Friday 14th August 2015

[gilsey]

Am I the only human being in Britain who refuses to have a smartphone ?

I don't refuse to have one, there's just no point, because we have virtually no mobile reception at home.

[frightful_oik]

... Where are the jellyfish when you want them.

Jellyfish, ohso? Where are the orcas?

Got an ear infection apparently.

[Tizme1]

If you have some couscous, and a few nice veggies like a pepper or courgettes, you could roast the veg in loads of olive oil with garlic and chili, mix with the couscous, and use the cream with some cucumber like a raita-type thing.

I made a veggie couscous a few weeks ago (I put olives and pine nuts in too, spiced with Ras El Hanout) and discovered I'd no yogurt but I did have a bit of creme fraiche that was just usable. It worked OK. Sour cream might too?

I've nearly always got a good selection of veggies. That actually sounds good but I've just been and checked and I'm out of olive oil. Poor show on my part. I've just found a recipe for a sort of creamy cheesy fish bake. As always I'll have to adapt it - I'm too much of a rebel to 'do as I'm told'.

Are you a vegetarian Ephe? I'm not but I tend to eat mostly veggie if that makes sense - hence I'm always looking for veggie recipe ideas.

Edited to take out a random i

No, I love my meat.

But I need to be careful with my diet, because I got ridiculously fat due to some awful drug therapy I had to have a few years ago (including high-dose steroids) and being not very mobile I can't get it off again through exercise, so I'm eating carefully these days. Show's got some health problems that means he should be eating less meat, so we're sort of semi-veggie by default.

Plus, being on benefits the budget is very limited - and good local produce is a bargain. We had a supper of Pembrokeshire Earlies the other day - just boiled, with a little butter, sea salt, and some tarragon from my window-box. They didn't need anything else - lovely all on their own. I don't find supermarket veg to be as tasty, they're always a bit watery - and they're no cheaper either because they always go off really quickly. I think they over-refrigerate them.

We have a really good weekly market here, with no fewer than 4 greengrocer stalls. There's a deli stall that does herbs/spices in little cellophane packs for 40-50 pence; and they always have vry good cheeses at a fair price. The actual Hay Deli shop, run by different people, I avoid like the plague - it charges ridiculous prices for crap food. I once tore the manager off a strip for trying to sell me grana padano which she insisted was Parmesan. Evidently thought I was as stupid as she is. Sometimes we get a fish man too.

Most of the meat I do get comes from the local butcher - the lamb is to die for, and from a farm we know. They also make Dragon sausages, which I have been told are pork. But having seen no dragons lately, I remain unconvinced.
Poultry is expensive - but a decent chicken is a treat, and we can get 4 meals out of one.
Just down the road in Talgarth is an award winning butcher whose pies and faggots are fabulous. We have been known to have just a pork pie from him for Christmas dinner unless we have visitors.

I don't think I could ever go completely vegetarian. I'd miss my dragons and eggs.....

We used to have a good market here. Back in the late 80's the Harlequin Shopping Centre was built [now renamed intu Watford] and, they refused to put signs up directing people to the market because they wanted to take over the area that contained the market and further develop it. The Lib dem council led by the Dotty Mare [oops sorry, I mean the Elected Mayor Dorothy Thornhill] made one wrong decision after another with regards the market and never helped or supported them.

Eventually, 'intu' got their way and they will be developing the area where the market was. Meanwhile the market was moved last year to an out of the way space overlooking the ring road and housed in shipping containers. It works in Hackney apparently but it definitely doesn't work here in Watford. The hardware stall went years ago. Now the bag stalls have gone. The material stall has gone. All the clothes stalls have gone. The plant stall has gone. The pet stalls have gone. The cheese stall has gone. The butchers stalls have gone. The green grocer stalls have gone. There are still the two fishmonger stalls thankfully. Most of the stall holders are trying to find alternative ways of making a living. Watford is a market town ffs!

Anyhow, a friend of mine regularly collects fish scraps from the fishmonger for my cats which I cook up for them. She turned up a short while ago with a huge bag of whole fish - kippers, trout, salmon, and lord knows what, which was left over today. Think the cats may have to fight me over that! But how worrying is that, when they are left with so much actual good quality fish? They've been running their stall for almost 30 years to my knowledge so it's not like they'd bugger up on their stock. Or you wouldn't think so anyway.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Anyone interested in American politics might enjoy this Fact Check site.

http://www.factcheck.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not that being factual helps much in Republican primaries, though they do Democrats as well.

This is quite a nice example.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/sander ... statistic/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bernie Sanders was using a very striking figure and his campaign couldn't back it up. This site went to work and found that it was actually accurate, presumably they just forgot how they calculated it.

Over and above the call of duty!

[StephenDolan]

Anyone interested in American politics might enjoy this Fact Check site.

http://www.factcheck.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not that being factual helps much in Republican primaries, though they do Democrats as well.

This is quite a nice example.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/sander ... statistic/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bernie Sanders was using a very striking figure and his campaign couldn't back it up. This site went to work and found that it was actually accurate, presumably they just forgot how they calculated it.

Over and above the call of duty!

Yes fact check is a great site.

With regards to future shadow cabinets, do you think Miliband will be approached (and accept a position)?

[Tubby Isaacs]

Good question. Think he might do, after a pause. He could do a Hague, except good.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Above some basic principles that in my view almost always apply.

1. If people don't trust you not to screw things up they absolutely will not vote for you. Hanging on to what they have is always priority number one. To a degree it is also why in tough times governments can hang on -the devil you know.

2. People are aspirational, they aspire to better things, more money, a better house, a better job, a better future. That this is somehow seen as a bad thing is a huge problem.

3. Stuff you say early on in a parliament can define you, which means you have to get the big things right early. The detail of policy can wait.

Away from such things one other thing.

How anybody can believe that Labour's 83 manifesto wasn't utterly hopeless is beyond me. The longest suicide note in history is a fair call. I doubt any Labour leader could have won in 83 but DH might at least have lost less spectacularly.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Incidentally on another note, The Daily Mail is now wasting Australian tax payers money. They ran a story about MH370 sonar images suggesting the Australians had found the plane. This forced an entire statement to be generated correcting misleading media reports.

Stay classy Dacre.

[StephenDolan]

Above some basic principles that in my view almost always apply.

1. If people don't trust you not to screw things up they absolutely will not vote for you. Hanging on to what they have is always priority number one. To a degree it is also why in tough times governments can hang on -the devil you know.

2. People are aspirational, they aspire to better things, more money, a better house, a better job, a better future. That this is somehow seen as a bad thing is a huge problem.

3. Stuff you say early on in a parliament can define you, which means you have to get the big things right early. The detail of policy can wait.

Away from such things one other thing.

How anybody can believe that Labour's 83 manifesto wasn't utterly hopeless is beyond me. The longest suicide note in history is a fair call. I doubt any Labour leader could have won in 83 but DH might at least have lost less spectacularly.

Some people want a better, fairer society, but this doesn't count as 'aspiration' for some reason. Some people want the world to be better for their children. Some people want better natures to prevail. Aspiration is a poisonous word, anyway. What it means is petit bourgeois, I'm all right jack pull up the anchor. Some people are like that. Those people will never vote Labour.

Exactly.
Aspiration is used purely in the sense of I want things to be better. For me. And when that's achieved, objective obtained.

[onebuttonmonkey]

The risk is that Corbyn will contaminate the brand

Yep. That says it all. The brand. Because politics is consumerism. Because it's not a party, it's a brand. How low have we fallen that some of our own supporters have internalised this facile market garbage?

In short: I don't buy that. And anyway, check out how contaminated it already is. Nobody buys it when it's just a label begging to be validated by people that took all the ingredients out.

I know I said I'd stay quiet, but if ever 9 words made me sick of everything, it's "The risk is that Corbyn will contaminate the brand". Just... well. Words fail.

/quits

[Tonibel]

To be fair to Corbyn, it's clear that he's read a fair bit on the subject and ignored his brother (who is an egregious climate change denier). I wasn't aware of this till he mentioned it.

the Committee on Climate Change
found that a virtually carbon free power sector by 2030 would cost consumers £23 billion less than relying
predominantly on gas during the 2020s,ix a

Quite a decent saving, before we've even got to our destination!

Problem of course is that this is the same Committee of Climate report had 40% nuclear, which Corbyn rules out. So straightaway, that £23bn figure doesn't work.

Let's hope the MSM think it's better to ignore your brother than stab him in the back.
.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Some people want a better, fairer society, but this doesn't count as 'aspiration' for some reason. Some people want the world to be better for their children. Some people want better natures to prevail. Aspiration is a poisonous word, anyway. What it means is petit bourgeois, I'm all right jack pull up the anchor. Some people are like that. Those people will never vote Labour.

It probably wasn't that much of a problem for Labour anyway in the last election.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 66729.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tubby Isaacs]

The risk is that Corbyn will contaminate the brand

Yep. That says it all. The brand. Because politics is consumerism. Because it's not a party, it's a brand. How low have we fallen that some of our own supporters have internalised this facile market garbage?

In short: I don't buy that. And anyway, check out how contaminated it already is. Nobody buys it when it's just a label begging to be validated by people that took all the ingredients out.

I know I said I'd stay quiet, but if ever 9 words made me sick of everything, it's "The risk is that Corbyn will contaminate the brand". Just... well. Words fail.

/quits

Come on, it's a metaphor.

[RogerOThornhill]

The lies over who runs schools continues...

David Cameron: Every school in the country could become an academy

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... ademy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Marking 100 days since his general election victory, the Prime Minister pledges to put education at the heart of his second term by dramatically expanding the academies programme, which Labour has vowed to oppose.
Every headteacher in England should be able to set their own curriculum and decide salary levels free from the influence of “bureaucrats”, Mr Cameron says.

and

“I profoundly believe this is the right direction for our country because I want teachers not bureaucrats deciding how best to educate our children.”

Fuck off you liar.

1. HTs run schools in a local authority
2. Schools in academy chains have no autonomy - they do whatever the chain tells them to do.
3. The academies that have real autonomy are the single school converters. Unfortunately the government doesn't like these now and would prefer them to group together in a chain.

Oh, and...

Mr Cameron has already announced that thousands schools deemed to be failing will be taken over and turned into academies as part of a bid to drive up standards.

So what happened to coasting schools? I only ask since that's the main part of the bill going through Parliament right now...

[Tubby Isaacs]

Notable that the Tory policy of selling housing association flats, which was put very much in terms of aspiration, isn't even popular.

[onebuttonmonkey]

The risk is that Corbyn will contaminate the brand

Yep. That says it all. The brand. Because politics is consumerism. Because it's not a party, it's a brand. How low have we fallen that some of our own supporters have internalised this facile market garbage?

In short: I don't buy that. And anyway, check out how contaminated it already is. Nobody buys it when it's just a label begging to be validated by people that took all the ingredients out.

I know I said I'd stay quiet, but if ever 9 words made me sick of everything, it's "The risk is that Corbyn will contaminate the brand". Just... well. Words fail.

/quits

Come on, it's a metaphor.

No. It's toxicity distilled into a sentence. Nothing - no Reeves, no Byrne, no policy however misguided, nothing has made me as absolutely sick of the state of supposedly left wing politics - or of what Labour is supposed to be for - as that.

Words are weapons. Meanings matter. And this is everything that is the opposite of what we should be.

Edit: you know what mrs. obm said when she went to that "new members" meeting when everyone said they had principles and nobody said what they were? She said, "What is Labour for?" She said, "It sounds like a logo looking for sponsorship." She said, "It's a bit like a brand trying to sell nothing because people like what it used to mean." That's why it matters.

[Tubby Isaacs]

No. It's toxicity distilled into a sentence. Nothing - no Reeves, no Byrne, no policy however misguided, nothing has made me as absolutely sick of the state of supposedly left wing politics - or of what Labour is supposed to be for - as that.

Words are weapons. Meanings matter. And this is everything that is the opposite of what we should be.

"Words are weapons"- that's a metaphor too, and not even a very good one because nobody or nothing is being attacked here.

If you don't like TE's metaphor (even though it's a standard one in politics, and not a stupid one because it reflects what Cameron did successfully- he was competitive enough before the crash to frighten Brown into cancelling an election) at least allow that the objections he and I state are based on policy.

[onebuttonmonkey]

No. It's toxicity distilled into a sentence. Nothing - no Reeves, no Byrne, no policy however misguided, nothing has made me as absolutely sick of the state of supposedly left wing politics - or of what Labour is supposed to be for - as that.

Words are weapons. Meanings matter. And this is everything that is the opposite of what we should be.

"Words are weapons"- that's a metaphor too, and not even a very good one because nobody or nothing is being attacked here.

If you don't like TE's metaphor (even though it's a standard one in politics, and not a stupid one because it reflects what Cameron did successfully- he was competitive enough before the crash to frighten Brown into cancelling an election) at least allow that the objections he and I state are based on policy.

Words are weapons, in my metaphor, because the thing badly chosen ones - or deliberately misused ones - can be used to attack is meanings.

I've no problems with metaphors in general - I have a specific problem with this one in particular. Why? Because of the volumes it speaks.

And sure - Tories do talk about the brand. You know why it's different? Because they're Tories.

[StephenDolan]

I'm not sure Blair will ever understand how much Iraq turned away former Labour voters.

[onebuttonmonkey]

I'm not sure Blair will ever understand how much Iraq turned away former Labour voters.

Exactly. Especially younger voters. Some within the party - sincerely, I believe, if it matters - have no idea how it looks to those outside. The people we need to convince aren't those already inside. And we don't do that by brand-awareness. It's the perception of marketing that repulses the very people we need to convince.

[rebeccariots2]

If Labour was a brand, it was contaminated by the Iraq war, by rendition and authoritarianism, then by the perception of economic incompetence. And perhaps most of all by the overriding sense that the labour movement that fought for rights and freedoms is dust, replaced by self-serving suits who basically don't give a shit, and think doing a bit of redistribution during a boom is good enough.

Yup. All of that culminating in horrible preening bickering and sniping at different factions in public ... when the infighting became more important than serving the people ... when rock the boat brooches were publicly worn as a self indulgent joke and repayment cheques for flipping and over claimed expenses were waved at us from TV screens as if to say 'Yes, I've been a vewy naughty person but this makes it all better now". It was disgusting. We need something so different.

[Tubby Isaacs]

No. It's toxicity distilled into a sentence. Nothing - no Reeves, no Byrne, no policy however misguided, nothing has made me as absolutely sick of the state of supposedly left wing politics - or of what Labour is supposed to be for - as that.

Words are weapons. Meanings matter. And this is everything that is the opposite of what we should be.

"Words are weapons"- that's a metaphor too, and not even a very good one because nobody or nothing is being attacked here.

If you don't like TE's metaphor (even though it's a standard one in politics, and not a stupid one because it reflects what Cameron did successfully- he was competitive enough before the crash to frighten Brown into cancelling an election) at least allow that the objections he and I state are based on policy.

But so much of what you both object to is appearance - basically what the papers will be able to twist and chuck at him, regardless of what's actually true.

Partly it is but we both have more than enough policy objections. It was Simon Wren-Lewis (just talking about economics) that made the point that Corbyn makes it far too easy for him to be discredited even where he's right. And given that fiscal credibility seems to have been by far the biggest problem in this election, hard to see how Corbyn helps that.

Nobody, by the way, is denying Iraq is still a problem and I've always opposed it. But if you're going to complain about being just perception, then surely that applies to Iraq too. Look at the drivel below the line every time Blair turns up. Deaths in the civil war are treated as though British troops killed them, and America's role disappears altogether.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I'm not sure Blair will ever understand how much Iraq turned away former Labour voters.

Exactly. Especially younger voters. Some within the party - sincerely, I believe, if it matters - have no idea how it looks to those outside. The people we need to convince aren't those already inside. And we don't do that by brand-awareness. It's the perception of marketing that repulses the very people we need to convince.

Yes. People are crying out for something genuine. Corbyn may have never been a frontbencher, but he's never been a bloody SpAd either.

Professional politicians Cameron, Osborne, Sturgeon seem to be doing OK. Cameron's got a professional politician as Defence Secretary too, and another as Culture Secretary. Johnson and Gove have also spent all their lives in this supposedly unpopular "Bubble".

[Tubby Isaacs]

But as I said to howsilly earlier, Corbyn has qualities and his talents need to be used. Just not as leader.

[onebuttonmonkey]

Exactly. Especially younger voters. Some within the party - sincerely, I believe, if it matters - have no idea how it looks to those outside. The people we need to convince aren't those already inside. And we don't do that by brand-awareness. It's the perception of marketing that repulses the very people we need to convince.

Yes. People are crying out for something genuine. Corbyn may have never been a frontbencher, but he's never been a bloody SpAd either.

Professional politicians Cameron, Osborne, Sturgeon seem to be doing OK. Cameron's got a professional politician as Defence Secretary too, and another as Culture Secretary. Johnson and Gove have also spent all their lives in this supposedly unpopular "Bubble".

You're conflating "genuine" with "professional". That's the thing - they aren't even in the same time zone.

By the way, if you take Johnson off that list, the thing they have in common is that everyone other than the already converted think they're despicable liars. As for Johnson - he's playing the "personality" card, but no one mistakes him for genuine. They're just bored of the more predictable version of untrustworthy.

Blair's version of genuine hasn't aged outside Westminster for all that it rules the roost in it. And is this what the limit of what we're aiming for? Really?

[Tubby Isaacs]

You're conflating "genuine" with "professional". That's the thing - they aren't even in the same time zone.

By the way, if you take Johnson off that list, the thing they have in common is that everyone other than the already converted think they're despicable liars. As for Johnson - he's playing the "personality" card, but no one mistakes him for genuine. They're just bored of the more predictable version of untrustworthy.

Blair's version of genuine hasn't aged outside Westminster for all that it rules the roost in it. And is this what the limit of what we're aiming for? Really?

Well, I just stuck out a load of ungenuine politicians who are very successful, certainly beyond achievements. Gove is probably the only one whose unpopular overall but he does a job in rallying the base.

So "genuineness" is overrated.

I've no idea where you got Blair from.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Anyway, bedtime. Night all!

[HindleA]

Careworker:What would you like to be called -service user,client,customer,patient?
Me:Our actual names usually helps.

[Temulkar]

Anyone awake with access to The Times? Apparantly there is a review of The Last Roundhead, Im just deciding whether to buy a subscription, which I will never use, or wait till 7am for the Newsagents to open.

[howsillyofme1]

Anyone awake with access to The Times? Apparantly there is a review of The Last Roundhead, Im just deciding whether to buy a subscription, which I will never use, or wait till 7am for the Newsagents to open.

Looking forward to reading it

[HindleA]

@Temulkar

Thanks for info,I have half an hour to go to the paper shop,find paper and review,read and place it back carefully on shelf.Shopkeeper is very tolerant of this habit,as long as I buy something from there occasionally.

[Temulkar]

Here's the review, clearly I couldnt wait. My father would be spitting blood that I subscribed to The Times

The Last Roundhead by Jemahl Evans

In another civil war, a hero who owes much to the legendary Flashman is drinking and whoring his way through the English Civil War. Sir Blandford Candy, an aged roué, recounts his youthful adventures in The Last Roundhead. After the unfortunate seduction of his brother’s wife, Sir Blandford finds himself embroiled in the violence erupting between king and parliament. A roundhead by accident, rather than by conviction, he becomes a scout, or spy, in the service of the parliamentarian army, uncovering royalist plots and avoiding his irascible, cavalier brothers.

“Sugar” Candy — he earns this monicker because of his pretty face and success with ladies — is an entertaining and witty guide to the political intrigues of the early Civil War. The plot can feel episodic, rather than entirely coherent, but the research is impeccable and the writing full of verve.

[utopiandreams]

@Temulkar

Episodic, Tem? So have you started on the television script yet and who do you see in the lead?

Edit: btw, Tem, the latter part was rhetorical, best left unanswered.