Stop voting for fucking Tories

[dpedin]

The chief whip would be the right honourable Mark Spencer.

This feels like it is all going to get pretty nasty for the Tory Party - and rightly so. Problem is now that the dam has bust and the flood of info about the MPs involved is only going to get bigger. Add in the blue on blue action, the number of MPs like Mad Nads and with scores to settle amongst the Tory leadership and the failure of the Party to act legally when face with allegations of rape and it all feels like a big cesspool of Tory is going to overwhelm them. Good!

[Simian]

The chief whip would be the right honourable Mark Spencer.

This feels like it is all going to get pretty nasty for the Tory Party - and rightly so. Problem is now that the dam has bust and the flood of info about the MPs involved is only going to get bigger. Add in the blue on blue action, the number of MPs like Mad Nads and with scores to settle amongst the Tory leadership and the failure of the Party to act legally when face with allegations of rape and it all feels like a big cesspool of Tory is going to overwhelm them. Good!

Yeah, totally agree the dam is bursting and that (to mix metaphors) the score settling is fuel for the fire. But, I can also imagine that the sheer volume of ‘issues’ being put out there could see a lot of people tuning it out and simply skipping the reports of it completely. In fact, I think we’re seeing that already.

[fishfoodie]

Mad Nad really is denser than a Neutron star, & she thinks the rest of us are as well.

Boris Johnson said Rishi Sunak “refused to engage” with him on kick-starting the UK economy after lockdown because the chancellor wanted to be PM, according to an extract from Nadine Dorries’ book.

According to the extract in the Mail, Mr Johnson told Ms Dorries: “Looking back, I can see that’s because there was a plan to remove me, and people were saying to him: ‘Don’t give him anything.

’He had been given the impression by someone that he should simply bide his time as chancellor until the bigger prize became his.”

Because the blond cunt could do nothing about who was the chancellor

[Rhubarb & Custard]

He only had Rishi Rich as chancellor because he'd promoted Cummings over Javid, and Javid promptly walked

[fishfoodie]

He only had Rishi Rich as chancellor because he'd promoted Cummings over Javid, and Javid promptly walked

Yeah, & Javid walked because it was already explicit that #10 was going to take control over the Exchequer, & the next Chancellor would just be a glove puppet

[Line6 HXFX]

To be fair, javid would have been a proper Doctor Death, and made George osbornes austerity seem like a oppulent mayors banquet.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Maybe. I don't like Javid and his I'm alright so screw everyone else approach, but that would be speculation.

On the austerity of Osborne, and others, it remains interesting how much of a free ride they get for their supposedly data driven approach. I will confess upfront I'm not without sympathy as a personal bias to the idea that debt is bad, and that at some point you're going to Liz Truss the economy and I'd rather not go looking for the stress points to begin with. But, they did drive a of thinking/policy off the back of the Reinhart and Rogoff paper 'Growth in a time of debt', the argument therein being governments with more debt had countries with much lower rates of growth, so Osborne's thinking was for all the pain of austerity it'd be more deleterious still not to cut in the present to gain more growth in the future, and that was supported by evidence.

The problem then resulting is the data that supported such argument stands up to scrutiny as well as a unicycle in the middle of an ice rink - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocials ... economics/

Yes Reinhart and Rogoff argue whilst they utterly screwed the pooch on their data it doesn't vitiate the main thrust of their contention, and again I've some sympathy because at some point debt is a problem, but actually the data showed countries with high debt did pretty much the same in terms of growth assuming a certain openness of markets, decent education systems and the like.

Most of the arguments against Osborne remain emotive, it just seems odd when there's such a spectacular own goal in what might be considered the objective part of Osborne's reasoning it's left to just lie there rather than being mercilessly thrown in his face over and over

(If anyone ever did want to look into what Reinhart and Rogoff got wrong it's jaw droopingly bad, you wouldn't expect such incompetence at GCSE level, and yet bless them they defend their work rather than performing a mea culpa, and you could only reasonably think they should put their hands up and admit they fucked their paper really, really badly)

[Line6 HXFX]

It's funny, if you are some right wing nazi fascist, white anglo saxon twat, you would be all for the state of Israel, as putting all the Jews all in one place, and as far away from pure, white Anglo saxon types, and into a hornets nest of angry young Muslims is a dream come true.


People like Suella Braverman use anti semitic tropes, when it comes to shite like spouting stuff about cultural Marxism (which she was warned about by various jewish lobby groups) and using other anti Jewish tropes, and even attacking holocaust survivors, who question her use of language..but is seriously pro Israel, in terms of clamping down on pro-palestinian protestors?

So for the british right...it seems jews staying in the fucking desert, getting up to all sorts of illegal shite..whilst illegally occupying land, and erradicating and dehumanising palistinians is perfectly fine.

Inspiring even.

[Sandstorm]

It's funny, if you are some right wing nazi fascist, white anglo saxon twat, you would be all for the state of Israel, as putting all the Jews all in one place, and as far away from pure, white Anglo saxon types, and into a hornets nest of angry young Muslims is a dream come true.


People like Suella Braverman use anti semitic tropes, when it comes to shite like spouting stuff about cultural Marxism (which she was warned about by various jewish lobby groups) and using other anti Jewish tropes, and even attacking holocaust survivors, who question her use of language..but is seriously pro Israel, in terms of clamping down on pro-palestinian protestors?

So for the british right...it seems jews staying in the fucking desert, getting up to all sorts of illegal shite..whilst illegally occupying land, and erradicating and dehumanising palistinians is perfectly fine.

Inspiring even.

None of that is funny. Or inspiring.

[Tichtheid]

Maybe. I don't like Javid and his I'm alright so screw everyone else approach, but that would be speculation.

On the austerity of Osborne, and others, it remains interesting how much of a free ride they get for their supposedly data driven approach. I will confess upfront I'm not without sympathy as a personal bias to the idea that debt is bad, and that at some point you're going to Liz Truss the economy and I'd rather not go looking for the stress points to begin with. But, they did drive a of thinking/policy off the back of the Reinhart and Rogoff paper 'Growth in a time of debt', the argument therein being governments with more debt had countries with much lower rates of growth, so Osborne's thinking was for all the pain of austerity it'd be more deleterious still not to cut in the present to gain more growth in the future, and that was supported by evidence.

The problem then resulting is the data that supported such argument stands up to scrutiny as well as a unicycle in the middle of an ice rink - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocials ... economics/

Yes Reinhart and Rogoff argue whilst they utterly screwed the pooch on their data it doesn't vitiate the main thrust of their contention, and again I've some sympathy because at some point debt is a problem, but actually the data showed countries with high debt did pretty much the same in terms of growth assuming a certain openness of markets, decent education systems and the like.

Most of the arguments against Osborne remain emotive, it just seems odd when there's such a spectacular own goal in what might be considered the objective part of Osborne's reasoning it's left to just lie there rather than being mercilessly thrown in his face over and over

(If anyone ever did want to look into what Reinhart and Rogoff got wrong it's jaw droopingly bad, you wouldn't expect such incompetence at GCSE level, and yet bless them they defend their work rather than performing a mea culpa, and you could only reasonably think they should put their hands up and admit they fucked their paper really, really badly)

The period immediately after 1945 saw a UK with rationing and austerity measures. The debt was peaking at nearly 250% of GDP, from there we built the NHS and the Welfare State as well as paying off the equivalent of three quarters of a trillion pounds in debt (which took until 2006), all the while reducing the debt until the financial crash of 2008.

I don't really have a point here, other than Osborne and his ilk still seem to think about the UK economy in terms of household budgets and balancing a chequebook, when it's quite plainly not like that at all

[tabascoboy]

King's Speech taken over the headlines, but the Covid Inquiry continues

[Simian]

Maybe. I don't like Javid and his I'm alright so screw everyone else approach, but that would be speculation.

On the austerity of Osborne, and others, it remains interesting how much of a free ride they get for their supposedly data driven approach. I will confess upfront I'm not without sympathy as a personal bias to the idea that debt is bad, and that at some point you're going to Liz Truss the economy and I'd rather not go looking for the stress points to begin with. But, they did drive a of thinking/policy off the back of the Reinhart and Rogoff paper 'Growth in a time of debt', the argument therein being governments with more debt had countries with much lower rates of growth, so Osborne's thinking was for all the pain of austerity it'd be more deleterious still not to cut in the present to gain more growth in the future, and that was supported by evidence.

The problem then resulting is the data that supported such argument stands up to scrutiny as well as a unicycle in the middle of an ice rink - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocials ... economics/

Yes Reinhart and Rogoff argue whilst they utterly screwed the pooch on their data it doesn't vitiate the main thrust of their contention, and again I've some sympathy because at some point debt is a problem, but actually the data showed countries with high debt did pretty much the same in terms of growth assuming a certain openness of markets, decent education systems and the like.

Most of the arguments against Osborne remain emotive, it just seems odd when there's such a spectacular own goal in what might be considered the objective part of Osborne's reasoning it's left to just lie there rather than being mercilessly thrown in his face over and over

(If anyone ever did want to look into what Reinhart and Rogoff got wrong it's jaw droopingly bad, you wouldn't expect such incompetence at GCSE level, and yet bless them they defend their work rather than performing a mea culpa, and you could only reasonably think they should put their hands up and admit they fucked their paper really, really badly)

Yeah, that paper is widely used in data science classes now as an example of exactly what a fully transparent and reproducible analysis pipeline DOES NOT look like

That the Torys (and others) used it to justify economic policy is both laughable and incredibly depressing.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Maybe. I don't like Javid and his I'm alright so screw everyone else approach, but that would be speculation.

On the austerity of Osborne, and others, it remains interesting how much of a free ride they get for their supposedly data driven approach. I will confess upfront I'm not without sympathy as a personal bias to the idea that debt is bad, and that at some point you're going to Liz Truss the economy and I'd rather not go looking for the stress points to begin with. But, they did drive a of thinking/policy off the back of the Reinhart and Rogoff paper 'Growth in a time of debt', the argument therein being governments with more debt had countries with much lower rates of growth, so Osborne's thinking was for all the pain of austerity it'd be more deleterious still not to cut in the present to gain more growth in the future, and that was supported by evidence.

The problem then resulting is the data that supported such argument stands up to scrutiny as well as a unicycle in the middle of an ice rink - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocials ... economics/

Yes Reinhart and Rogoff argue whilst they utterly screwed the pooch on their data it doesn't vitiate the main thrust of their contention, and again I've some sympathy because at some point debt is a problem, but actually the data showed countries with high debt did pretty much the same in terms of growth assuming a certain openness of markets, decent education systems and the like.

Most of the arguments against Osborne remain emotive, it just seems odd when there's such a spectacular own goal in what might be considered the objective part of Osborne's reasoning it's left to just lie there rather than being mercilessly thrown in his face over and over

(If anyone ever did want to look into what Reinhart and Rogoff got wrong it's jaw droopingly bad, you wouldn't expect such incompetence at GCSE level, and yet bless them they defend their work rather than performing a mea culpa, and you could only reasonably think they should put their hands up and admit they fucked their paper really, really badly)

Yeah, that paper is widely used in data science classes now as an example of exactly what a fully transparent and reproducible analysis pipeline DOES NOT look like

That the Torys (and others) used it to justify economic policy is both laughable and incredibly depressing.

'tis very well known in economics circles too. but it never got much in the way of a wider appraisal, possibly down to who owns the media, possibly down to the media themselves not being great at stats, or even just a view it's actually a human interest story that lacks interest.

and that always struck me as odd when austerity gets attacked over and over, but the data being so wrong and how it was relied on in such wrong fashion is just skirted over

[Simian]

Maybe. I don't like Javid and his I'm alright so screw everyone else approach, but that would be speculation.

On the austerity of Osborne, and others, it remains interesting how much of a free ride they get for their supposedly data driven approach. I will confess upfront I'm not without sympathy as a personal bias to the idea that debt is bad, and that at some point you're going to Liz Truss the economy and I'd rather not go looking for the stress points to begin with. But, they did drive a of thinking/policy off the back of the Reinhart and Rogoff paper 'Growth in a time of debt', the argument therein being governments with more debt had countries with much lower rates of growth, so Osborne's thinking was for all the pain of austerity it'd be more deleterious still not to cut in the present to gain more growth in the future, and that was supported by evidence.

The problem then resulting is the data that supported such argument stands up to scrutiny as well as a unicycle in the middle of an ice rink - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocials ... economics/

Yes Reinhart and Rogoff argue whilst they utterly screwed the pooch on their data it doesn't vitiate the main thrust of their contention, and again I've some sympathy because at some point debt is a problem, but actually the data showed countries with high debt did pretty much the same in terms of growth assuming a certain openness of markets, decent education systems and the like.

Most of the arguments against Osborne remain emotive, it just seems odd when there's such a spectacular own goal in what might be considered the objective part of Osborne's reasoning it's left to just lie there rather than being mercilessly thrown in his face over and over

(If anyone ever did want to look into what Reinhart and Rogoff got wrong it's jaw droopingly bad, you wouldn't expect such incompetence at GCSE level, and yet bless them they defend their work rather than performing a mea culpa, and you could only reasonably think they should put their hands up and admit they fucked their paper really, really badly)

Yeah, that paper is widely used in data science classes now as an example of exactly what a fully transparent and reproducible analysis pipeline DOES NOT look like

That the Torys (and others) used it to justify economic policy is both laughable and incredibly depressing.

'tis very well known in economics circles too. but it never got much in the way of a wider appraisal, possibly down to who owns the media, possibly down to the media themselves not being great at stats, or even just a view it's actually a human interest story that lacks interest.

and that always struck me as odd when austerity gets attacked over and over, but the data being so wrong and how it was relied on in such wrong fashion is just skirted over

Aye, it's pretty wild it didn't get more coverage. tbf, a lot of US newspapers and magazines ran pretty good pieces on it, but it's amazing it didn't get more coverage in the UK and Mainland Europe. The BBC ran a pretty good piece on it, but even that focussed on the human interest angle https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22223190

W

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Yeah, that paper is widely used in data science classes now as an example of exactly what a fully transparent and reproducible analysis pipeline DOES NOT look like

That the Torys (and others) used it to justify economic policy is both laughable and incredibly depressing.

'tis very well known in economics circles too. but it never got much in the way of a wider appraisal, possibly down to who owns the media, possibly down to the media themselves not being great at stats, or even just a view it's actually a human interest story that lacks interest.

and that always struck me as odd when austerity gets attacked over and over, but the data being so wrong and how it was relied on in such wrong fashion is just skirted over

Aye, it's pretty wild it didn't get more coverage. tbf, a lot of US newspapers and magazines ran pretty good pieces on it, but it's amazing it didn't get more coverage in the UK and Mainland Europe. The BBC ran a pretty good piece on it, but even that focussed on the human interest angle https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22223190

W

Yeah that doesn't do a good job at explaining how the NZ data impacted the overall figure as it did as a for instance, it doesn't even try really.

Still, at least it's some coverage. Scant mind when one considers the vast implications of what's been delivered on the back of being so wrong, the increase in poverty, slower growth, in the UK we've had Brexit. And yet, in a couple of weeks time come the Autumn Statement dollars to donuts the view of one G. Osborne will be sought as something of an 'expert'

[tabascoboy]

In a normal world, A Braverman led Tory party should surely be the end of it...

Is Braverman trying to get sacked? Some Tory insiders think so

Ex-ministers and backbenchers suggest home secretary’s stream of provocative comments may be part of a future leadership strategy
...
One former minister told the Guardian: “It is as if she wants to be fired so she can get on with a leadership bid … If she is tied to the government for too long, she will have to carry some of the blame for Rishi’s failure – and few people think he will win a general election outright.”

Another former Tory frontbencher said Braverman’s decision to make statements that have not been signed off by No 10 shows that Sunak is weak. “She is employing a self-preservation strategy which is not going down well inside the parliamentary party outside of the 40 or so MPs who might support her.”

On Monday, Colin Bloom, the former director of the Conservative Christian Fellowship, said Braverman was “goading” Sunak into sacking her. “It is not just that it is the comments about people sleeping in tents. I think she is goading No 10 into getting rid of her because she wants to launch her leadership campaign,” he told Newsnight.
...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... SApp_Other

[Slick]

In a normal world, A Braverman led Tory party should surely be the end of it...

Is Braverman trying to get sacked? Some Tory insiders think so

Ex-ministers and backbenchers suggest home secretary’s stream of provocative comments may be part of a future leadership strategy
...
One former minister told the Guardian: “It is as if she wants to be fired so she can get on with a leadership bid … If she is tied to the government for too long, she will have to carry some of the blame for Rishi’s failure – and few people think he will win a general election outright.”

Another former Tory frontbencher said Braverman’s decision to make statements that have not been signed off by No 10 shows that Sunak is weak. “She is employing a self-preservation strategy which is not going down well inside the parliamentary party outside of the 40 or so MPs who might support her.”

On Monday, Colin Bloom, the former director of the Conservative Christian Fellowship, said Braverman was “goading” Sunak into sacking her. “It is not just that it is the comments about people sleeping in tents. I think she is goading No 10 into getting rid of her because she wants to launch her leadership campaign,” he told Newsnight.
...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... SApp_Other

The clip of Starmer doing a decent job of taking her apart while Rishi squirms next to her was brilliant.

[Sandstorm]

Maybe. I don't like Javid and his I'm alright so screw everyone else approach, but that would be speculation.

On the austerity of Osborne, and others, it remains interesting how much of a free ride they get for their supposedly data driven approach. I will confess upfront I'm not without sympathy as a personal bias to the idea that debt is bad, and that at some point you're going to Liz Truss the economy and I'd rather not go looking for the stress points to begin with. But, they did drive a of thinking/policy off the back of the Reinhart and Rogoff paper 'Growth in a time of debt', the argument therein being governments with more debt had countries with much lower rates of growth, so Osborne's thinking was for all the pain of austerity it'd be more deleterious still not to cut in the present to gain more growth in the future, and that was supported by evidence.

The problem then resulting is the data that supported such argument stands up to scrutiny as well as a unicycle in the middle of an ice rink - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocials ... economics/

Yes Reinhart and Rogoff argue whilst they utterly screwed the pooch on their data it doesn't vitiate the main thrust of their contention, and again I've some sympathy because at some point debt is a problem, but actually the data showed countries with high debt did pretty much the same in terms of growth assuming a certain openness of markets, decent education systems and the like.

Most of the arguments against Osborne remain emotive, it just seems odd when there's such a spectacular own goal in what might be considered the objective part of Osborne's reasoning it's left to just lie there rather than being mercilessly thrown in his face over and over

(If anyone ever did want to look into what Reinhart and Rogoff got wrong it's jaw droopingly bad, you wouldn't expect such incompetence at GCSE level, and yet bless them they defend their work rather than performing a mea culpa, and you could only reasonably think they should put their hands up and admit they fucked their paper really, really badly)

Yeah, that paper is widely used in data science classes now as an example of exactly what a fully transparent and reproducible analysis pipeline DOES NOT look like

That the Torys (and others) used it to justify economic policy is both laughable and incredibly depressing.

'tis very well known in economics circles too. but it never got much in the way of a wider appraisal, possibly down to who owns the media, possibly down to the media themselves not being great at stats, or even just a view it's actually a human interest story that lacks interest.

and that always struck me as odd when austerity gets attacked over and over, but the data being so wrong and how it was relied on in such wrong fashion is just skirted over

Will history students one day look back at Osbourne with the same fondness as they do for Dr Richard Beeching and the Trains?

[C69]

In a normal world, A Braverman led Tory party should surely be the end of it...

Is Braverman trying to get sacked? Some Tory insiders think so

Ex-ministers and backbenchers suggest home secretary’s stream of provocative comments may be part of a future leadership strategy
...
One former minister told the Guardian: “It is as if she wants to be fired so she can get on with a leadership bid … If she is tied to the government for too long, she will have to carry some of the blame for Rishi’s failure – and few people think he will win a general election outright.”

Another former Tory frontbencher said Braverman’s decision to make statements that have not been signed off by No 10 shows that Sunak is weak. “She is employing a self-preservation strategy which is not going down well inside the parliamentary party outside of the 40 or so MPs who might support her.”

On Monday, Colin Bloom, the former director of the Conservative Christian Fellowship, said Braverman was “goading” Sunak into sacking her. “It is not just that it is the comments about people sleeping in tents. I think she is goading No 10 into getting rid of her because she wants to launch her leadership campaign,” he told Newsnight.
...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... SApp_Other

The clip of Starmer doing a decent job of taking her apart while Rishi squirms next to her was brilliant.

I don't like Starmer but tbh, he was good yesterday.
Looked like a PM in waiting.

[Hal Jordan]

Sunak's body language was interesting in the Starmer clip, if he leaned any further away from Braverman he'd have fallen off the bench.

[Insane_Homer]

https://www.threads.net/@russincheshire ... zWg02iN2fb

#TheWeekInTory

1. We begin with the Covid inquiry, which revealed the shocking news that everything we all knew three years ago ACTUALLY HAPPENED

2. This week it looked at the actions of Boris Johnson, a shit Aslan who we made into our Prime Minister for a laugh

3. Cabinet office records said Johnson was “weak and indecisive” and “cannot lead”

4. But Johnson’s defendants said Covid was merely “the wrong crisis … for his skill-set”, which is the skill-set of a children’s entertainer on mandatory leave pending the outcome of a tribunal

5. Then Dominic Cummings turned up, exhibiting the glassy-eyed stare of an unqualified accountant doorstepped by Watchdog

6. He’d spent the pandemic conducting iffy eye-tests and charming his team with supportive messages calling them “useless fuckpigs”, “morons” and “cunts”

7. Johnson believed Covid to be “a hoax” on the day over 4,000 died from it in Italy

8. Meanwhile Matt Hancock – Peewee Herman reflected in the back of a spoon – wanted the authority to decide “who lived and who died” in the event Covid WASN’T found to be entirely made up

9. Johnson said Covid was “nature’s way of dealing with old people”, and the elderly should “accept their fate”

10. Part of that fate was him being prepared to “recklessly” kill the Queen by exposing her to Covid, until he was talked out of a regicidal palace visit by staff

11. Johnson then asked Dominic Cummings to invent a “dead cat” story to get the pandemic off the front pages, because BoJo was “sick of it”

12. Cummings revealed that Johnson had given “direct bungs” to newspapers “dressed up as Covid relief”, in return for positive coverage

13. Number 10 officials said at the time, “Govt isn’t actually that hard but [Johnson] is really making it impossible”

14. They called the govt's response to the pandemic “a terrible, tragic joke”

15. But the thatched sex-yeti did make a fine contribution to science, with his mind-blowing and not-medically-proven theory that Covid could be treated by aiming your hairdryer up your nose

16. Jacob Rees-Mogg, the precise physical intersection of a harrowing antique dildo and the concept of gout, said Johnson was merely “an antidote to group think”

17. But Tory Lord Bethell said Johnson did “everything he could” to avoid focusing on the pandemic

18. This was, it is claimed, because Johnson didn’t want to take the limelight off his "Brexit triumph"

19. Brexit triumph update: Brexit has caused a 22% slump in UK exports to the EU, which was once our biggest market

20. And because Brexit saved the NHS, patients now face “severe drug shortages” due to delays and higher costs

21. In light of this, Rishi Sunak, a rejected early draft of an Aardman sidekick, said Britons “must be prepared to fail”, and we must applaud him leading by example

22. Sunak took a break from his gap-year pretending to be a Prime Minister to audition for his next job, as Elon Musk’s desktop bobble-head

23. Sky News described the Musk/Sunak softball interview as “One of the maddest events I’ve ever covered”

24. Sunak said the risk of extinction from AI was on the same scale as that from nuclear war

25. But good news for fans of The Terminator, because Sunak responded to this existential threat by letting Musk regulate AI all by himself

26. As Sunak smilingly told us AI would destroy our jobs, futures, and possibly lives, Musk immediately unveiled an AI product with what he called “a rebellious streak”, and I began digging a bunker

27. Tory MP’s responses:

28. “The PM is offering the electorate dystopia. Thick, thick, thick”

29. “I despair at No 10’s naivety”

30. “Head in hands. It’s utterly breathtaking. Unbelievable crassness.”

31. Speaking of witch (typo): Suella Braverman claimed rough sleeping is a “lifestyle choice”

32. Funny how that “lifestyle choice” became 175% more popular when the Tories introduced austerity

33. Chinchilla the Hun’s solution to people forced to live in tents is: ban tents

34. Ben Howlett called Braverman “actually evil”

35. She then went on to describe people asking for a ceasefire as “hate marches”

36. She says she opposes asking everybody to stop killing one another, because it ruins the meaning of Armistice Day

37. It didn’t seem to matter that the police have already said no such march is even happening

38. Braverman’s previous great success, the Bibby Stockholm Legionnaires Disease Breeding Facility, failed fire inspections again

39. So the govt now has to reduce the number of people it can hold, making the entire cost-saving exercise 17% more expensive than the thing it replaces

40. And the Home Office is being investigated for unlawfully segregating asylum seekers by nationality or race

41. Esther McVey, one of the brightest stars in the political fundament, accused Just Stop Oil of vandalising a 1651 painting that she somehow thinks depicts the Suffragette movement

42. Fun fact: the "Suffragette" painting she's defending was vandalised by Suffragettes in 1914

43. Former Tory chair Brandon Lewis has taken a six-figure job at a company owned by sanctioned Russians

44. Another former Tory chair, Bim Afolami, is being investigated over payments from a lobbying firm

45. And yet another former Tory chair, Jake Berry, accused an unnamed (but we all know) Tory MP of being a serial rapist

46. Being Tory chair sounds like a relentless, high-stakes game of gobshite whack-a-mole

47. Tangoed Morph stunt double (and, yep, former Tory chair) Oliver Dowden said there was no cover-up of the rape allegations, even though the party had known about it for ages, but hasn’t taken action against the alleged culprit

48. But Dowden couldn’t deny the Tory party had quietly paid for the alleged victim to get treatment

49. Michelle Mone finally admitted involvement in a £200m rip-off PPE company, after denying it for 3 years, when she wasn’t too busy buying private jets with her profits

50. The Tory chair of the Environment Select Committee has been asked to resign, after it was found he was a member of a group opposed to solar power, but in favour of bee-killing, trophy hunting, culling badgers, and fox hunting

51. Bob Stewart was found guilty of racial abuse

[Insane_Homer]

Part #2

52. Crispin Blunt was arrested for rape and drug offences

53. Peter Bone was kicked out of the party for waving his tallywacker at a member of staff

54. Gillian Keegan denied Tories have a “cultural issue” with sexual misconduct. So here's a list to help Gillian:

a. Imran Ahmad Khan: sexual assault
b. Charlie Elphicke: sexual assault
c. Michael Fallon: resigned after groping incident
d. Rob Roberts: sexually harassed a junior member of staff
e. Chris Pincher: accused of groping multiple times
f. Neil Parish: watching porn in parliament
g. Julian Knight: still under investigation for sexual assault
h. Mark Menzies: paid a male escort for sex, showed him round parliament, and then asked him to procure crystal meth
i. Stephen Crabb: texted a 19-year-old he’d just interviewed for a job, and asked her to meet him for sex
j. Mark Garnier: referred to his secretary as “sugar tits” and made her buy sex toys for him
k. Brooks Newmark: sent sexually explicit messages to an undercover reporter investigating his habit of sending sexually explicit messages to people
l. Damian Green: resigned after being accused of groping a Tory activist half his age
m. Andrew Griffiths: found to have repeatedly raped and abused his wife, and sent over 2000 sexually explicit messages to other women
n. David Warburton: promised “not to remove my clothes again”, if the woman he had just groped would let him back inside for more cocaine
o. Unnamed Tory MP: woke up drunk in a brothel, didn’t know how he got there, and had lost his clothes
p. Unnamed Tory MP: told his secretary to “come and feel the length of my cock”
q. Unnamed Tory MP: groped a female journalist and said “God, I love those tits”
r. Boris Johnson: accused of groping 2 women during a single lunch
t. Andrew Rosindell: as part of a “gentleman’s agreement”, has not attended parliament for a year while facing indecent assault investigation
u. He must have a different definition of “gentleman” than I do
s. And then there’s the spreadsheet of 36 sexually untrustworthy Tory MPs that is handed to new staff, as a sort of field guide to the degenerates and dangerous monsters they’ll be working for


55. Anyway: back to the smorgasbord of odium and despair that’s still, incredibly, running this country

56. Kemi Badenoch announced a “£1.4 trillion trade deal” with Florida, which isn’t a trade deal, and would only be worth £1.4 trillion if Florida gave us their entire GDP

57. And now a guest appearance by former Tory MP and exuberantly gormless flapdoodle Nadine Dorries, who claimed social media firms have a “big dial” that they turn to make everybody more left wing

58. She went on to assert Boris Johnson was taken down by “shadowy forces” which she has imaginatively nicknamed “Moneypenny”, “Skyfall” and “M”, but it’s possible she just fell asleep face down on her keyboard during a James-Bond-and-Lambrini marathon.

59. This culminated in her claim that No 10 has a “shadowy fixer” employed to kill people’s pet rabbits

60. Meanwhile, away from this turd-bestrewn right-wing playpen, the UN described the UK as “in violation of international law” over our levels of poverty

61. The independent Institute for Government described Tory policies as a “doom loop” that had left vital services “crumbling”

62. And the Tory solution to the sewage pollution crises was revealed to be: changing the definition of “pollution”

63. In the face of catastrophic and irreversible climate disaster, Sunak announced new North Sea oil and gas licenses to “bring bills down”

64. Energy secretary Clare Coutinho admitted they “won’t bring bills down”

65. And finally, the Tories revealed marvellous new plans to brand anybody “undermining” the UK as an “extremist”. So if this is my last tweet, it's because I'm paying a long, involuntary visit to a black-ops site in Mogadishu.

[TedMaul]

That was most enjoyable,, thank you!

[C69]

Thanks for that.
Re 45 MF?

[geordie_6]

Bloody hell. Labour couldn't fix all that if they found a magic lamp on a London flea market...

[fishfoodie]

Bloody hell. Labour couldn't fix all that if they found a magic lamp on a London flea market...

If they get a massive majority, & two full terms, they might just be able to get you back to where you were in 2008 !

So just a quarter century of lost growth because you elected the Tories.

[Tichtheid]

Bloody hell. Labour couldn't fix all that if they found a magic lamp on a London flea market...

If they get a massive majority, & two full terms, they might just be able to get you back to where you were in 2008 !

So just a quarter century of lost growth because you elected the Tories.

Given that the vast majority of the 65 points there, at least 55 of them, are Tories being Tories, ie inept, corrupt or sex pests, it won't take much to turn those points around - to just be decent human beings who can do the job they are being paid for would be pretty much it.

The more difficult parts are fixing the total fucking mess these shitehawks have left behind them for the the next government to clear up

[fishfoodie]

Bloody hell. Labour couldn't fix all that if they found a magic lamp on a London flea market...

If they get a massive majority, & two full terms, they might just be able to get you back to where you were in 2008 !

So just a quarter century of lost growth because you elected the Tories.

Given that the vast majority of the 65 points there, at least 55 of them, are Tories being Tories, ie inept, corrupt or sex pests, it won't take much to turn those points around - to just be decent human beings who can do the job they are being paid for would be pretty much it.

The more difficult parts are fixing the total fucking mess these shitehawks have left behind them for the the next government to clear up

But they've gotten away with it for the last decade plus because 99% of the media won't publish the stories, & the Met is institutionally corrupt & the nefarious relationship between the Politicians, the Media, & the Police mean that the victims know damn well that if they go to the Met, they'll never work again, they'll get crucified in the Tabloids, & there's a microscopic chance that their attacker will ever go to gaol.

The failures of the Met have been well know for at least the last couple of decades; the takeover of the media, & the power it gives to a few billionares ditto, & the complete lack of any properly independent enforcement of ethics has existed forever.

Did Rishi ever bother appointing an ethics advisor ?

Self-Regulation is no regulation, & that's what Westminster has.

[Tichtheid]

If they get a massive majority, & two full terms, they might just be able to get you back to where you were in 2008 !

So just a quarter century of lost growth because you elected the Tories.

Given that the vast majority of the 65 points there, at least 55 of them, are Tories being Tories, ie inept, corrupt or sex pests, it won't take much to turn those points around - to just be decent human beings who can do the job they are being paid for would be pretty much it.

The more difficult parts are fixing the total fucking mess these shitehawks have left behind them for the the next government to clear up

But they've gotten away with it for the last decade plus because 99% of the media won't publish the stories, & the Met is institutionally corrupt & the nefarious relationship between the Politicians, the Media, & the Police mean that the victims know damn well that if they go to the Met, they'll never work again, they'll get crucified in the Tabloids, & there's a microscopic chance that their attacker will ever go to gaol.

The failures of the Met have been well know for at least the last couple of decades; the takeover of the media, & the power it gives to a few billionares ditto, & the complete lack of any properly independent enforcement of ethics has existed forever.

Did Rishi ever bother appointing an ethics advisor ?

Self-Regulation is no regulation, & that's what Westminster has.

I totally agree.

I looked through a few of the tweets from Becky Paton up there in a previous post ^ - it looks like she was doing a documentary about the sexual abuse she and others have endured at the hands of Tory MPs and their friends. The BBC pulled the plug on it at the last moment after a year of making the film.

I assume the BBC were told to do so.

[sockwithaticket]

PoliticsJoe have discussed the rampant sexual harassment in parliament a few times and revisited the topic on their most recent episode of the pubcast really hammering how inadequate the reporting and sanction processes are, which means people don't report and so the MPs are able to just carry on.

[C69]

Any speculation as per point 45 rapist MP?

[Slick]

PoliticsJoe have discussed the rampant sexual harassment in parliament a few times and revisited the topic on their most recent episode of the pubcast really hammering how inadequate the reporting and sanction processes are, which means people don't report and so the MPs are able to just carry on.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time in the Strangers Bar, various others in Parliament and the local drinking pubs around it, and it’s quite incredible. It’s as if the last 20 years or so of social reform (for want of a better phrase) hasn’t happened.

To be fair though, it’s not just MP’s and it’s not just men, behaving badly, but it’s very, very easy to see how the imbalance of power could be easily abused.

It was only about 2 months ago that I was outside the Red Lion while a group of guys surrounding a prominent MP were shouting obscenities at tourists as he laughed away

[fishfoodie]

PoliticsJoe have discussed the rampant sexual harassment in parliament a few times and revisited the topic on their most recent episode of the pubcast really hammering how inadequate the reporting and sanction processes are, which means people don't report and so the MPs are able to just carry on.

It's not even as if this is a Party specific issue, because they've all had their despicable scrotes, who've evaded their just deserts.

Profumo, Thorpe, Cyril Smith.....

They all got away scot free, when they should all have rotted away in isolation cells, going slowly insane, so they weren't shanked by ODCs, who objected to serving their time with traitors, nutbars, & paedos.

This is just the top 0.00001% lauding it over the plebs.

[C69]

So just hours after Rishi met the Head of the Met and some common ground was found.
Guess who has an interview and claims left wing protests and causes are treated more favourable than those by right wing groups.

Go girl

Is she actually trying to get sacked? She is certainly starting her thrust for leadership early.

Then mad Nad on the Beeb spouting conspiracy theories.
Brilliant

[Ymx]

Good on Braverman for holding that weasel of a man to account.

[SaintK]

So just hours after Rishi met the Head of the Met and some common ground was found.
Guess who has an interview and claims left wing protests and causes are treated more favourable than those by right wing groups.

Go girl

Is she actually trying to get sacked? She is certainly starting her thrust for leadership early.

Then mad Nad on the Beeb spouting conspiracy theories.
Brilliant

Would be interested to know just who is pulling her strings. She appears too thick to be doing this of her own accord!

[Ymx]

“Balanced” Piers trying to trot out the garbage media line, but not all of them are inciting genocide.

[Slick]

So just hours after Rishi met the Head of the Met and some common ground was found.
Guess who has an interview and claims left wing protests and causes are treated more favourable than those by right wing groups.

Go girl

Is she actually trying to get sacked? She is certainly starting her thrust for leadership early.

Then mad Nad on the Beeb spouting conspiracy theories.
Brilliant

Would be interested to know just who is pulling her strings. She appears too thick to be doing this of her own accord!

She definitely is trying to get sacked.

And agree Saint, someone is planning this with her. Although I read yesterday that she only has the support of about 40 MP's. Also, seems a bit of a strange time to be doing this, the Torys are going to get whacked at the GE so why not wait until after that - most evidence so far seems to point to the fact that Rishi going more right wing and appealing to specific groups isn't really working anyway so who thinks going full tonto is going to work?

[Tichtheid]

“Balanced” Piers trying to trot out the garbage media line, but not all of them are inciting genocide.

A banal equivalent to that argument would be that if some Rangers supporters are sectarian bigots who have run guns into Northern Ireland for loyalist paramilitary terrorists you should never go to a match at Ibrox.

I know someone who was convicted of that offence, or rather I know his sibling.

The answer is of course that Rangers do not belong to the extremists, likewise protests calling for peace and a ceasefire do not belong to extremists

[Rhubarb & Custard]

“Balanced” Piers trying to trot out the garbage media line, but not all of them are inciting genocide.

You mean like the Tories being proud to have the racists on board for the Brexit vote? This isn't unusual for Tory supporters now, it is the Tories now