Forest-England
Vital Squad Member
Hope over divide and conquer any day!And the buzzin of the bees in the cigarette trees and the soda water fountain in that big rock candy mountain......................................................
Hope over divide and conquer any day!And the buzzin of the bees in the cigarette trees and the soda water fountain in that big rock candy mountain......................................................
Hard to believe anyone could have done worse imho.
In terms of bullying, i completely agree with you when both sides are equal. However, definition of a bullying is where two adults/kids are not equal. In the case of patel, she is the employer, a position of power. Her behaviour should be beneath that of an ordinary employer, much less a great office of state. There are plenty of legal processes to use if she feels her people were not up to the job.
Bojo's failure to fire her shows how weak he really is, not to mention the absolute moral bankruptcy of it. Its an embarrassment to the nation and another piece of evidence, if more were.needed, of their utter unsuitibility to govern.
Only one phrase is appropriate and it's one we all know very well...
Bloody disgrace.
Corbyn could get proper shirty as soon as he was asked a question he didn't like. Let's not pretend he's a saint. He was also prone to just putting off decisions rather than being decisive.Compare and contrast:
Corbyn appears to have always treated people with courtesy and respect, even when they screamed abuse at him. Might cover a multitude of sins, but all he's actually accused of is failing to instantly repair a poor complaints system, when as party leader he's not meant to interfere. Kind of a catch-22.
For this he's suspended from the party, and Starmer appears intent on chucking him out (even though that means he's now the leader interfering with the disciplinary process).
Patel shouts, screams and swears at staff, but her party leader ignores the report and backs her to the hilt.
Kind of proves a point Pope made somewhere, that the right succeed by being thoroughly nasty while the left are handicapped by trying to be decent human beings.
Corbyn could get proper shirty as soon as he was asked a question he didn't like. Let's not pretend he's a saint. He was also prone to just putting off decisions rather than being decisive.
The Patel episode is diluted somewhat by being just another episode in the gutter of Johnson's government. Nothing will ever sink as low as the Cummings affair, in which most Tory ministers (not, to be fair, Patel) sold their souls to Johnson for jobs and loyality when they fucked up (ahem, RH member for Newark...)
The reality is, voters knew Johnson would be like this. They voted for him with all the lying, cronyism, gaslighting and corruption priced in. He gets away with it because a) ultimately there is little voters can do about it and b) many people knew they were voting for this and still chose Johnson over Corbyn.
Yes, which is a weakness in ministerial scrutiny. Unbelievably, the PM is the ultimate arbiter of whether a minister has broken the ministerial code. It's hard to determine quite when the PM was invested with such presidential power.I'm sure you're right about Corbyn, but my focus is on the EHRC report, which seems to have blamed him for not dealing with allegations of antisemitism quickly enough. It said that this was all about FB posts shared and tweets retweeted. No mention of actual antisemitic comments aimed at actual people (nor any evidence of social media activity disparaging Jews in general).
So hard to see how or why he should have intervened to speed things up - and he wasn't meant to, anyway, and was criticised by the EHRC for doing so...he can't win. Starmer (for perfectly understandable political reasons) treats him as if he'd given a Nazi salute. When Corbyn's reinstated, Starmer does exactly what the EHRC forbade, and interferes. Bad move.
Patel, on the other hand, faced specific, concrete charges of bullying. The report tried to minimise them but still found her guilty. BJ exonerated her.
Agreed.Yes, which is a weakness in ministerial scrutiny. Unbelievably, the PM is the ultimate arbiter of whether a minister has broken the ministerial code. It's hard to determine quite when the PM was invested with such presidential power.
Therefore it is encumbant on a PM to be honest and willing to do the right thing, regardless of it's convenience to them. Clearly a problem with the current PM.
We would need either an honest Tory government (lol) or an honest labour one to put this right. So we probably need to put the past to bed, however that might need to be achieved.
Agreed.
Right now, I feel angry enough about the scapegoating of Corbyn to say 'Sod it, I'll vote Green next time' - and really, if they're the closest party to how I feel, I should do so.
But I hope Labour will still heal itself well enough to earn my vote, as a realistic alternative to the Tories.
I'm sure there are some quite nasty hard left types around, but I don't buy the narrative of 'The Left' as antisemitic. So I worry that Starmer will alienate a lot of good party members if he tries to punish Corbyn unduly.
I may even join the Labour party and try going to meetings. That would fill up my empty life...not convinced though.
My version of 'the personal is political' is 'what I do makes a difference', and I distrust all political dogma.
The left is antisemitic trope is the same shite that the Far Right, some centrists, Trump, Brietbart, Conservatives, Republicans, Anti BLM etc cretins use with ANTIFA
It is a method to try and shut people down by blaming them of the very thing they are guilty of
Corbyn could get proper shirty as soon as he was asked a question he didn't like. Let's not pretend he's a saint. He was also prone to just putting off decisions rather than being decisive.
The Patel episode is diluted somewhat by being just another episode in the gutter of Johnson's government. Nothing will ever sink as low as the Cummings affair, in which most Tory ministers (not, to be fair, Patel) sold their souls to Johnson for jobs and loyality when they fucked up (ahem, RH member for Newark...)
The reality is, voters knew Johnson would be like this. They voted for him with all the lying, cronyism, gaslighting and corruption priced in. He gets away with it because a) ultimately there is little voters can do about it and b) many people knew they were voting for this and still chose Johnson over Corbyn.
You've got an excellent point there.Sad to say there is a good deal of truth there. But I'll tell u what, just as trump was not immune, neither is johnson. He gets away with it because of a and b but u missed c) they believe johnsons bullshit wont affect THEM
Obviously it takes some people longer than others to work out what is happening to them.and why. Once the yanks worked out large numbers of them were dying and losing their jobs the chickens came home to roost. I predict johnson will face the same- it was cool to vote nasty when the alternative was corbyn and u didnt believe it would affect u. Neither of things are true now.
Skwawkbox, in my experience, appears to be largely fake news, as Breitbart is.
Much to my surprise, on researching the Canary actually has a very high rating in terms of passing fact checks; I therefore I'm happy to withdraw my comments about that site's equivalency with alt right media. Ther eis no doubt that the far left has its own echo chambers just as the alt right does; it's just that my experience of far left echo chambers is that they spend far more time attacking people they consider to not be left enough than they do people on the right. Meanwhile, the right is pretty concentrated in its meme based attacks on the left.
There is no evidence of any forces working to remove Corbyn. Right wing media did not like him and did not want him in power because they felt he would seriously harm theirs (and everyone else's) interests. There is nothing clandestine or shadowy about that.
The forces that removed Theresa May as PM are far more sinister. And remember that Mr Corbyn was not removed from his position. Recent tradition is that a leader resigns if his MPs have no confidence in him or if they lose an election. Mr Corbyn defied both if those valuable conventions for his own ends and convenience. That he resigned after two election defeats, the latter a historically disastrous one, is neither a conspiracy nor a surprise. It was simply Mr Corbyn doing the right thing after trying literally everything else.
Yes, which is a weakness in ministerial scrutiny. Unbelievably, the PM is the ultimate arbiter of whether a minister has broken the ministerial code. It's hard to determine quite when the PM was invested with such presidential power.
Therefore it is encumbant on a PM to be honest and willing to do the right thing, regardless of it's convenience to them. Clearly a problem with the current PM.
We would need either an honest Tory government (lol) or an honest labour one to put this right. So we probably need to put the past to bed, however that might need to be achieved.
Cash for Questions. Such innocent times. I long for that kind of sleaze.The Ministerial Code mirrors some of the constitutional rules and conventions set out in other documents, including the Cabinet Manual and Civil Service Code. As such, it is not legally binding, though there is increasing pressure for it to be.
A form of the code has existed since WW2, though it was only made public when it was published during the 'Cash for questions' malarkey by John Major in 1992. It was renamed the Ministerial Code under Tony Blair in 1997.
Cash for Questions. Such innocent times. I long for that kind of sleaze.
Great news about the Oxford vaccine.
Science is coming up with the goods again.
Was loving the negative spin this morning when it broke re: 70%.
The smallest of research would have shown the real story. Our press are awful sometimes.
The consequences of this story will be people misquoting 'only 70% efficacy' for a good time to come, unfortunately.
Sigh.
Excellent news all round.
Great for UK manufacturing and for the climate.
Who knew Brexit could be so progressive?
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ee-uk-manufacturers-bringing-it-all-back-home