Jump to content


Board Moderators
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mormont

  1. I read that extract and then some of the comments on this thread and have to wonder why it's bad for officer to be 'talent spotting' but OK for users here to be discussing Penny Mordaunt purely in terms of her physical attractiveness.
  2. These two posts are telling the same story. The Tories, for years, were worried about being outflanked on the right by UKIP and various other lunatics. Now, there's no good reason to vote for those parties because the Conservative front bench are positioned to the right of where UKIP was back in the 2010s. But that has put off middle-of-the-road voters, not because they're repulsed by these policies but because the Tories - having been in government for so long - just have no ideas to address those voters' real priorities. All they talk about is issues of ideological purity. They have literally nothing to say to huge swathes of the electorate: anyone under 40, for example, would struggle to find a single Tory policy that speaks to their concerns.
  3. That was definitely the reason, I'm sure. ETA link to original article https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/05/04/leonard-leo-clarence-ginni-thomas-conway/
  4. To be clear, I don't doubt that they were going for something other than what I said. But
  5. It is now. And if it's a properly assessed health and safety requirement, those tribunal cases (who goes straight to a tribunal?) are not likely to get far IMO. Well, apropos of that: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65419126 He's not wrong. There will certainly be another pandemic in our lifetimes, possibly within the decade, probably airborne. Complaining about a key service instituting an RPE policy now is odd given that everyone would doubtless ask why they didn't have one in place before the next pandemic hits.
  6. Visually, yes, without a doubt - although 'Sith' is the one thing I've watched in recent years that really made me wish I had a bigger TV. Simply amazing looking episode. So beautiful. But Screecher's Reach does fall down a bit for me story-wise. I've watched up to episode 5 and can tell anyone who hasn't watched it yet, the Aardman episode is exactly what you would hope for. Perfect.
  7. That is probably an overestimate, yes. Ethics. Ethics is the issue. Not lawbreaking. Ethics and high standards are important in public life. This is where, I know, you'll start parroting right wing talking points about Biden, rather than discuss Donald Trump, a man whose entire life including his presidency has been defined by his contempt for the notion of ethical behaviour. But the modern Republican party is more or less defined by its absolute rejection of the notion that there should be standards in public life, and that does matter. Sure. Not many of Trump's appointees will be left, so that's good.
  8. I'm usually sceptical of 'false flag' claims but let's face it, Putin has significant history in that area.
  9. You were not wrong. As I've said before, the idea that any of the Royal family's money is not public money is an attempt to give them legitimacy. It all belongs to the nation by rights.
  10. Again, this is recency bias. Go back to the 80s/90s. It was worst, of course, in the aftermath of Diana's death, when the Queen personally was seen as remote, uncaring, and obsessed with formality but these impressions weren't untypical of her public perception at the time. She got an easier ride from the press in the last few years and particularly after the deaths of her mother and her husband. She also got better advisors after the Diana debacle.
  11. Anyone who think Liz had an innate sense of what to do or not to do to avoid PR disasters is doing some selective reading of history.
  12. The biggest problem Star Wars has in general as a franchise is being wedded to some bad choices Lucas made without any real thought for their implications, because he never really imagined they'd be important decades later - which was in turn because he couldn't really have known, though he might have hoped, how significant the franchise would be decades later. But then, the same can be said of the early days of the major comics companies.
  13. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65435426 HAHAHAHAHAHAHHH... HAHAHAHA... No. God help us, there will be more of this drivel to come. I note also that the service will be really religiously inclusive by asking people of all faiths to participate in a ceremony by, er, reading from a book that is not of their faith and asking them to profess allegiance to the King in the name of a God they don't believe in. Religious diversity there: people of all faiths are welcome to practice Christianity. The Chief Rabbi will be doing so on the Sabbath, which is a really nice touch.
  14. That's what's telling about that interview: the complete lack of any introspection or self-reflection, critical qualities of any professional with a code of ethics. It simply does not occur to Alito that he or any of his colleagues might have done anything to deserve public criticism.
  15. Ah, the whine of the powerful conservative through the ages: 'shut up and show proper deference while I fuck you over'. ETA: https://www.businessinsider.com/jane-roberts-chief-justice-wife-10-million-commissions-2023-4?r=US&IR=T Weird how people are accusing the justices of unethical conduct.
  16. Agreeing to appear on GB News is not advisable under any circumstances. It's a Russian propaganda/black money op. The satisfaction of owning Laurence Fox, a thing you can do five times on social media before breakfast (is he still on Twitter?), isn't worth giving that operation even a veneer of being an actual valid TV station.
  17. You're supportive of the conservative view of protest, then, that it should be a sort of polite reminder of an issue? Like having a man with a clipboard approach you and ask if you care about climate change? Although that too might be too inconvenient to the general voting public. Maybe they should write a letter to their MP. If only the suffragettes had thought of that. Their tactics did piss off the voting public, that probably explains their lack of success. That frustration and anger arises from the cause being ignored when people tried to raise it in ways that did not piss off the voting public, because when you adopt tactics that people can ignore, they ignore you.
  18. In other news, disenfranchising poorer younger voters appears to be progressing well. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65389832 They can't even say 'prevent voter fraud' because that would imply this alleged fraud actually takes place, and they have no evidence that it does. So they have to say it prevents entirely hypothetical fraud. While at the same time, this measure will stop hundreds of thousands of valid votes being cast. How many valid votes is it worth losing to stop one fraudulent vote?
  19. This claim has been largely debunked. Also, while we're on the topic, I'm not at all clear what Brexit has to do with evacuating people from Sudan. I think folks understand how deeply I loathe Brexit, but let's not be making stuff up about it.
  20. It's strange how in every economic cycle, the benefits go to the rich, but the costs must be borne by the poor.
  21. At present, about 50% of my Twitter feed is people discussing how to block blue checks from your Twitter feed. It's been a masterclass in how to fail at marketing a product.
  22. You're not reading carefully. Heirarchies of racism suggest that one type of racism is inherently worse than another. Not that one incident of racism can be worse than another: and not that types of racism have different histories and manifestations. But that identical incidents of racism directed to two different people can be better or worse than the other. That's what it means to say there are heirarchies of racism. And where it inevitably leads is making excuses for some sorts of racism. I have had this argument made by those on the hard left, to my face. It goes to some bad places. Racism is most dangerous when people feel like they have some sort of justification for why it's not really bad racism. Don't ever go down that road.
  23. The idea that there is a heirarchy of racism is a very dangerous one, and it should never be confused with the idea that some racist incidents are more serious than others, or that not all racism looks alike or has a similar history. Anti-Semitism has a different history and has manifested differently than, say, racism against Roma or racism against Afro-Caribbeans in the UK. That is not at all the same as saying they exist in a heirarchy.
  • Create New...