protect their Second Amendment Right to bear arms. And they cling to that right because their guns mean more to them than the lives of other people.

Do you not listen to what gets said after each tragedy?

mbc1955 wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:It's not that simple.

Of the top of my head, there's the constitution, the Supreme Court, the power of states, where awful Republican governors get elected on bad turnouts and gerrymander the House.

The majority of American people could vote for a strongly pre-control president, and huge barriers would remain to controlling guns like was done by John Howard in Australia.

I'm sorry, I disagree. These 'controls' exist because of a massive political will among the American population to protect their Second Amendment Right to bear arms. And they cling to that right because their guns mean more to them than the lives of other people.

Do you not listen to what gets said after each tragedy?

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

mbc1955 wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:It's not that simple.

Of the top of my head, there's the constitution, the Supreme Court, the power of states, where awful Republican governors get elected on bad turnouts and gerrymander the House.

The majority of American people could vote for a strongly pre-control president, and huge barriers would remain to controlling guns like was done by John Howard in Australia.

I'm sorry, I disagree. These 'controls' exist because of a massive political will among the American population to protect their Second Amendment Right to bear arms. And they cling to that right because their guns mean more to them than the lives of other people.

Do you not listen to what gets said after each tragedy?

Which of my points is easily fixed by the American people having the political will? The example of Obama has been mentioned. He can't do anything. The American people voted for him with a 5 million majority.

rebeccariots2 wrote:

mbc1955 wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan 2m2 minutes ago
UPDATE: 50 dead, 53 wounded.
Now officially worst mass shooting in U.S. history. #orlando

This is dreadful.

When are the American people going to say enough is enough and introduce some sensible gun control.

They're not. Their gun means more to them than other people's lives.

It's as simple as that.

I hope you aren't right, but fear you are. It'll be the biggest regret for Obama I reckon - that he couldn't get any kind of reform through.

citizenJA wrote: Yes, apparently many Obama supporters believe it's their constitutional right to own a firearm they'll never buy and won't need as
well as pay more for private health care insurance that doesn't provide as consistently healthy outcomes as less expensive health
care systems.

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Guns are a base issue for Republicans to get white working class votes. It's very useful because these gun rights voters are very loyal, and vote against their own economic interests which allows them to pick up pro-business Republican voters who might, like Mike Bloomberg, hate guns.

This doesn't mean you can blame Americans in general.

ohsocynical wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:

mbc1955 wrote: They're not. Their gun means more to them than other people's lives.

It's as simple as that.

I hope you aren't right, but fear you are. It'll be the biggest regret for Obama I reckon - that he couldn't get any kind of reform through.

The best thing Obama could have done for them was turn the clock back to the eighteen hundreds and made cowboy outfits mandatory.

Seriously; it's gone too far now. There are too many guns in circulation to do anything about them. I think recently I read there is a gun for every man woman and child in the US.

Two of Mr Ohso's relatives, a niece and a grandniece, have cancer. In order to help them pay for their treatment another of his nieces is running a crowd funding page, but it isn't doing that well, so now she is raffling a gun. What are the odds that makes a lot of money!

And there is another of Mr Ohso's cousins [who lives in Orlando Florida] who had her house burgled. As she lives on her own, she bought a gun. A few weeks later she went out but didn't take the gun. Got broke into again, and as well as a few bits of jewellery, they took the gun. The jewellery was recovered but not the gun. The last I heard she was pondering whether to get another one.

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Guns are a base issue for Republicans to get white working class votes. It's very useful because these gun rights voters are very loyal, and vote against their own economic interests which allows them to pick up pro-business Republican voters who might, like Mike Bloomberg, hate guns.

This doesn't mean you can blame Americans in general.

mbc1955 wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Guns are a base issue for Republicans to get white working class votes. It's very useful because these gun rights voters are very loyal, and vote against their own economic interests which allows them to pick up pro-business Republican voters who might, like Mike Bloomberg, hate guns.

This doesn't mean you can blame Americans in general.

But I do blame Americans in general, begging CitizenJA's pardon. Because the political will isn't there, and it will not be there in the kind of numbers necessary for longer than you or I or the youngest person here can hope to live. Because America is a land of mythology and a central part of that mythology is the man with a gun, bringing justice wherever he goes, the loner who stands up for himself, even in the face of the Law, when the Law is corrupt. Can't be the man with a gun defending himself without a gun. Ergo...

And when I say Americans in general, I mean exactly that: in general. Not every single one of them. But millions of them. And many millions more than Obama's majority.

Plus, don't forget another aspect of American myth, its Declaration of Rights, its Constitution and its Amendments. Tamper with just one of those, like the Second Amendment, and you open the door to those who want to interfere with other elements. The right to bear arms is equal to the right of, say, free speech. If you're free to change the first, then the second isn't safe.

PorFavor wrote:The gun laws in the USA are as anachronistic as their voting system.

Tubby Isaacs wrote:You've just given yourself a very good explanation of why it's complicated. People might hate the second amendment, but worry about it being repealed or qualified for very good reasons. These would, I guess, include a fair few jurists.

That's a whole layer on top of the political problems of getting guns controlled. I'd guess that something like a majority would support controls, as it happens.

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

citizenJA wrote: Yes, apparently many Obama supporters believe it's their constitutional right to own a firearm they'll never buy and won't need as
well as pay more for private health care insurance that doesn't provide as consistently healthy outcomes as less expensive health
care systems.

The Supreme Court says guns are a right., so they're correct to think that.

citizenJA wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

citizenJA wrote: Yes, apparently many Obama supporters believe it's their constitutional right to own a firearm they'll never buy and won't need as
well as pay more for private health care insurance that doesn't provide as consistently healthy outcomes as less expensive health
care systems.

The Supreme Court says guns are a right., so they're correct to think that.

Yes, but my point was millions of US citizens having never held a firearm, won't own one, have no intention of ever using one, understand intellectually people having access to guns causes horrific tragedies but continue to believe they'd better not vote for gun control.

Take care of difficult problems
while they are still easy;
Do easy things before they become too hard.

Difficult problems are best solved while they are easy.
Great projects are best started while they are small.

http://tao-in-you.com/lao-tzu-tao-te-ching-chapter-63/

When you're founding your nation
Don't

ohsocynical wrote:

citizenJA wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote: The Supreme Court says guns are a right., so they're correct to think that.

Yes, but my point was millions of US citizens having never held a firearm, won't own one, have no intention of ever using one, understand intellectually people having access to guns causes horrific tragedies but continue to believe they'd better not vote for gun control.

Ironic though, that when a mass shooting occurs, gun sales go through the roof...

yahyah wrote:Night all.

I'm ending the day happy.
The doctor had to start me on diuretics last week, my abdomen and back torso had swollen so much, as well as what the GP thought was internal oedema. Likely due to the blood pressure medication unfortunately. Have been so fed up, with the swelling and the heat I felt awful.
My husband says I've gone down back to my normal size, even my face is slimmer again, and the horrible internal pain and discomfort has nearly gone.

My brain is still a bit off the station, hopefully that will come back soon.

Hope others with health issues are feeling some respite.

yahyah wrote:Night all.

I'm ending the day happy.
The doctor had to start me on diuretics last week, my abdomen and back torso had swollen so much, as well as what the GP thought was internal oedema. Likely due to the blood pressure medication unfortunately. Have been so fed up, with the swelling and the heat I felt awful.
My husband says I've gone down back to my normal size, even my face is slimmer again, and the horrible internal pain and discomfort has nearly gone.

My brain is still a bit off the station, hopefully that will come back soon.

Hope others with health issues are feeling some respite.

Radical plans floated by Jeremy Corbyn to extend the right to buy to tenants of private landlords have won the backing
of a major centre-right thinktank as a way to address the affordability crisis facing young, aspiring homeowners.

- Right to buy plans floated by Corbyn backed by centre-right thinktank

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016 ... -thinktank" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;