Gordy's gone bye byes and Adam Boulton's gone nut-nut, following Kay Burley's spectacular on-air meltdown on Saturday while covering the takebackparliament protest
( Read more... )
WE DO NOT ELECT PRIME MINISTERS IN THIS COUNTRY. WE VOTE FOR THE PARTY NOT THE PM. THIS IS NOT AMERICA. WE DO NOT HAVE A PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM. REPEAT - THIS IS NOT AMERICA. WE DO NOT HAVE A PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM. YOU VOTE FOR THE PARTY, NOT THE PRIME MINISTER.
Actually, we don't vote for the President, either, though most Americans think we do. There's the popular vote and then there's the Electoral College vote. After the popular vote, state-appointed electors cast their ballots for whatever candidate prevailed in their state.
So basically, we vote for the people who vote for the President and Vice-President.
I never heard of Helen Duncan before, but the notion of a witch trial in 1944 is fascinating. I want to know more about this woman!
I get extremely irritated when people misrepresent for political/religious reasons the trial of Helen Duncan as a witch trial. She was tried under the 1723 Witchcraft Act which repealed all earlier witchcraft statutes in Great Britain and which was essentially an early trade practices act which allowed people who posed as witches, wizards, faith healers or mediums to extract money from the gullible (and, in the cases of the relatives of those who perished on the Hood) the grieving to be prosecuted for fraud.
an early trade practices act which allowed people who posed as witches, wizards, faith healers or mediums to extract money from the gullible (and, in the cases of the relatives of those who perished on the Hood) the grieving to be prosecuted for fraud.
I think you just gave me an idea for a Dresden Files story set in Edinburgh.
And thank you. I didn't know any of that. (Well, obviously.)
Sky News is a transparent and unbelievably cack handed attempt by Murdoch inc to set up a Fox News like channel in the UK. But, like most, they underestimate the sheer cynicism inherent in the British national psyche, un like middle America there's a distinct lack of acquiescent sheep to blindly accept their platitudinous drivel. Apart from Daily Mail readers and they don't count in any meaningful metric. It's worth noting tht relatively few PMs have successfully taken their parties to the polls and won. PMs who didn't include Churchill in 1940, Eden 1955, Macmillan '57, Douglas Home '63, Callaghan '76 & John Major in 1990. So its hardly without precedent. Tell you what though, regardless of what happens next, remind me to never, ever play poker against Nick Clegg.
70 years ago Churchill was appointed PM to lead a coalition government. Most people think he's the best PM we ever had.
I've read several articles since the weekend that say the BBC should be axed as their news is so biased. Considering Nick Robinson seems eager to get inside Dave's trousers, I'm wondering why the tories seem to be against them.
Who wrote the articles? I bet you anything the authors were shilling for Murdoch. Roopy no likey BBC - good public service broadcasting means we aren't all obliged to get Sky Plus surgically implanted in our forebrains - which is probably his next move.
I think both victims interviewees of Sky News there stood their ground remarkably well - well done Campbell!
I blame Paxman. It's a fine line between continuously pressing your question to expose how ridiculously flimsy the other person's response is, and just not listening to their response at all and having a hissy fit.
I keep opening the BBC's election page as it auto-updates but they insist on including negative snippets from "Have Your Say". I normally avoid such crap and it makes me wince to see people asking for another election because the leadership of a party has changed. Those TV leader debates really didn't help with the popular misconception that we elect parties, not leaders. I was rather disappointed by how much they all talked about themselves in the first person to be honest.
Also I have been quite shocked how negatively the media, including the BBC, have reported on the Take Back Parliament protests. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't support PR.
I keep opening the BBC's election page as it auto-updates but they insist on including negative snippets from "Have Your Say".
The terrifying thing is that recently they tweaked Have Your Say to make it less...well...mad. It used to be a strange howl-pit for the deranged, the hopelessly ignorant and the just plain stupid.
Actually, in theory at least, we don't even vote for parties; we vote for representatives [ pause for hollow laugh in North Hull ] to take their place in a sovereign Parliament [ further hollow laughter followed by a sound of strangled choking ].
Comments 13
Actually, we don't vote for the President, either, though most Americans think we do. There's the popular vote and then there's the Electoral College vote. After the popular vote, state-appointed electors cast their ballots for whatever candidate prevailed in their state.
So basically, we vote for the people who vote for the President and Vice-President.
I never heard of Helen Duncan before, but the notion of a witch trial in 1944 is fascinating. I want to know more about this woman!
Reply
Reply
I think you just gave me an idea for a Dresden Files story set in Edinburgh.
And thank you. I didn't know any of that. (Well, obviously.)
Reply
Reply
It's worth noting tht relatively few PMs have successfully taken their parties to the polls and won. PMs who didn't include Churchill in 1940, Eden 1955, Macmillan '57, Douglas Home '63, Callaghan '76 & John Major in 1990. So its hardly without precedent.
Tell you what though, regardless of what happens next, remind me to never, ever play poker against Nick Clegg.
Reply
I've read several articles since the weekend that say the BBC should be axed as their news is so biased. Considering Nick Robinson seems eager to get inside Dave's trousers, I'm wondering why the tories seem to be against them.
Reply
Reply
I blame Paxman. It's a fine line between continuously pressing your question to expose how ridiculously flimsy the other person's response is, and just not listening to their response at all and having a hissy fit.
I keep opening the BBC's election page as it auto-updates but they insist on including negative snippets from "Have Your Say". I normally avoid such crap and it makes me wince to see people asking for another election because the leadership of a party has changed. Those TV leader debates really didn't help with the popular misconception that we elect parties, not leaders. I was rather disappointed by how much they all talked about themselves in the first person to be honest.
Also I have been quite shocked how negatively the media, including the BBC, have reported on the Take Back Parliament protests. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't support PR.
Reply
The terrifying thing is that recently they tweaked Have Your Say to make it less...well...mad. It used to be a strange howl-pit for the deranged, the hopelessly ignorant and the just plain stupid.
Some of their Greatest Hits are collated here.
http://ifyoulikeitsomuchwhydontyougolivethere.com/
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment