New Tory Leader

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

Here's a 'snap ' verdict.

GBP/USD.

 

[Nuff Said 5,092]

15 hours ago, Herman said:

Funny how that got far more column inches than some of the rank behaviour by the former PM. Funny old country really.😐

Yes, uppity black woman gets a hard time from media run by rich white men, who go easy on a rich white man from a similar background to them. Who’d a thunk it? 🤨

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

15 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Yes, uppity black woman gets a hard time from media run by rich white men, who go easy on a rich white man from a similar background to them. Who’d a thunk it? 🤨

You missed out caring between uppity and black

[littleyellowbirdie 2,514]

32 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Yes, uppity black woman gets a hard time from media run by rich white men, who go easy on a rich white man from a similar background to them. Who’d a thunk it? 🤨

You missed race baiter and hypocrite who spent her life railing against private education only to send her son off to a fee-paying school.

[Nuff Said 5,092]

8 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

You missed race baiter and hypocrite who spent her life railing against private education only to send her son off to a fee-paying school.

I agree, that was a significant mis-step, but equally I would have thought the right would be in favour of her exercising her personal choice to privately educate her children. Or don’t they want black people in “their” schools? 
 

Not sure about race baiter though, thin ice to skate on for many.

 

The fact remains that as a child of black working class parents, her achievements in getting to Cambridge and becoming the UK’s first black MP are considerable, which makes the animosity directed at her by the right-wing media all the more reprehensible when they don’t apply the same standards to those from far more privileged backgrounds when they behave similarly - or far worse.

[A Load of Squit 5,136]

What happened to the department for Brexit Opportunities?

 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

9 hours ago, sonyc said:

Yeh, I agree with that. Dull is a big improvement on the bluster of the narcissist. 

It's an odd thing to be sort of happy about Truss - but it's because she isn't Johnson. And like any new person coming in I always want them to do well, do a good job. Be effective. I would extend that to Truss.

The portents are less favourable though when in her opening speech yesterday she described her party as "the greatest political party on earth". I realise she is playing to her audience on front of her but it was a rather stupid thing to say to a watching nation. And given they've had 12 years already and definitely haven't covered themselves with glory.

I haven’t heard her speak, and apparently she is no orator, which I see as a good thing. The U.K. has had quite enough of empty speechifying. But so far I don’t see any significant difference between BoJo the Charlatan’s lying boosterism and Truss’s meaningless platitudes, such as ‘aspirational nation’, especially when millions of her citizens have not dying from cold  as their main aspiration…

Edited September 7, 2022 by PurpleCanary

[Naturalcynic 629]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

Yes, uppity black woman gets a hard time from media run by rich white men, who go easy on a rich white man from a similar background to them. Who’d a thunk it? 🤨

Racist claptrap.  Johnson was hounded from office by a concerted campaign from the media, both print and broadcast, and the remainist left.  But then again I suppose cake was taken so it was inevitable.

[Well b back 3,190]

24 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

What happened to the department for Brexit Opportunities?

 

They couldn’t find any

[sonyc 5,492]

25 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I haven’t heard her speak, and apparently she is no orator, which I see as a good thing. The U.K. has had quite enough of empty speechifying. But so far I don’t see any significant difference between BoJo the Charlatan’s lying boosterism and Truss’s meaningless platitudes, such as ‘aspirational nation’, especially when millions of her citizens have not dying from cold  as their kin aspiration…

Platitudes aplenty...indeed. The proof is in the pudding as they say.

It's a very low bar indeed - just because she isn't Johnson! She could yet turn out a Johnson-lite.

There was an interesting piece about her (can't recall source) that talked about her not being a wallflower but a very determined person...but ...bear with me ... she had to demonstrate she was selfish, narcissistic and show a lack of empathy for others and indeed always put herself first. In other words she had to be ruthlessly ambitious (unless that got in the way of her political goals). Quite a thing and probably a very alien way of thinking about a job for the majority of people. That tells you about who puts themselves forward for such public roles. No imposter syndrome that might affect the rest of us.

I believe in her 'coronation' we are seeing the end of this particular Tory era however. It's been on a downward slope for so long. Johnson turned the decline into a steep descent. She will struggle in my opinion. Events will outpace her.

You'll remember my puer aeternus description of Johnson? - if so, I was very interested to hear his Cincinnatus statement and about him splashing down somewhere in the Pacific. Puer's rarely land but crash. He is laying his path back already (to mix my metaphors).

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by sonyc

[Nuff Said 5,092]

24 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

What happened to the department for Brexit Opportunities?

 

We don’t need it now Brexit is done. Or “delivered” in Truss-speak.

Which reminds me, Marina Hyde has outdone herself with this, and that is saying something. 
 

My favourite was “Truss uses the word “delivery” a lot for someone whose own delivery would lose the Bafta to an HGV announcing “This vehicle is reversing”. The vocal that will be delivering all the bad news to you this winter is slightly less appealing than a dental drill, if any of you are lucky enough to still have a dentist.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/06/liz-truss-prime-minister-mps?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[Well b back 3,190]

8 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Racist claptrap.  Johnson was hounded from office by a concerted campaign from the media, both print and broadcast, and the remainist left.  But then again I suppose cake was taken so it was inevitable.

What a load of bo****, he was hounded from office by people like me who have voted Tory all our lives and found he was a liar who was destroying our country for his own personal pleasure and gains. The left didn’t really want him out as it was to their advantage for him to stay. 
Have a read of the papers from yesterday they were all happy to print his lies from his leaving speech. Truss in turn was happy to congratulate him on his achievements, which he didn’t achieve, meaning she won’t be getting many of us lost voters back.

Good riddance to the lying, racist, divisive person.

[Well b back 3,190]

7 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Platitudes aplenty...indeed. The proof is in the pudding as they say.

It's a very low bar indeed - just because she isn't Johnson! She could yet turn out a Johnson-lite.

There was an interesting piece about her (can't recall source) that talked about her not being a wallflower but a very determined person...but ...bear with me ... she had to demonstrate she was selfish, narcissistic and show a lack of empathy for others and indeed always put herself first. In other words she had to be ruthlessly ambitious (unless that got in the way of her political goals). Quite a thing and probably a very alien way of thinking about a job for the majority of people. That tells you about who puts themselves forward for such public roles. No imposter syndrome that might affect the rest of us.

I believe in her 'coronation' we are seeing the end of this particular Tory era however. It's been on a downward slope for so long. Johnson turned the decline into a steep descent. She will struggle in my opinion. Events will outpace her.

You'll remember my puer aeternus description of Johnson? - if so, I was very interested to hear his Cincinnatus statement and about him splashing down somewhere in the Pacific. Puer's rarely land but crash. He is laying his path back already (to mix my metaphors).

 

When the time comes the 160,000 village idiots will vote him back in.

[sonyc 5,492]

16 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

We don’t need it now Brexit is done. Or “delivered” in Truss-speak.

Which reminds me, Marina Hyde has outdone herself with this, and that is saying something. 
 

My favourite was “Truss uses the word “delivery” a lot for someone whose own delivery would lose the Bafta to an HGV announcing “This vehicle is reversing”. The vocal that will be delivering all the bad news to you this winter is slightly less appealing than a dental drill, if any of you are lucky enough to still have a dentist.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/06/liz-truss-prime-minister-mps?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

They often say exactly the things they don't then deliver in their opening speeches!

Thatcher quoted St Francis f****** Assisi..."where there is discord may we bring harmony". Yeah right😅

May spoke about injustice and laws being passed by "not listening to the mighty"...by "not listening to the powerful". Grenfell? The ERG😅

Johnson spoke about restoring our trust in democracy.😂

So 'deliver, deliver, deliver' may be turn out to be another falsehood - Trussian speak.

Like all the others before.

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by sonyc

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

24 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Racist claptrap.  Johnson was hounded from office by a concerted campaign from the media, both print and broadcast, and the remainist left.  But then again I suppose cake was taken so it was inevitable.

No. He was just useless and his own party knew he was kicking them from within. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

She has been a Minister for three failed PMs. Two who only just made one five year period between them and were removed by their own party. The other who resigned because he couldn't handle UKIP.

Why are her ideas and policies to be believed? For instance, she will not impose a windfall tax on energy companies because she says it will stifle investment. These companies are not investing in the UK. They are selling us something and making obscene profits. They won't pull out because even after a windfall tax, they will still make enormous profits. And the tax will be on last year's profits anyway.

[Rock The Boat 1,326]

8 hours ago, Bort said:

It's a disaster isn't it? God knows what this climate-change-denying streak of Victorian p!ss has planned. Reopen the coal mines? Fracking?

The clearest indicator yet that we're going to need civil unrest to get this country moving in the right direction. Can't rely on corporate-backed politicians. 

A general strike would be a good start.

Of course it would be. It's your overall aim.

[Rock The Boat 1,326]

4 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

"If I get trolled and I provoke a bad response on Twitter I know I'm doing the right thing. Twitter is a sewer of left-wing bile. The extreme left pile on is often a consequence of sound conservative values."

That is our new Home Secretary's opinion.Who couldn't win a seat in the London Assembly or two other GE constituencies but was fast tracked to Fareham with its massive Tory majority.

The same Lady who supports the Rwanda scheme, even if leaving aside the morality issue, it has been costed higher than keeping an illegal immigrant in this country for 12 years.

The Lady who agrees that torture is acceptable.

Who was Chair of the ERG.

A Climate Change sceptic.

She also thinks the British Empire was a force for good.

And also wants us to withdraw from the Human Rights convention so we can "get rid of all this woke rubbish".

If she can deliver on all these points, the Conservatives may stand a chance of re-election. Or she might turn out to be another talking head and do nothing

[ricardo 7,349]

12 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

She has been a Minister for three failed PMs. Two who only just made one five year period between them and were removed by their own party. The other who resigned because he couldn't handle UKIP.

Why are her ideas and policies to be believed? For instance, she will not impose a windfall tax on energy companies because she says it will stifle investment. These companies are not investing in the UK. They are selling us something and making obscene profits. They won't pull out because even after a windfall tax, they will still make enormous profits. And the tax will be on last year's profits anyway.

Here's a nice little job for you K.G. We import most of our gas from Norway nowadays so could you just nip up to Oslo and tell them we've slapped a windfall tax on them. I'm sure they'll give you a nice fat cheque pronto😉

[Nuff Said 5,092]

32 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

No. He was just useless and his own party knew he was kicking them from within. 

But, but ... cake ... 

[Herman 9,718]

1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

Racist claptrap.  Johnson was hounded from office by a concerted campaign from the media, both print and broadcast, and the remainist left.  But then again I suppose cake was taken so it was inevitable.

Do give over for goodness sakes.

He was consistently behind in the polls.

He badly lost a few by-elections.

He got booed by Royalists for frigs sake.

He is the master of his own rise and fall so grow up and realise he WAS a very naked emperor.

[sonyc 5,492]

8 minutes ago, Herman said:

Do give over for goodness sakes.

He was consistently behind in the polls.

He badly lost a few by-elections.

He got booed by Royalists for frigs sake.

He is the master of his own rise and fall so grow up and realise he WAS a very naked emperor.

And also, a big shaming moment for him if ever there was one ... he was actually ambushed by cake.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,514]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

I agree, that was a significant mis-step, but equally I would have thought the right would be in favour of her exercising her personal choice to privately educate her children. Or don’t they want black people in “their” schools? 
 

Not sure about race baiter though, thin ice to skate on for many.

 

The fact remains that as a child of black working class parents, her achievements in getting to Cambridge and becoming the UK’s first black MP are considerable, which makes the animosity directed at her by the right-wing media all the more reprehensible when they don’t apply the same standards to those from far more privileged backgrounds when they behave similarly - or far worse.

I don't know what you call divisive and abrasive rhetoric like 'white people love to divide and rule' if not race baiting. 

I don't think she has had it any harder than John Prescott who is a white male, who railed against the Lords his entire career... before joining the House of Lords. 

[Nuff Said 5,092]

4 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I don't know what you call divisive and abrasive rhetoric like 'white people love to divide and rule' if not race baiting. 

I don't think she has had it any harder than John Prescott who is a white male, who railed against the Lords his entire career... before joining the House of Lords. 

TBH, I think joining the House of Lords in his position is more defensible than sending your child to public school, especially if you have publicly spoken against non-state education previously. Sometimes you have to work within the system to change it.

[Herman 9,718]

17 minutes ago, sonyc said:

And also, a big shaming moment for him if ever there was one ... he was actually ambushed by cake.

[Well b back 3,190]

47 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Here's a nice little job for you K.G. We import most of our gas from Norway nowadays so could you just nip up to Oslo and tell them we've slapped a windfall tax on them. I'm sure they'll give you a nice fat cheque pronto😉

It will apply to profits made by companies from extracting UK oil and gas. 
 

When did Norway start extracting U.K. gas and selling it back to us, the tax is against companies that extract U.K. oil and gas and sell that to us and other companies. 

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

8 minutes ago, Well b back said:

It will apply to profits made by companies from extracting UK oil and gas. 
 

When did Norway start extracting U.K. gas and selling it back to us, the tax is against companies that extract U.K. oil and gas and sell that to us and other companies. 

It's no different to the existing 'windfall' tax which will remain anyway we understand.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

56 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Here's a nice little job for you K.G. We import most of our gas from Norway nowadays so could you just nip up to Oslo and tell them we've slapped a windfall tax on them. I'm sure they'll give you a nice fat cheque pronto😉

Did you see the Panorama programme? Indeed the Norwegian gas is state owned but it must have a shell (no pun intended) company which carries out its business much like EDF.

Norway doesn't even account for half of our gas. Most still comes from the North Sea. And companies like Shell still receive handouts rather than paying Corporation Tax. One makes £100M a day profit.

Even if we cannot get much out of Norway, the others are there and 20% percent of something is better than 100% of nothing.

Why is it OK to tax UK companies but not foreign owned. Its like when Phillip Green was allowed to get away with paying no tax. They said he would pull his businesses. Total rubbish. The stores were all in the UK. In fact, the obfuscation and lying regarding tax makes me cringe.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

9 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Everything's so easy with the benefit of hindsight. With hindsight, every country should have had a hard lockdown early on that lasted many many months, as was popular in Asia. That's a tough sell in countries with liberal societies. We know for a fact that the lockdowns we had led to considerable suspicion of motives and even hysteria in some sections. 

 

Of course it is, but in this case no hindsight was required - by the time the numbers started building in the UK we should have been fore-warned by what had already happened elsewhere; the successes in SE Asia with early lockdown and the catastrophes in continental Europe with far too late lockdowns. There were plenty of people in the UK who had picked up those warnings and were urging the Government to take action and even the Premier League acted before Johnson for crying out loud!!!

Johnson was just far too late despite all the warnings and experience available from countries hit earlier than us. His initial strategy was the notorious disastrous 'herd immunity' stupidity but even when it became obvious that a lockdown would become essential at some point he still dithered when anyone who can do simple maths would have understood that with a virus spreading at an exponential rate that the sooner he locked down then the fewer deaths and the shorter lockdown necessary.

And that was only one of his many mistakes - he didn't appear to learn anything from those mistakes and u-turns first time around because repeated a lot of them in the second and third wave!! I seem to remember that his high point was 4 significant u-turns in a single week and 1 or 2 a week was the norm for quite a while - that is not the mark of a decisive or competent leader.

I also think you are wrong in saying 'We know for a fact that the lockdowns we had led to considerable suspicion of motives and even hysteria in some sections.', certainly with respect to the first lockdown which was extremely well observed by almost everyone despite it being a far worse experience for everyone because of Johnson's incompetence and indecision, which no doubt then did start suspicion of motives. Although I would suggest that suspicions were raised mainly by his largely incoherent and sometimes incomprehensible tiered lockdowns which appeared to have little rhyme or reason in many cases - it had become obvious by then that Johnson had never paid much attention to the scientific advice and was, as we always suspected, simply making up as he went along (and of course throwing in the u-turns so frequently because he got it obviously wrong so often).

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,514]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

TBH, I think joining the House of Lords in his position is more defensible than sending your child to public school, especially if you have publicly spoken against non-state education previously. Sometimes you have to work within the system to change it.

Funnily enough, changing the system was a manifesto commitment of the 1997 majority Labour government in which John Prescott served as Deputy PM... before taking a place many years later in the House of Lords after 13 years in government. 

From the Labour 1997 manifesto: 

Quote

A modern House of Lords

The House of Lords must be reformed. As an initial, self-contained reform, not dependent on further reform in the future, the right of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords will be ended by statute. This will be the first stage in a process of reform to make the House of Lords more democratic and representative. The legislative powers of the House of Lords will remain unaltered.

The system of appointment of life peers to the House of Lords will be reviewed. Our objective will be to ensure that over time party appointees as life peers more accurately reflect the proportion of votes cast at the previous general election. We are committed to maintaining an independent cross-bench presence of life peers. No one political party should seek a majority in the House of Lords.

A committee of both Houses of Parliament will be appointed to undertake a wide-ranging review of possible further change and then to bring forward proposals for reform.

We have no plans to replace the monarchy.

http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtml

Edited September 7, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie