Thursday 23rd March 2017

Post by **refitman** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 7:09 am

Morning all.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 7:16 am

Likewise

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 7:30 am

Morning all.

Brendan Cox the only sensible voice I heard on Today before the inevitable switching it off.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 8:04 am

Morning

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/m ... 5-expenses" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Inside story of the Tory election scandal

Post by **adam** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 8:33 am

Yesterday...

SpinningHugo wrote: I don't myself find the killing of innocent people terribly complex and difficult.

Who are 'innocent people'? Daniel McCann, Mairead Farrell, Sean Savage? So you couldn't bring yourself to support anyone who stood behind that, which is virtually everybody involved in British politics and public life then outside the Republican movement itself? Thomas McCearlin, John Murray and Caoimhín Mac Brádaigh, killed at their funeral?

I don't for a moment doubt your good faith in holding Corbyn and all in disdain. The idea - that you've brought up on several occasions - that the political complexities of the politics of Northern Ireland give you grounds for dismissing him out of hand, a political situation where a significant and consistently growing proportion of the population of NI could see beyond your simplicity of good guys and bad guys.

I am sure we will hear a lot of this as and when (if and when?) Corbyn leads labour in a General Election campaign, but it's a silly irrelevance that denies a deeply complex and conflicted history in part of our country that is still evolving now. Our governments of all colours have been quite happy to give their support to murderous shits around the world but that doesn't top peoples' lists of why they can't be contemplated. Let it go.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 9:04 am

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ts-poorest" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In Liverpool, Tory cuts have brought a city and its people to breaking point
Frances Ryan

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 9:04 am

http://europe.newsweek.com/exercise-bat ... 2054?rm=eu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

WHY TAKING A HOT BATH MIGHT BE AS GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH AS EXERCISE
Who knew? Taking a bath burns the same amount of calories as a half-hour walk.

Excuse the off-topic link, but it's so unusual for something fun and pleasant to be linked with better health, I thought it worth sharing. A bit of positivity amongst all the gloom.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 9:09 am

adam wrote:Yesterday...

SpinningHugo wrote: I don't myself find the killing of innocent people terribly complex and difficult.
Who are 'innocent people'? Daniel McCann, Mairead Farrell, Sean Savage? So you couldn't bring yourself to support anyone who stood behind that, which is virtually everybody involved in British politics and public life then outside the Republican movement itself?

The Gibraltar shooting was a disgrace. It was, as the European Court of Human Rights held, a violation of their human rights. The IRA claimed they were at war with the British, and so it was an enormous propaganda coup. But it was morally and legally wrong, as the UK state was not at war. They were criminals who should have been arrested.

who now supports the Gibraltar shootings, and thinks it legitimate? Not me.

But I think you're guilty of moral relativism (Corbyn is constantly guilty of this. It is like a tick with him. See every comment he makes on Ukraine or anti-semitism. ) That, say, Bloody Sunday or the Gibraltar shootings were immoral and disgusting doesn't make it ok to back the IRA (as Corbyn and McDonnell did .)

adam wrote:Thomas McCearlin, John Murray and Caoimhín Mac Brádaigh, killed at their funeral?

Revolting Loyalist murders. Morally as repulsive as the IRA. Those who supported these acts of terror are no better than Corbyn and McDonnell. I certainly don't.

adam wrote: that the political complexities of the politics of Northern Ireland give you grounds for dismissing him out of hand, a political situation where a significant and consistently growing proportion of the population of NI could see beyond your simplicity of good guys and bad guys.

It isn't complex. Was the killing of innocent people a legitimate way for the IRA to pursue the goal of a united Ireland?

That other people, including the government of my country, have been guilty of other morally disgusting things is not on point at all. I condemn those too.

Maybe we could overlook Corbyn and McDonnell's lack of moral judgement on this issue if it were not characteristic of a more general moral failing.

Post by **adam** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 9:25 am

Well. My core point is that this is an irrelevant discussion, and I know how easy it is for this kind of discussion to spin out of control into realms of offence that I honestly do not intend but probably can't be avoided at some point. So I will limit this to...

SpinningHugo wrote: But I think you're guilty of moral relativism

Who isn't? Events exist in contexts, not in moral hypotheticals.

I don't believe that the killings in Gibraltar - extra-judicial state/military executions - equate to the killings at Enniskillen - the deliberate targeting of civilians - for example, but I think it's absurd to imagine that there isn't a connection between them (two events amongst many - I'm not for a moment suggesting any kind of direct causality). That isn't pejorative moral relativism, it's just accepting that Republican terrorism in Northern Ireland had lots of roots but one of them was a very genuine sense amongst a part of our national community that the discrimination against them would never end, a small core group of people who believed that violence was a justifiable response to this and a very significant number of people who sat somewhere between support, acceptance and tolerance of this violence.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 10:00 am

No longer have a bath,so jumping up and down under shower as a substitute.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 10:15 am

Moral relativism is certainly not good as the norm, but nor is moral absolutism.

Both have their place at different times, and one of the skills of politics is deciding when each is appropriate.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 10:49 am

HindleA wrote:No longer have a bath,so jumping up and down under shower as a substitute.

I prefer star jumps but keep banging my arms.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 10:52 am

Doctor:How exactly did you break your arm,again?

Post by **adam** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 10:54 am

HindleA wrote:Doctor:How exactly did you break your arm,again?

I want you to show me exactly what you did.

Exactly?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 11:01 am

Willow904 wrote:http://europe.newsweek.com/exercise-bat ... 2054?rm=eu
WHY TAKING A HOT BATH MIGHT BE AS GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH AS EXERCISE
Who knew? Taking a bath burns the same amount of calories as a half-hour walk.
Excuse the off-topic link, but it's so unusual for something fun and pleasant to be linked with better health, I thought it worth sharing. A bit of positivity amongst all the gloom.

"These data indicate the potential for thermal therapy as an alternative treatment and management strategy for those at risk of developing metabolic disease where adherence, or ability to EX[exercise], may be compromised."

- S. H. Faulkner, S. Jackson, G. Fatania & C. A. Leicht
The effect of passive heating on heat shock protein 70 and interleukin-6: A possible treatment tool for metabolic diseases?

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1 ... 17.1288688" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ephemerid gave us the heads' up on this over a year ago after the Passive Heating Treatment Tool installation at her place.

Good-morning, everyone

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 11:03 am

adam wrote: Who isn't? Events exist in contexts, not in moral hypotheticals.

I don't believe that the killings in Gibraltar - extra-judicial state/military executions - equate to the killings at Enniskillen - the deliberate targeting of civilians - for example, but I think it's absurd to imagine that there isn't a connection between them (two events amongst many - I'm not for a moment suggesting any kind of direct causality).

Who rational could deny that? Certainly not me. It just isn't relevant to the moral question of whether support for the IRA was moral or immoral.

adam wrote: it's just accepting that Republican terrorism in Northern Ireland had lots of roots but one of them was a very genuine sense amongst a part of our national community that the discrimination against them would never end, a small core group of people who believed that violence was a justifiable response to this and a very significant number of people who sat somewhere between support, acceptance and tolerance of this violence.

All of which is a statement of fact. No problem accepting any of that.

But the question in issue is: was and is it morally acceptable to endorse the IRA's killing of innocent people to pursue the goal of a united Ireland.

To which the only answer possible is no.

People who do not accept that, such as Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, are morally bankrupt.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 11:18 am

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/john ... ension-age" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

John Cridland CBE and the Government Actuary’s Department release reports into the future State Pension age

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 11:21 am

Carers UK response

http://www.carersuk.org/news-and-campai ... sion-age-2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 12:12 pm

Trump is a bit odd

http://time.com/4710456/donald-trump-ti ... d=homepage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 12:14 pm

Boss of British Gas owner gets 40% pay rise as millions live in fuel poverty

Centrica chief executive Iain Conn’s remuneration jumped from £3.02m in 2015 to £4.15m in 2016....
British Gas’s parent company was handed a pay increase of nearly 40% last year, a raise Labour attacked as
“astronomical” and a “kick in the teeth” for millions of families living in fuel poverty.

Centrica said it recognised the sensitivity of executive pay and was very careful to be in line with its peers.
A spokeswoman said that in terms of financial performance, 2016 had been a very good year for the company,
which posted an operating profit of £1.5bn, up by 4% on 2015.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ing-prices" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(cJA emphasis)

This is too much money for what this person does
The profit British Gas makes from supplying people with energy is too much

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 12:27 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:Trump is a bit odd

http://time.com/4710456/donald-trump-ti ... d=homepage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, that is one way of putting it

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 12:54 pm

The only person anything like Trump I've seen is Joe Kinnear.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ne-1960189" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 1:39 pm

Hello.

I see some "England fans" did us all proud in Germany last night:

http://www.football365.com/news/england ... oesnt-work" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This isn't going to get any better, for obvious reasons.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 1:48 pm

NonOxCol wrote:Hello.

I see some "England fans" did us all proud in Germany last night:

http://www.football365.com/news/england ... oesnt-work" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This isn't going to get any better, for obvious reasons.

If you've ever been to an England game, you'll know it is pretty unpleasant. Nothing like following a club.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 1:55 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
adam wrote: Who isn't? Events exist in contexts, not in moral hypotheticals.

I don't believe that the killings in Gibraltar - extra-judicial state/military executions - equate to the killings at Enniskillen - the deliberate targeting of civilians - for example, but I think it's absurd to imagine that there isn't a connection between them (two events amongst many - I'm not for a moment suggesting any kind of direct causality).

Who rational could deny that? Certainly not me. It just isn't relevant to the moral question of whether support for the IRA was moral or immoral.

adam wrote: it's just accepting that Republican terrorism in Northern Ireland had lots of roots but one of them was a very genuine sense amongst a part of our national community that the discrimination against them would never end, a small core group of people who believed that violence was a justifiable response to this and a very significant number of people who sat somewhere between support, acceptance and tolerance of this violence.
All of which is a statement of fact. No problem accepting any of that.

But the question in issue is: was and is it morally acceptable to endorse the IRA's killing of innocent people to pursue the goal of a united Ireland.

To which the only answer possible is no.

People who do not accept that, such as Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, are morally bankrupt.

Maybe I'd depends on your perception of whether Corbyn or McDonnell were endorsing the killing of innocent people, or just recognising the reality of the situation that led to the IRA existing, and supporting their motives, rather than their methods.

I don't think Corbyn's dealings make him immoral, but they do make it easier to attack him.
there's an interesting article on 'International Socialism' on how socialists should respond terrorism, which, as a lapsed Labour member, you may like:

http://isj.org.uk/marxism-and-terrorism/

But whatever the specific differences between terrorism currently and that of the past—and these are less than appearances suggest—the question of how to respond is one that socialists have frequently had to confront.

Also a response to some criticisms of Corbyn in the Spectator.

https://danieldcollins.wordpress.com/20 ... d-the-ira/

For many, joining the IRA wasn’t to satisfy some blood-lust; it was to defend themselves, their families, their streets and their community against violent intrusions by sectarian police and against pogroms by belligerent loyalist mobs as the state stood idly by. They were brutalised by a discriminatory two-tiered system that violently denied them their civil rights (and later rejected the possibility of power-sharing).

( Apologies if you've already read these)

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:09 pm

When Neil Gorsuch put corporate interests over a man freezing to death

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/ma ... nse-maddin" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seems like he *is* the heir to Scalia.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:20 pm

tinybgoat wrote:
Maybe I'd depends on your perception of whether Corbyn or McDonnell were endorsing the killing of innocent people,

There is no doubt at all about their words and actions

Corbyn

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/night- ... -1-7008757" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

McDonnell

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/2949688.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All a long time ago, no doubt.

Maybe it is a generational thing? In a generation closer to world war, perhaps the murder of innocents to achieve good ends seemed more acceptable than it does now.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:22 pm

StephenDolan wrote:When Neil Gorsuch put corporate interests over a man freezing to death

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/ma ... nse-maddin" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seems like he *is* the heir to Scalia.

Scalia was, intellectually, quite interesting.

Gorsuch isn't.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:29 pm

Among other things, I think the Corbyn/McDonnell position on Northern Ireland has aged very badly. The sense that reunification was "inevitable" was based, among other things, a very patronising view as Catholics as simple Pope-fearing folk who'd bang out babies forever and be holed up Northern Ireland because Ireland would stay dirt poor.

The Nationalist vote fell in 2015. Brexit of course, changes the odds. Whether the DUP recover from this bad result or not, if there's a hard Brexit. then it doesn't need all that many unionists to change sides.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:33 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:The sense that reunification was "inevitable" was based, among other things, a very patronising view as Catholics as simple Pope-fearing folk who'd bang out babies forever and be holed up Northern Ireland because Ireland would stay dirt poor.

Who expressed such a view Tubby? I don't recall hearing that second, third, fourth hand nor reading that.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:33 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Among other things, I think the Corbyn/McDonnell position on Northern Ireland has aged very badly. The sense that reunification was "inevitable" was based, among other things, a very patronising view as Catholics as simple Pope-fearing folk who'd bang out babies forever and be holed up Northern Ireland because Ireland would stay dirt poor.

The Nationalist vote fell in 2015. Brexit of course, changes the odds. Whether the DUP recover from this bad result or not, if there's a hard Brexit. then it doesn't need all that many unionists to change sides.

One of the many idiocies of Brexit is, of course, the North of Ireland.

It just made no sense to blow people up over which bit of the EU you lived in. It isn't worth murdering people over whether you use the Euro or not.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:38 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:The sense that reunification was "inevitable" was based, among other things, a very patronising view as Catholics as simple Pope-fearing folk who'd bang out babies forever and be holed up Northern Ireland because Ireland would stay dirt poor.
Who expressed such a view Tubby? I don't recall hearing that second, third, fourth hand nor reading that.

Really, you never heard anybody talk about "Catholic birth rates" in the context of Northern Ireland?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:41 pm

Interesting reference to "Catholic birth rates" here.

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/cathol ... -1-7151872" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Catholic birth rates spurred unionists into making 1998 deal, Clinton suggested

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 2:56 pm

We can talk about Corbyn and this sort of stuff all day, and we've done it before. I only brought up the IRA to make the point I think the Tories are saving up loads of stuff for a General Election and that doesn't bear thinking about. I didn't mean to set it all off again here.

As a last word, I quote from this, which is part polemic, but lots of it isn't, and I like this bit-

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

Just as in the case of Israel’s enemies, one is entitled to ask: on whose authority did Mr Corbyn do all this chatting? In whose name? Who appointed him? To whom did he report? Exactly what was being ‘negotiated’? Precisely what was being said that forwarded the cause of peace? And did Mr Corbyn also meet with Northern Ireland’s Loyalists, or right-wing Israeli settlers? Well, no. He poses as a visionary who reached out to supposedly irreconcilable enemies before it was fashionable to do so: but, and this is crucial, he did so before there was the slightest indication that his contacts were willing to compromise or even temper their hard-line hatred of many (Northern Ireland’s Social Democratic and Labour Party, for instance) with whom he should have been standing and fighting – for peace. Most of this just has the flavor of a free-floating backbencher’s intellectual curiosity and hatred for settled orthodoxy, which is fair enough. But the signal it sends, not just to those who seek peace but who actively wish the UK and its allies ill, is unmistakable: UK Labour is making sure that it is crystal clear that there is a deep weakness, and a willingness to talk on almost any grounds, at the heart of the British state. In a very unstable world, that is a very dangerous place to stand.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 3:07 pm

Christ. Look at this from the Mail.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 3:37 pm

There is no doubt the Corbyn/McDonnell line on Ireland was highly one-sided and simplistic.

(which actually mirrored the party at lower levels in the 1970/80s - support for the idiotic "troops out" position was widespread)

But yes, it is in the past. And moreover, whilst JMcD said some genuinely stupid and inflammatory things (for which he has since apologised) it is fair to say JC's actual utterances were a bit more circumspect. Whilst I disagree with his stance on both NI and the ME, there is no reason to seriously doubt that his dislike of "violence on all sides" is genuine.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 3:46 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Christ. Look at this from the Mail.

She may well have thought that she would be of no use in the situation and would only get in the way if she'd hung around. And, for what it's worth, by her facial expression she looks distressed. The Mail should be severely castigated for this. Disgusting. And a blatant attempt at rabble-rousing.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 3:49 pm

That's actually about as balanced as things get in the Heil.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 3:51 pm

Even the term "Brexit" marginalises, trivialises, and ignores Northern Ireland.

"UKxit"?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 4:03 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:There is no doubt the Corbyn/McDonnell line on Ireland was highly one-sided and simplistic.

(which actually mirrored the party at lower levels in the 1970/80s - support for the idiotic "troops out" position was widespread)

But yes, it is in the past. And moreover, whilst JMcD said some genuinely stupid and inflammatory things (for which he has since apologised) it is fair to say JC's actual utterances were a bit more circumspect. Whilst I disagree with his stance on both NI and the ME, there is no reason to seriously doubt that his dislike of "violence on all sides" is genuine.

I can agree with that. Accept that it won't stay in the past, because it's a hugely effective wedge issue. It terrifies me what the Tories will do with it.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 4:13 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote: JMcD said some genuinely stupid and inflammatory things (for which he has since apologised)

no he hasn't.

if you mean this

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ent-labour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

then I'd refer you to this on what is wrong with "apologies" of that kind

https://spinninghugo.wordpress.com/2015 ... apologies/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corbyn's has used less inflammatory language, but his longstanding support for the IRA is quite clear. Portraying him, as some on here have, as just 'engaging' is not in accordance with the historical record.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 4:35 pm

Oh -

Good morfternoon.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 4:40 pm

Poland’s prime minister, Beata Szydło, also drew a link between the attack and the EU’s migrant policy, saying it vindicated Warsaw’s refusal to take in refugees under the EU’s quota scheme.

“I hear in Europe very often: do not connect the migration policy with terrorism, but it is impossible not to connect them,” Szydło told private Polish broadcaster TVN24.

She added that the EU’s migration commissioner, Dimitris Avramopoulos, currently on a visit to Warsaw, was “trying to tell us: you have to take these migrants ... And two days later another terrorist attack in London occurs”.

I think Poland's due a cut to its EU structural funds. Why should anybody share their money with them?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 4:49 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Poland’s prime minister, Beata Szydło, also drew a link between the attack and the EU’s migrant policy, saying it vindicated Warsaw’s refusal to take in refugees under the EU’s quota scheme.

“I hear in Europe very often: do not connect the migration policy with terrorism, but it is impossible not to connect them,” Szydło told private Polish broadcaster TVN24.

She added that the EU’s migration commissioner, Dimitris Avramopoulos, currently on a visit to Warsaw, was “trying to tell us: you have to take these migrants ... And two days later another terrorist attack in London occurs”.
I think Poland's due a cut to its EU structural funds. Why should anybody share their money with them?

What has happened in Poland is scary and sad (see also Hungary). If the EU fails it will be an enormous tragedy.

The failure of the center to hold is awful in the UK, even worse elsewhere.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 5:29 pm

Yeah.

Not that it's the most urgent thing, I notice the Polish Government cutting the pensions age- down to 60 for women!

When they can't afford it, it'll be the fault of the gays, or something.

They're already well underway with pauperizing Poland.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 5:36 pm

SH, Corbyn would strongly dispute that he has ever "supported the IRA".

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 6:09 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
HindleA wrote:No longer have a bath,so jumping up and down under shower as a substitute.
I prefer star jumps but keep banging my arms.

If you drink a pint of beer in the bath - or indeed while doing star jumps in the shower - you will become immortal

:

Drinking pint of beer a day linked to reduced risk of heart attack
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 43151.html

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 6:35 pm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nan ... 2b0d1a6c7a" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

Nancy Pelosi: GOP Health Care Plan Would Make ‘Being A Woman A Preexisting Condition’
Obamacare made it so all health insurance plans on the marketplace have to cover maternity care. The GOP wants to do away with that.

There is something very wrong with American attitudes towards women.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 7:43 pm

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/mi ... r-measure/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ministers forced into sickness benefit u-turn over ‘sanction fodder’ measure

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Mar, 2017 7:46 pm

Willow904 wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nan ... 2b0d1a6c7a?

Nancy Pelosi: GOP Health Care Plan Would Make ‘Being A Woman A Preexisting Condition’
Obamacare made it so all health insurance plans on the marketplace have to cover maternity care. The GOP wants to do away with that.
There is something very wrong with American attitudes towards women.

With right-wing American attitudes, to be a bit more precise.......