When will this shit end?

[MrBarry465]

40 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Sunak has somehow emerged from this all this unscathed and popular despite being the one who’s persuaded Boris Johnson to do all his blunders- he introduced him to the BS scientists who believed we’d already achieved herd immunity in September and who wrote that BS Huntington deceleration (or whatever it was called then) back then. He opposed further lockdowns at each of the crucial junctures, he claimed there was no money for 80% furlough when Manchester needed it, then suddenly found a whole wad of cash when suddenly the south was afflicted. But he wined and dined the media and they thought he was handsome so he’s faced zero scrutiny.

 

Never rated him and surely one of the most moronic things someone has done in power this year and that is really saying something.

 

[st dan]

45 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

But he wined and dined the media and they thought he was handsome so he’s faced zero scrutiny. 

And he didn’t even do that right!

 

Edited January 8, 2021 by st dan

[priest17]

18 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

Credit to Piers, he's a nob but at least he's been hammering the government since the start of this.

If someone shits all over the floor they deserve no credit for tidying up a bit of it.

[steviewevie]

41 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9125621/Jonathan-Van-Tam-went-curry-Boris-Johnson-told-Londoners-avoid-restaurants.html
 

 

This totally normal article from the mail appears to be tracking JVT’s every move. Bad enough that they’ve published exactly what he ate when on an essential trip when eating in restaurants was only advised against (not banned), but they also suggest he dined with a companion in the same restaurant on a different occasion.

 

Bizarre stuff from the mail. 

getting ready for the blame war to come.

[Ryan1984]

50 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9125621/Jonathan-Van-Tam-went-curry-Boris-Johnson-told-Londoners-avoid-restaurants.html
 

 

This totally normal article from the mail appears to be tracking JVT’s every move. Bad enough that they’ve published exactly what he ate when on an essential trip when eating in restaurants was only advised against (not banned), but they also suggest he dined with a companion in the same restaurant on a different occasion.

 

Bizarre stuff from the mail. 

Feeds into their readers who ‘don’t trust’ the scientists but will give this government praise at every step of the way.

Also, 16 March last year? That was before we were even in lockdown. It would have been a similar time to Mother’s Day/that Liverpool match!

Edited January 8, 2021 by Ryan1984

[Punksnotdead]

39 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

Never rated him and surely one of the most moronic things someone has done in power this year and that is really saying something.

 

Why are people surprised when he's revealed as a c**t? He's a Tory, of course he's a c**t!

C**t!

How many times can I get the word c**t into one post? 😄

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Punksnotdead said:

Why are people surprised when he's revealed as a c**t? He's a Tory, of course he's a c**t!

C**t!

How many times can I get the word c**t into one post? 😄

c**t c**t c**t c**t c**t

[Guest]

 

[dotdash79]

Well, Twitter is having a purge 

[efcfanwirral]

1 hour ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9125621/Jonathan-Van-Tam-went-curry-Boris-Johnson-told-Londoners-avoid-restaurants.html
 

 

This totally normal article from the mail appears to be tracking JVT’s every move. Bad enough that they’ve published exactly what he ate when on an essential trip when eating in restaurants was only advised against (not banned), but they also suggest he dined with a companion in the same restaurant on a different occasion.

 

Bizarre stuff from the mail. 

They'll be hoping that if he resigns he'll be replaced by someone who advises lifting lockdowns 

[efcfanwirral]

9 minutes ago, dotdash79 said:

Well, Twitter is having a purge 

Big tech as arbiter of what is acceptable speech is a slippery slope... 

[FestivalJamie]

9 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

 

Germany also reported over 1000 deaths for 4th day in a row 😞

[Paul ™]

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

Big tech as arbiter of what is acceptable speech is a slippery slope... 

Not really, standard T&C's for a lot of websites, even this site has rules  you can get banned for 😉

[dotdash79]

10 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Big tech as arbiter of what is acceptable speech is a slippery slope... 

freedom of speech doesn’t include freedom from consequences.
 

It also doesn’t mean private companies have to give you a platform. 

[dotdash79]

12 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Big tech as arbiter of what is acceptable speech is a slippery slope... 

however this is more about big tech realising that the government is changing and with that they are trying to cover themselves against scrutiny. 

[zahidf]

24 minutes ago, dotdash79 said:

however this is more about big tech realising that the government is changing and with that they are trying to cover themselves against scrutiny. 

More that there statement says they are worried that Trump is going to try to incite a second coup attempt on inauguration day

 

 

[MrBarry465]

2 hours ago, efcfanwirral said:

Big tech as arbiter of what is acceptable speech is a slippery slope... 

 

Not really, it's a private platform.

As others have said, freedom of speech does not mean freedom of consequence at the end of the day.

Play stupid games and win stupid prizes.

We have reached that stage where polemicists are abusing their right to free speech by shouting “fire” in the theatre. Their right to endanger life and undermine the public is not absolute and should stop. Right now.

Edited January 9, 2021 by MrBarry465

[bamber]

24 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

 

Not really, it's a private platform.

As others have said, freedom of speech does not mean freedom of consequence at the end of the day.

Play stupid games and win stupid prizes.

We have reached that stage where polemicists are abusing their right to free speech by shouting “fire” in the theatre. Their right to endanger life and undermine the public is not absolute and should stop. Right now.

Well said MrBarry465

[mcshed]

12 hours ago, Ozanne said:

as the PM has to be an MP.

Our absence of a constitution leaves this an ambiguous point. Plenty of PM's used to come from the House of Lords although that stopped over a 100 years ago so probably isn't on. Alec Douglas Home was in the Lords when appointed PM but resigned him position after a few days so he could stand in a by-election to become an MP so not only was he PM whilst a Lord he was also PM whilst sitting in neither house for a few weeks until he won his seat. 

As we saw with Brexit that constitution by convention can't really stand up to an administration wanting to do its own thing so if all of parliament really was coming together to support a unity candidate who wasn't an MP then they could probably get away with it as long as there was a clear path for that person to enter parliament.

[Crazyfool01]

Looks like stricter enforcement is coming ... let’s wait and see ... and see if it has any effect 

[mcshed]

10 hours ago, Mr.Tease said:

 

Whilst I agree with the sentiment Piers Morgan complaining about someone being a populist blustering bullshitter is too much for me.

 

[The Dawg]

10 hours ago, Mr.Tease said:

All these people will keep their jobs, and continue to be pundits in our media:

 

I listened to that Oakeshott woman once on the news and what she was saying made me really angry. So much so I was shouting at the TV, you know the sort of thing, thinking she could hear me.

Think I'm losing the plot 🙂

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, mcshed said:

Our absence of a constitution leaves this an ambiguous point. Plenty of PM's used to come from the House of Lords although that stopped over a 100 years ago so probably isn't on. Alec Douglas Home was in the Lords when appointed PM but resigned him position after a few days so he could stand in a by-election to become an MP so not only was he PM whilst a Lord he was also PM whilst sitting in neither house for a few weeks until he won his seat. 

As we saw with Brexit that constitution by convention can't really stand up to an administration wanting to do its own thing so if all of parliament really was coming together to support a unity candidate who wasn't an MP then they could probably get away with it as long as there was a clear path for that person to enter parliament.

All very true however The Cabinet Manual, states that the prime minister “always sits in the House of Commons.”

Prime Ministers are also expected to be accountable to parliament through Prime Minister’s Questions, delivering statements and appearing in front of the Liaison Committee. It would therefore not be sustainable for a prime minister to stay in office without being an MP indefinitely.

[mcshed]

11 hours ago, zahidf said:

This seems.. inappropriate 

There was chatter amongst the herd immunity advocates at the start of this thing that a disease that targeted the old might not be a bad thing in terms of pensions and strain on the care system. Such people are psychopaths.

[mcshed]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

All very true however The Cabinet Manual, states that the prime minister “always sits in the House of Commons.”

Prime Ministers are also expected to be accountable to parliament through Prime Minister’s Questions, delivering statements and appearing in front of the Liaison Committee. It would therefore not be sustainable for a prime minister to stay in office without being an MP indefinitely.

That's why my last sentence ended "as long as there was a clear path for that person to enter parliament."

If someone was willing to stand down for Blair then he could be appointed before winning that seat.

It's all complete fantasy but then so is any discussion of GNUs.