Alf Bentley Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 27 minutes ago, Webbo said: We're in a weak position because the establishment have been working against us from day one. MPs that stood on a manifesto of leaving the EU have tried to sabotage the negotiations from the start. If we had a PM with any balls we tell them to stuff their deal. It beside the point anyway America obviously wants to do well out of any deal, as would anyone else. My last comment on this in here, as I don't want to hijack the Trump/US thread......see you back in the Politics Thread re. Brexit sooner or later, I'm sure. I agree with your last comment. Any country/bloc promotes its own interests in negotiations - and can expect to get its own way to a greater extent if it is the stronger party or party with less to lose: e.g. US or EU negotiating with the UK. The UK would be in the stronger position if negotiating with Portugal, Ireland or wherever. It's logical that the EU will mostly get its own way in negotiations with the UK for that reason. I'm curious, though, as to the issues on which the UK has been "bullied"? There's been an agreement on the divorce settlement, based on pre-existing commitments. There's been a mutually beneficial agreement to protect the interests of EU citizens in the UK and vice-versa. The EU has agreed to the UK's request for a transition period, of benefit to both parties, but particularly the UK. The EU has been insisting on no hard border in Ireland to protect the peace, to ensure that the Irish Republic doesn't face problems and to protect the integrity of the Single Market - hardly bullying. Likewise, so far, the EU has been resisting UK attempts to retain those bits of the Single Market that it likes (free movement of goods) while opting out of those that it doesn't like (e.g. freedom of movement) - again, hardly bullying, just protecting their interests, which they're in a strong enough position to do. On your first comment, I've no idea who this "establishment" is that is frustrating you - after all, you have a Tory Govt. You can ignore "the establishment" if you want. As for MPs standing on a manifesto of leaving the EU.....er, we are leaving the EU! Personally, I think May is showing "balls" of a sort in trying to negotiate a Soft Brexit departure with a few bits of red meat for the headbangers. I presume she realises that telling the EU to "stuff their deal", having made few preparations for a cliff-edge Brexit, could cause devastation to the nation - so she's being responsible and quite brave in facing the headbangers down to a large extent and trying to negotiate the best possible deal from a much stronger negotiating partner that is determined to protect its own interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Izzy Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 32 minutes ago, Buce said: As my teenage daughter is fond of saying, 'What does that even mean?' Trump reckons he plays golf off a 3 handicap which is very impressive for bloke his age. A professional should go around a course in level par - which for Turnberry is 72 strokes. A 3 handicap player should therefore go round in 75 strokes but most amateur golfer only play to their handicap a couple of times a year. If Trump shot two under his handicap today that means he'd have gone around in 73 strokes which is some doing around that course. No wonder it was a successful trip for him P.S. I've no idea what he really shot today and I don't believe for a minute that he only plays off 3. What I do believe is that the real reason he visited the U.K. this weekend was to play one of the best links golf courses in the world (which he just happens to own!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buce Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 12 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: Trump reckons he plays golf off a 3 handicap which is very impressive for bloke his age. A professional should go around a course in level par - which for Turnberry is 72 strokes. A 3 handicap player should therefore go round in 75 strokes but most amateur golfer only play to their handicap a couple of times a year. If Trump shot two under his handicap today that means he'd have gone around in 73 strokes which is some doing around that course. No wonder it was a successful trip for him P.S. I've no idea what he really shot today and I don't believe for a minute that he only plays off 3. What I do believe is that the real reason he visited the U.K. this weekend was to play one of the best links golf courses in the world (which he just happens to own!) Cheers. So what's your handicap (I'll resist the obvious comment )? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Izzy Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Buce said: Cheers. So what's your handicap (I'll resist the obvious comment )? My handicap is currently 7 but I got down to 6 at one stage. Only about 10% of amateur golfers have a handicap of 6 or below so I'm O.K. but not that good. As it happens I stopped playing about 10 weeks ago at the same time I joined the gym. My lad will start playing football at weekends from September and I'll be watching him play every week, so I'll probably put golf on hold for a few years until he's a bit older Edited 14 July 2018 by Izzy Muzzett 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 1 hour ago, Webbo said: We're in a weak position because the establishment have been working against us from day one. MPs that stood on a manifesto of leaving the EU have tried to sabotage the negotiations from the start. If we had a PM with any balls we tell them to stuff their deal. It beside the point anyway America obviously wants to do well out of any deal, as would anyone else. 2 Absolutely. It just strikes me as ridiculous how people think the US will be keen to offer us a sweetheart deal while at the same time remarking on how a deal with EU is "punishment" or somesuch. The US is equally as self-interested as the EU - if not more. I mean, the entire stance of this administration has been "America First", surely that's a big enough hint dropped without the policy changes reflecting that dropping even bigger ones? As Alf says, the US want a world full of individual states where they will be one of the biggest kids in the playground and assert their supremacy. I'd love to know from anyone at all about why that would be a good thing for the UK or anyone else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44829539 Scots like having Trump drop in for a links round, then. Can't say that I blame them considering the way he's treated a lot of them in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l444ry Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 23 hours ago, MattP said: Both make the same point? You mean aside from one wanting us to remain and the other wanting the hardest possible Brexit you mean No/ They both said the USA will deal with the EU first. Wake up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 14 July 2018 Share Posted 14 July 2018 I'm not an SNP fan by any stretch of the imagination but Sturgeon saying that Trump needs to be questioned on policy regarding treatment of women and minorities and (more importantly) the environment is spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 12 hours ago, leicsmac said: I'm not an SNP fan by any stretch of the imagination but Sturgeon saying that Trump needs to be questioned on policy regarding treatment of women and minorities and (more importantly) the environment is spot on. Shame she's made so many rude comments about him that she can't even get a meeting to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 12 hours ago, l444ry said: No/ They both said the USA will deal with the EU first. Wake up. Trump has not said that at all. He's said if we go for this type of Brexit he has too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 9 minutes ago, MattP said: Shame she's made so many rude comments about him that she can't even get a meeting to do it. Fair, though like this administration would listen to anyone talking sustainable sense about environmental policy when they have special coal/oil/gas interests to satisfy anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 How's this for a classic cock-up. America's C.N.N. initially turned up at The Chequers Hotel in Marlow, Bucks, which is small, and better known locally as a pub. They really did their homework. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 1 hour ago, lifted*fox said: Isnt that the virtuous guy with the beard the man who invited members of Hizbollah, Hamas and the IRA into parliament? People whose parties and political affiliation encourage genocide towards Jews and the execution of Homosexuals? Just checking because it doesn't seem to be mentioned in the photoshop. Is that him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 33 minutes ago, MattP said: Isnt that the virtuous guy with the beard the man who invited members of Hizbollah, Hamas and the IRA into parliament? People whose parties and political affiliation encourage genocide towards Jews and the execution of Homosexuals? Just checking because it doesn't seem to be mentioned in the photoshop. Is that him? More about the Mail ignoring that the Trump administration enables similar fundies and yet is very keen to point out when Corbyn engages them in yet another double standard. But hey, it's probably all good with them so long it is a cross hanging above the legalised mistreatment of women and minorities rather than a crescent and star (and as long as it's rather better hidden in the legal system and establishment and so it can be plausibly denied). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 1 hour ago, leicsmac said: More about the Mail ignoring that the Trump administration enables similar fundies and yet is very keen to point out when Corbyn engages them in yet another double standard. Who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 15 July 2018 Share Posted 15 July 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, MattP said: Who? This is by no means an exhaustive list, but... In Congress/Cabinet: Mike Pence: the VP, has expressed support for gay "conversion therapy" Sam Brownback: US "U.S. Ambassador for International Religious Freedom", lobbied the UK for the release of Tommy Robinson Louie Gohmert: Representative for Texas, signed off on numerous anti-abortion bills and one of only 4 representatives to vote against a bill to authorize the National Science Foundation to support entrepreneurial programs for women. Also likened homosexuality as a similar kind of sin that led to "Noah's Flood". And out in the wider world and politically active: Brett Kavanaugh: Trumps Supreme Court nominee (not confirmed as yet) - lauded dissent in the case of Roe v Wade. Franklin Graham: Influential evangelist and political activist, is on record with the view that "God kills gays in the Bible and He does not support gay marriage." Pat Robertson: Pretty much as the above. There are plenty more out there than that, too. Now, don't get me wrong, you won't see these guys forcing women to cover up or throwing gay guys off a building. They're much, much smarter than that as they know that such stuff is likely, no matter how much power they have, to lead to talk later on and general international disapproval (I mean, most of the theocracies around the world that still exist tend to cop a lot of flak for that sort of thing, after all). Instead, they use the law and popular opinion, either by controlling the legislature or by exerting influence over the public to vote in those that then can. Perhaps it's a bill shutting down a female health clinic that then makes it impossible to get to another one without the help of those unlikely to give it, or one that denies gay married couples healthcare benefits that mean they have trouble caring for each other should one be hospitalised. Perhaps a bill with a loophole in allowing doctors to not treat trans people. And all in the name of "religious freedom". Like I said, not as spectacular nor as photogenic means of control as ISIS pitching someone off a roof, but still a demonstration of how these people have the power and control to make the lives of those they believe abominable a misery in a first-world country. And, of course, entirely deniable because "hey, we didn't kill anyone, did we? We're not like those Muslims!" And in the time that this current administration has been in charge, these proposals being put forward have increased at a very fast clip. It doesn't really take a smart person to suggest that this administration is at least giving tacit support to such fundies and standing aside to let them bring these bills forward. The two Supreme Court judges brought about during Trumps tenure so far (one confirmed, one not) also bear this out, and also allow a possibility for a future major victory for the fundies: the overturning of both Roe v Wade and Obergefell v Hodges. And yet, publications like the Mail see fit to ignore the Christian fundamentalist right given a free hand by Trump as they do all of this entirely. I do honestly, truly hope that one day the US will actually be able to shake off the fundie influence, establish a clear barrier between church and state, and join the rest of the first world in a more secular 21st Century. Edited 15 July 2018 by leicsmac 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 21 hours ago, leicsmac said: More about the Mail ignoring that the Trump administration enables similar fundies and yet is very keen to point out when Corbyn engages them in yet another double standard. But hey, it's probably all good with them so long it is a cross hanging above the legalised mistreatment of women and minorities rather than a crescent and star (and as long as it's rather better hidden in the legal system and establishment and so it can be plausibly denied). 18 hours ago, leicsmac said: This is by no means an exhaustive list, but... In Congress/Cabinet: Mike Pence: the VP, has expressed support for gay "conversion therapy" Sam Brownback: US "U.S. Ambassador for International Religious Freedom", lobbied the UK for the release of Tommy Robinson Louie Gohmert: Representative for Texas, signed off on numerous anti-abortion bills and one of only 4 representatives to vote against a bill to authorize the National Science Foundation to support entrepreneurial programs for women. Also likened homosexuality as a similar kind of sin that led to "Noah's Flood". And out in the wider world and politically active: Brett Kavanaugh: Trumps Supreme Court nominee (not confirmed as yet) - lauded dissent in the case of Roe v Wade. Franklin Graham: Influential evangelist and political activist, is on record with the view that "God kills gays in the Bible and He does not support gay marriage." Pat Robertson: Pretty much as the above. There are plenty more out there than that, too. Now, don't get me wrong, you won't see these guys forcing women to cover up or throwing gay guys off a building. They're much, much smarter than that as they know that such stuff is likely, no matter how much power they have, to lead to talk later on and general international disapproval (I mean, most of the theocracies around the world that still exist tend to cop a lot of flak for that sort of thing, after all). Instead, they use the law and popular opinion, either by controlling the legislature or by exerting influence over the public to vote in those that then can. Perhaps it's a bill shutting down a female health clinic that then makes it impossible to get to another one without the help of those unlikely to give it, or one that denies gay married couples healthcare benefits that mean they have trouble caring for each other should one be hospitalised. Perhaps a bill with a loophole in allowing doctors to not treat trans people. And all in the name of "religious freedom". Like I said, not as spectacular nor as photogenic means of control as ISIS pitching someone off a roof, but still a demonstration of how these people have the power and control to make the lives of those they believe abominable a misery in a first-world country. And, of course, entirely deniable because "hey, we didn't kill anyone, did we? We're not like those Muslims!" And in the time that this current administration has been in charge, these proposals being put forward have increased at a very fast clip. It doesn't really take a smart person to suggest that this administration is at least giving tacit support to such fundies and standing aside to let them bring these bills forward. The two Supreme Court judges brought about during Trumps tenure so far (one confirmed, one not) also bear this out, and also allow a possibility for a future major victory for the fundies: the overturning of both Roe v Wade and Obergefell v Hodges. And yet, publications like the Mail see fit to ignore the Christian fundamentalist right given a free hand by Trump as they do all of this entirely. I do honestly, truly hope that one day the US will actually be able to shake off the fundie influence, establish a clear barrier between church and state, and join the rest of the first world in a more secular 21st Century. All good points obviously but this is a British newspaper though, of course they are going to be more inclined to call out the hypocrisy of Jeremy Corbyn that names barely a person in Britain would know about. They don't ignore them all either, just googling the top thing they have done a few stories on it... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5364801/Gay-Olympian-Adam-Rippon-refuses-meeting-Pence.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5281183/Adam-Rippon-doesnt-want-Pence-leading-Olympic-delegation.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 6 minutes ago, MattP said: All good points obviously but this is a British newspaper though, of course they are going to be more inclined to call out the hypocrisy of Jeremy Corbyn that names barely a person in Britain would know about. They don't ignore them all either, just googling the top thing they have done a few stories on it... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5364801/Gay-Olympian-Adam-Rippon-refuses-meeting-Pence.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5281183/Adam-Rippon-doesnt-want-Pence-leading-Olympic-delegation.html Fair play to them for at least giving some coverage towards Pence then. It's probably too much to expect the Mail to evenhandedly highlight the shortcomings of such people in the same way as they might highlight Muslim fundamentalists (as it probably is to expect the Mirror to likewise hold up more of a light to Corbyn rubbing shoulders with the folks you mentioned). My own take is that they are as dangerous as each other in their own way when it comes to seeking control over anyone they deem objectionable (a theme running through Abrahamic religions and politics for centuries). NB. The comments on those stories do make for interesting reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 (edited) On 27/06/2018 at 12:25, Sharpe's Fox said: big result last night where a 28 old socialist who was a bartender this time last year beat the favorite to replace Nancy Peloci as the house leader of the democrats in the Democratic primary for the congressional seat in the Bronx. The Democratic party has to go left or get beat again in 2020. On 27/06/2018 at 12:51, leicsmac said: Was gonna post about this too, good stuff but as I've said before concerning the nation at large I'm worried that large swathes of swing voters are too susceptible to the "OMGZ COMMIE!!!!111" dog-whistle that can and will get trotted out against even a vaguely left candidate. Did a TV interview last night, not the sharpest knife in the draw to say the least. How do these people manage to get elected? https://twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/1018867760783224832 Edited 16 July 2018 by MattP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 1 hour ago, MattP said: Did a TV interview last night, not the sharpest knife in the draw to say the least. How do these people manage to get elected? https://twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/1018867760783224832 Same way Roy Moore (almost) got in, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 1 minute ago, leicsmac said: Same way Roy Moore (almost) got in, I guess. But he didn't, in fact he was so bad he couldn't get elected in a place that is one of the most fertile for the party he stood in the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 7 minutes ago, MattP said: But he didn't, in fact he was so bad he couldn't get elected in a place that is one of the most fertile for the party he stood in the country. The process is the same though, just a good thing he didn't have quite enough fundie rednecks to get over the finish line. Honestly, given how far to the right the Overton Window is over there I'm still amazed she got the nod among Dems even in a place as liberal as the Bronx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 Jesus Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breadandcheese Posted 16 July 2018 Share Posted 16 July 2018 16 minutes ago, toddybad said: Jesus Christ. Wow. Just wow. And not in a good way. Wow. I didn't think Sasha Baron Cohen could find anything more crazy than though his previous creations, but wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts