Zern
-
Posts
598 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Zern
-
-
Hard
notto disagree with Femi today:I agree with Femi on this. The degradation of our human rights has been steadily increasing since our exit from the EU, led by some ultra-right wing tories who sees regulation as red-tape, holding back the industry that could be unleashed.
What is worrying is the Labour party's matching rhetoric that accepts the right-wing premises underlying Tory policy.
-1 -
17 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:
Probably trying to protect his position in the (unlikely) event of Starmer reforming the HoL.
Baron Goldsmith has nothing to fear from Sir Kier Rodney Starmer
0 -
3 hours ago, Crùbag said:
Saw that!
Who's voting for the Optional Identiy Marks?
Identity Marksists
about the the only form of Marxism present in todays 'Labour' Party
5 -
Nice to get some clarity on this issue:
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/electoral-commission-weigh-whether-scottish-155453213.html
They are, "an optional identity mark".
Lenny also has been sacked. Poor Lenny. He was too nice for them anyway.
Quote“Labour Party are registered to contest elections in England, Scotland and Wales.”
The Electoral Commission then shared a link to Labour’s register entry – which lists “Scottish Labour Party”, “Scottish Labour Party Candidate”, “Glasgow Labour”, and “Aberdeen Labour” as descriptions used by the central UK party.
3 -
On 03/03/2023 at 16:40, CarrbridgeSaintee said:
If you believe in the big bang, then that's the beginning of time, space and matter.
For the big bang to take place, then there would have to be a cause. It's not unreasonable to suggest this cause would have to be timeless, spaceless and matterless.
Given it's timeless nature, it certainly wouldn't have to 'sit on their arse for eternity' or have to 'hud oan a minute' because time wouldn't have existed prior to the big bang at all.
Humans not being able to possibly comprehend this is therefore a logical position to hold, given that all we know is time. It's impossible to comprehend timelessness. Even the comprehension takes time itself.
We understand time well enough. Certainly enough to compensate GPS satellites to correct for their difference in relative time due to a. being somewhat outside the gravity well of the planet and b. travelling at speeds that slows their onboard clocks.
What is less clear is the origins of the universe. It does appear that everything winds back to an apparent big bang, what is less certain is what happens at that point. There are several competing theories. all constantly being updated. Some are cyclical, the universe being series of iterations; some are more one-off affairs. We currently do not know.
If something is timeless, spaceless and matterless how does it cause anything and what does it affect?
0 -
3 minutes ago, RuMoore said:
I'm sure he is but he's responding to someone saying most Scots don't support the SNP as opposed to the general electorate.
It's obviously a major issue in Scottish politics but the other poster is objectively correct when he says the majority of Scots don't support the Nationalist parties.
How do you measure support for parties? Votes appear the most effective way. So the majority of Scots (who expressed an opinion at the last election) support parties in favour of independence. Hence the majority in the Scottish Parliament.
Alternatively you could go by membership numbers. How many members does the Scottish Labour Party have? None. There is only the UK Labour Party. Same for the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party and the so-called Scottish Lib Dems. Fictional parties with no members, because you cannot join those parties.
0 -
36 minutes ago, RuMoore said:
Just for clarity do you believe that Scottish citizens that don't vote are not Scottish?
Not sure how you get that from wot @DeeTillEhDeh posted.
Pretty sure he's pointing to the overwhelming number of elected MSPs that command the majority in our government. Our MMP system being more democratic and representative, it would suggest that independence is a very current issue.
Under a functioning democracy; this would lead to negotiations between the two governments.
0 -
2 hours ago, ScotiaNostra said:
and Its been nearly 10 years of meh under SNP now
I can only disagree. I can name half a dozen policies off the top of my head that have benefitted the citizens of Scotland in the last decade.
I would be hard pressed to name even one policy of the previous Labour/Lib Dem administration.
It's a game to them.
Starmer exemplifies this attitude. PMQ's is a "knockabout". He doesn't connect the real world effects of Tory rhetoric and policy. His comments on the two-child cap demonstrate this disconnect. He wants to decrease child poverty and uses the record of New Labour as his touchstone; yet ignores the fact that this was possible because of increased welfare funding and no cap being in place.
4 -
The Labour/Lib Dem coalition. 10 years of meh.
Which is why we ended up with an SNP administration in the first place.
1 -
7 minutes ago, Swarley said:
Jo Whiley or Sara Cox then?
Have they issued denials? Nicky Campbell says it's not him.
What is weird is that the family complained to the BBC and not the Police. So not a crime then?
0 -
Household name, six-figure salary. It's like the clues are all there.
0 -
4 minutes ago, DiscoStu said:
Feel free to counter his points.
How about nah. I don't feel the need to counter some spin doctor's narrative.
0 -
Corbyn was a threat.
Starmer has de-comissioned Corbyn and purged the party of any left-wing elements.
He will be rewarded.
This neo-labour will be like the latter half of Blair/Brown's tenure, with all the corruption and none of the redeeming features.
2 -
Not sure why Labour escapes the charges of incompetence; their collaboration with the Conservative on triggering Article 50 and approving the TCA don't exactly show them in their best light now. Their token opposition to egregious corruption and waste in Westminster is not something to boast about.
I don't regard the SNP as incompetent, they have always seemed to be able to deliver on their policies and promises to the greatest extent and i can name a dozen policies of the top of my head that improved life for citizens of Scotland.
QuoteVote Lib Dem
Hah, funny.
The party of negotiable affection.
2 -
A Starmer promise:
0 -
2 hours ago, TheScarf said:
A completely pointless party led by the biggest Tory in the country. It baffles my why anyone in Scotland votes for these losers.
I wonder why too. Watching Starmer shit on everything that Labour used to represent, in addition to embracing Brexit and British Nationalism is a most repellent combination. They don't have policies for Scotland; they don't have a coherent environmental policy either. Its just empty gestures and tweaking round the edges with no significant change.
3 -
I can name a dozen things Starmer is against, and almost nothing he is in favour of. Policy is a bit thin on the ground.
What is weird, from the outside, is watching a Labour leader stick a middle finger up to every policy endorsed by the Labour membership. The same membership he gulled into voting for him on the basis of those pledges that he then abandoned.
I don't think it will be quite the vote winner he thinks it will be. I hate tories. Thoroughly sick of them.
But pseudo-suckup-tories somehow manage to be even worse.
5 -
Starmer's speech interrupted:
"we did that last time"
"we've done that one"
Classy.
Humza does it better.
0 -
3 hours ago, StellarHibee said:
Aye, but the fact that she's managed to remain in the shadow cabinet should offer you a clue.
Just heard on Novara that Nandy will be out in an upcoming reshuffle by Starmer.
0 -
Another one gets the Starmer treatment.
Keir Starmer considers ditching Labour pledge to reinstate DfID | Labour | The Guardian
This is becoming habitual.
0 -
20 minutes ago, razamanaz said:
I see the EU refused to talk to Humza about Scotland's pending independence - how will he blame that on the media, Westminster, Brexit? - waiting with baited breath to hear what Nicola says in his earpiece
Maybe he should listen to the majority of Scots
You saw this?
My guess is that your repeating something you've read elsewhere. Source?
That majority voted for SNP at our last SGE. He's listening to that majority.
0 -
Labour have gone full Tory.
0 -
Got round to watching it. The audience were an awful bunch. The panellists were also pretty bad.
No government representative on the panel. John Redwood was the sole Conservative. A man of constant platitudes who has never had anything significant to say in all his many years in politics. An utterly vapid personality who did what he always does; talk bollocks.
Ben Habib is an idiot, will always be an idiot and represents no-one. His noises on Northern Ireland at the end were sheer lunacy. He wants a hard border on Ireland.
The Labour peer was bland. Very Starmer. Clear on what Labour would not do, no rejoin, no SM, CU or FOM and we got a 'make Brexit work' for future plans.
The economist Anand was trying to act as middle-ground i think.
Weird invite was Alastair Campbell; his inclusion baffles me. Was he a Brexit supporter at one point? Or were they stuck for people?
What is clear is that all the people who voted Brexit in the audience did so for many differing reasons. So we get some who say Brexit is done, others who say it has not started and all ranges in-between. All unsatisfied.
Heh. Good.
0 -
Have been watching the SNP Indy Convention. Am watching atm.
Humza began well, was heckled by someone. He paused to speak to them direct (off camera) then returned and gave an excellent speech.
Nothing wild to report. Ash toned down her jacket, and everyone is being thoroughly nice to each other.
0
What is the point of Labour ?
in The Politics Forum
Posted
Labour to stick with Rishi Sunak’s diluted targets on phasing out gas boilers | Financial Times (ft.com)