|
Jose posted:they're both clear tubes but different enough sizes that it would take some effort to mix them up NHS clearly needs to follow networking practice and put tags on all the connectors saying what they're for.
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 01:07 |
|
|
I do not recommend jamming stuff up your knob. Be careful with what you do with your willy lest the NHS have to shove a camera up it to figure out why you keep pissing blood. Should be in sex ed, imo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
ShaneMacGowansTeeth posted:So I got a breakdown of where my tax goes and less than 1% went to the EU (apologies for the crappy quality) You could have bought most of a cheap pair of pants with that almost-tenner.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
I have to wear dress trousers for work so all my jeans are literally the pairs I had when I was 16.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
Can't really say I blame people resigning if they aren't going to vote for A50. The whip for the final vote is a foolish idea.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
jabby posted:But apparently you can come back fairly rapidly, which is probably what's going to happen. More ridiculous tradition bollocks. I'll still vote for him if it comes to another election, unless there's another candidate with the rest of his platform that I would trust half as far as i can throw them them. But, well, I dunno about the whole whipping thing. What matters is that Labour endures, and to that end, if/when pursuing brexit fucks everything up, it's going to be useful to have someone who didn't vote for it. Labour as a party right this second needs to pick a side but Labour as a collection of MPs benefits from having people who can turn up later and say "I thought it was dumb and didn't vote for it" just as Corbyn did with the Iraq war.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
jabby posted:Spin is going to be everything in this later scenario. Coming out and saying you were always against Brexit and it was always going to be terrible doesn't put the blame on the Tories, it puts the blame on the British public for voting for it. How do you think that will go down? Claiming it was inevitably going to gently caress up indirectly lets the Tories off the hook because hey, they were just following instructions. I guess I just don't see the point in trying to lock the entire labour party into only one possible route further down the line. Maybe public opinion will have soured to include the liars and cheats who persuaded the public to vote for it as well as the people who said they could make a good go of it, and we will want people who had no part in that as well. Labour has a lot of people in it and a lot of different ideas and I think any labour MP who has a conviction that the right thing to do is to vote against brexit, and who thinks they can keep their constituency, should do that. We might have need of them later on.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
I don't think PC historically supported the nazis and they seemed actually a bit socialist. So they're quite good as far as nationalist parties go.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
The Lords do tend to act somewhat independently of the commons so they might do their own thing. Like, all of them might do their own thing, the lords tend to be kind of unpredictable.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Other than actually voting en-masse to block A50 which, well, I think would be political suicide.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
I wonder if they voted for a fast debate so they didn't have to go to work very long.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Oh well now that you say it it's settled.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
I don't think the thread has a problem with an absence of depressive realism.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:Trying to get amendments passed after you made the strongest show in the world that you're willing to super-mega-roll-over, three-whippingly-fuckingly-strongly, is kind of the same as accepting a job for a certain salary saying "but I hope I can count on you to get a 100% raise after six months! but hahaha no big deal". Just not gonna loving happen. That... isn't really how our government works though. If you want to pass a bill with amendments, you have to support the bill until it gets to the amendment stage. If you have the facility you may then threaten to attempt to block it in order to force amendments through if the government cannot command a majority for whatever reason, but you are still dependent upon getting the bill to the amendment stage. Your other option would be to block the bill and try to get it reintroduced on your terms but good luck doing that with a minority of members and with the government now being really loving pissed that you showed them up the first time. If it sounds silly, well, our system of government is silly. The commons isn't designed to act as a check on itself in cases of majority governments. There is no control for that. Other than the house of lords who have limited power as an actual check on the government. It may be that they can get amendments passed but there ultimately just isn't a strong mechanism for stopping a majority government doing whatever it wants to. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Feb 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:You've been banging on about opposing the hill being pointless because labour have a minority of MPs - but your genius plans involved 'threatening to block' it at the amendment stage? "If you have the facility"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Labour can't meaningfully oppose the bill you dolt you know that perfectly well. They can vote however they like and the only effect it will have is on public perception.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Support Corbyn as a leader who actually wants the Labour party to give a poo poo about the welfare of the working class, for which domestic government policy is far more important than Brexit, especially as Brexit is a given and thus the way this and future governments spread the cost of it will be very important. The point of the Labour party isn't to just do the polar opposite of whatever the government does, it's to do the best it can for the actual worthwhile people of the UK. Which is to say, not the rich cunts.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
I miss the happy days of condom cameron and gimpy george
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Brexit is a given because Labour is not opposing it. Completely incorrect, and you are well aware of that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Labour doesn't have leverage. Parliamentary minorities, outside of specific cases of lax cohesion in the ruling party, do not have any power in the UK government. The UK opposition does not function. The only thing it can do is entirely extraparliamentary and threaten to depose the government in subsequent elections. To which its conduct in parliament is entirely a matter of positioning, positioning in favor of things like welfare, employment rights, civil equality, wealth redistribution, positive rights to health, wealth, and happiness, are all entirely sensible and morally imperative. But positioning in opposition to the concept of a thing that is going to happen at the expense of doing their sole possible function of utlility within parliament, which is to say proposing sensible amendments to government policy, does not make sense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
He would have used his sixty foot willy to beat May to death without leaving the labour benches.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
A choice between tories selling the NHS to the US out of stupidity and Smith selling it to whoever will pay him the most out of greed would be an interesting if depressing one.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
The idea being if he had not. Use your brain, flaps.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Going down the pub and getting drunk is good advice for the ill imo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Not sure it's super pertinent either way tbh.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
If Clive Lewis ends up resigning at the final reading I think he'll also be owed some respect for that. Hopefully it won't come to it but we'll see.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
I like the implication that they only said sorry to him after blowing up his car, not that he'll get compensated at all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
marktheando posted:They aren't the party of the working classes, They sort of are.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
marktheando posted:The Tories hold that title now. No they don't. Prince John posted:In other news, Corbs is getting it in the neck for apparently suggesting people choose their sexual orientation, while speaking at an LGBT event of all places. Which is a bit daft tbh, that assertion is a stupid one and not something I think should be clung to.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I think sexuality's one of those weird things and it's one of those cases where the mere existence of wankers means that we can't have sensible conversations of it, because I definitely feel like sexuality is fluid (I'd be uncomfortable saying "I was always bi" or whatever), but OTOH the argument from the pro-fuckstick angle will always be "If sexuality's changeable we have to change it so it's correct" and they can go gently caress a cactus. I'm not entirely sure that responding to "homosexuality is wrong" with "but I can't help it" is entirely non-fuckstickish though. It kind of carries an implicit agreement with the former statement. The correct answer is "no it isn't".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Yeah, but it seems to be one of the recurring arguments that sexuality is pre-set and inherent and this makes it natural and good. I'm not sure that's accurate (the first bit, obviously) but I'd rather be winning the rhetorical argument than correct on nitpicks. I don't think the argument really has much in the way of legs though because if it turns out that it isn't (I doubt it is universally) then that scuppers the whole thing. Also it's not addressing the actual root of the problem which is that arguments from nature and/or divine mandate are stupid and not a substitute for proper consequentialist ethics. If someone things being gay is wrong I don't think they're going to be convinced by telling them that people can't help it, these being the same idiots who believe everyone is born hosed up and need Jesus to fix them. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Feb 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
My sexuality is exactly as much a choice as my political beliefs. I could stop finding either sex attractive exactly as much as I could stop believing that capitalism is inherently immoral, which is to say, I can't. Because that understanding doesn't go away any easier than my understanding that people's anatomy has a rather limited amount to do with how attractive they are. But I think most people would still treat my political beliefs as elective. As they would with probably all the other information I have in my head. The line between choice/not a choice is complicated but in terms of ethics I really don't see anything false about believing that sexuality is not immoral, regardless of whether it's a choice or not. I don't care why you think it so long as you do think it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
And you all called me silly when I said that 4 hour days and a third of the year off was silly in the last thread, it's now government policy!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:My grandad was called Murdo, he wasn't a Tory. And the Gaelic version of Dangermouse was called Donnie Murdo. Alasdair Caimbuel as the Sgriobhadh sounds interesting.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
It does seem kind of unhelpful.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Extreme0 posted:The right keeps winning because runts like you rather sympathise with the covering of rape to keep things "united" then getting rid of the posion that will ruin the left platform later on when it's used against the values that leftism shares. I'm not super sure that running screaming from everything the SWP attends is a winning strategy though. Better thing to do would be to tell them to gently caress off and it's our event now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
In the context of people refusing to attend events with the SWP in them...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Diane Abbott is a shithead because she didn't vote for brexit.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:She faked a migraine so that she didn't have to choose between quitting her shadow cabinet post and defying Jezza's dumb three line whip on the Article 50 vote, or going against the wishes of 80% of her constituents. She bottled it big time. Even if so, who cares? I don't particularly want her to stop being in the cabinet and I don't particularly want her to vote for brexit. So that's fine?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 01:07 |
|
|
I want Labour to get their amendments passed, I don't think this requires every Labour member to vote for A50 and I think forcing people to do so against their own principle and especially against their constituency representation is silly. So, I have no issue with people breaking the whip or trying to minimise the consequences for doing so. Unless you really want everyone to vote for A50 you should probably share this position. I suspect you just dislike Abbott, possibly because she's too "urban" and want to be your usual whingeing self. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Feb 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 23:16
|
|