Be Excellent To Each Other

Or they've resigned.

Oh, incidentally I share a very similar analysis and conclusion, TBH. Corbyn's at heart as deeply eurosceptic as Farage, looking at his political history, and he's ideologically wedded to the authoritarian, old-style Bennite left which I don't identify with at all. Personally, I've never called myself a socialist, I've always been sceptical of unions, and regard centralised planning in economics as unworkable as it's shown historically to be. I still regard myself on the centre-left, and (roughly speaking) a social democrat, but am not stupid enough to think that left = unquestionably good. The section of the left that wants to keep everyone behind closed state borders in the name of some twisted notion of equality can do one, frankly.

My word, there does seem to be an awful lot of political realignment and reassessment going on of late. If someone doesn't say some Lefty economic claptrap boilerplate soon, I'm going to start thinking I've logged onto the wrong forum... where's Hearthly when you need him?

Bollocks there has been any "realignment". My views are the same as they've always been. One can be on the centre-left and still find the atavistic Corbynite left-wing very dodgy and unappealing. I support the typical social-democratic goals of a mixed economy with a strong welfare state and equality of opportunity, just as I always have. And if anything, I find the Tories and their particularly foul blend of authoritarianism and laissez-faire at least as revolting as I have ever done. Particularly now as it seems set to ruin this country and the lives of many people living here by rushing towards Hard Brexit.

PLP != shadow government

Nope Cavey, I still hate the Tories and everything they stand for. Labour were much the same throughout my formative years, although their social programmes were a lot more palatable obviously.

I agree that Labour right now and Corbyn in particular are utterly useless though. And I can't support the Lib Dems because I really don't like their leader's views on equal marriage and religion. So

*joins UKIP*

Tim Farron voted repeatedly in favour of gay marriage (he abstained once over some minor amendments tabled re: religious minorities which he said said he since regretted).

One can only assume that you are against marriage equality. How odd.

I think if you are looking for a party where you agree with every minute detail of every policy and view they hold, you'll never, ever vote.

Yep, fair enough to be corrected on that. I've just checked out his voting record and you're right for a change.

To be fair, it had to happen eventually.

I find it staggering that the pound can fall in anticipation of a speech by the Prime Minister and yet the opposition are nowhere to be seen. Poor old Harold Wilson must be looking down/up at us and wondering what's changed.

As someone who's been scoping out a new PC for a while now, it's quite annoying to find that everything is getting more expensive on a weekly basis.

I realise Brexit is bigger than just me getting cross about increasingly costly PC components because the pound is getting rogered, but still, this is the REAL IMPACT felt by the man on the street.

A spec that was coming in at about £1500 a few months ago is more like £1750 now.

Well then you should BUY BRITISH. Fucking traitor.

Yes I'll buy nothing but genuine UK manufactured PC components, along with all that other stuff the UK allegedly produces and thus our manufacturers are having an absolute bonanza.

I mean, we basically don't really make anything any more, do we. There's probably a boutique kettle producer in Surrey that's doing alright as a result of the weakened pound, and that's about it.

I've spoke to a few UK game devs and they've said it probably works out OK for them, since the bulk of their income is earned in dollars. But that's more indie devs, larger studios will struggle because a lot of them rely on hiring talent from across Europe.

Well they shouldn't, it is clear that the talent lies in the UK, but these devs are just traitors, betraying the upstanding talen in the UK by going for the cheapest option. Maybe now that European talent is so expensive we can stop employing anybody and all fall into a pit of our own making.

Apparently Mrs May wants a 'clear break' from the EU. So that's blocking on Facebook, deleting emails, and not returning calls, but still saying she wants to be friends and respects them as people nonetheless?

And then drunkenly texting them at 2am telling them you still love them and you're so sorry and never should have left.

From last July...


This wasn't a great prophecy, although you're correct about how disastrous leaving the single market will be.

I don't think I was wrong at that time. I did, however, underestimate how willing UK politicians of all stripes would be to plunge us into disaster for fear of UKIP, Murdoch, and Dacre.

The Supreme Court (and I still find it hard to realise we have one now, even though I've been there!) is passing judgement today. Getting some popcorn in. Anyone fancy a round of Brexit Bingo?

I don't see any possible way the court doesn't rule against the government, and I don't see any way the government doesn't get the votes to pass the A50 bill that results. And I don't see why on earth the government pushed the court case this far.

If you're struggling to see have you tried standing on a box?

Any box tall enough to let me see is to tall for me to climb on.

Perhaps they're doing us a favour and colouring in another space in the constitution. It's not, after all about Article 50, but about the boundaries between the executive and the legislative in an area that's always been unclear. If foreign policy is an executive function and law making/breaking a legislative function, then who holds the brief when it comes to foreign policy that involves making laws? There's a brief discussion of the theoretical issue in Ray Rapheal's 'Mr President: Why the founders created a chief executive' detailing how the framers of the US constitution grappled with placing treaty making rights. We, of course, just muddle through and resolve these things as they arise.

I think there are elements of making sure it is done properly, and getting the method blessed by the Supreme Court is important. Make sure it is watertight, so to speak.

Or, in other words, if we're going to build ourselves some gallows, we'd better be sure they won't collapse.

Well put.

The conspiracy theory is to test how the supreme court act on a non risk decision so that they can build that into thinking for future, riskier decisions following the point that it becomes the absolute supreme court.

THE TENSION

An interesting idea.

Has the Supreme Court's emblem won any design awards? I think it's brilliant.

A victory for Parliament against the Crown.

So what does that mean, people who sit at the front of the class and pay attention?

They have to pass a bill. Haven't read the judgement yet but it might be as short as:

I can't think of a politician I'd credit with sufficient long-term thinking to take the sacrifice of losing a court case for that. But perhaps I am too cynical.

Every generation needs an Admiral Byng.

Fleet Admiral Gougle's less popular colleague.

sadly, our politicians have more in common with this bing:

I think it means that May is going to retreat to a Royalist heartland and start raising regiments of pike and musketmen.

Labour is on a slippery slope if it falls for the Brexiteers’ claim that last year’s referendum result is untouchable. On the contrary, the party should campaign to reverse the result if it takes power again. Public support for Brexit is more likely to diminish than increase as Brexit’s costs and job losses become clearer.

Somewhat interesting article about the referedum result.

#titlegore

I think it is seen as "rules guidance', rather than losng a case. At least, that is how I would present it. "Wanted guidance to make sure we do it right first time"

Yeah, but they didn't play it as that when they appealed the high court ruling. Too late for it to be anything but a foolishly gambled, wasteful defeat at this point.

Nah, I think they needed to run it through the Supreme Court to shore up barricades against any future attacks on the process. I don't think it is a massive loss.

Apparently there's an interesting plot twist in the judgement where the Court rules that the devolved assemblies don't have a say in the legislation. I need to read more on this but that's going to bring joy to the governing party in Holyrood for sure.

Stu's post on it

http://wingsoverscotland.com/fooled-you-again/

Who?

But, this bit amused me:



Because in a federation, it'd be written into the constitution or compact.

It's a huge loss of face for May, given her assurances that the government would win the appeal. She's not a big fan of losing face.

Still, at least Labour are going to use this opportunity to play Parliamentary games, further embarrass the Prime Minister, push the knife into the administration, and perhaps do the right thing for the country.

*looks at Mr Corbyn's Twitter feed*

Oh.

He"s terrible.