Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10
52
Liverpool FC Forum / Re: International Watch
« Last post by Black Bull Nova on Today at 12:03:09 am »
Neymar is a cheating bastard, good but over-rated as a footballer as well. You can almost see him deciding which part of his leg he's going to hold as he goes down. Can't actually reach his foot where the contact is made so goes for further up the leg, what's the point with players like that. It's a friendly and they are 4-1 up at the time as well.
53
General Football and Sport / Re: UEFA League of Nations
« Last post by didi shamone on Today at 12:02:16 am »
How the fuck did you get promoted? I know you play Ukraine on a loop but who else was in your group?

Going to be even duller (not) watching England games in Group B. Just saw I eland drew with AlbaniaÖis that the likes of who theyíll be up against next?

Think I saw Sweden are relegated to group C. When did they get so bad?!

Ireland beat Armenia  3-2 .  Wrong country and scoreline ;)
54
News and Current Affairs / Re: Elections in Europe
« Last post by thejbs on Yesterday at 11:59:01 pm »

One thing you miss in saying ĒThey want to give people the choice of (again eg) starting a family or no, of marrying a person of the opposite or same sex, of being able to change their gender.Ē is that peopleís choices arenít formed in a vacuum, but are influenced by those around them.  Take the gender choice, for example, where has that come from?  It didnít even exist 10/15 years ago, and now you have huge numbers of teenage girls going for it.  Itís been pushed out from academia and has caught on, but people do not like it, it is one of the things that is considered a bad way to live.  So you canít cast it as an example of just giving people freedom of choice, because (at least from a conservative pov) it is an example of forcing people to do something, or most generously of a moral failing in vacating common values and allowing something random in.  Conservatives do have a tried-and-tested system at their back in the shape of tradition, and it isnít fair to call adherence to or promotion of that all oppression whereas progressivism is all good.


If you can argue this, then we can perhaps argue that religion is quite similar. While religion is a freedom, itís being foisted upon people, especially children, leaving little real choice. And religion is far from benign in its influence.

Other conservative (religious?) moralities such as avoiding divorce, encouraging procreation, denying abortion, denying marriage equality are morally dubious but somehow believed by conservatives more acceptable than someone changing gender.
55
I find it incredible that there are adults who donít understand the Machiavellian nature of politics (not just here but everywhere).

Keir Starmer is essentially an honourable and principled man. As a politician he has to use an array of skills (in his case honed as a legal-advocate) -pragmatism, fine judgement and tactical nous - which battles to fight and which to either avoid or shelve for another day; without those skills heís not worth a candle to the Party he serves, the more so as leader. That is severely exacerbated in the case of a Labour leader for two reasons: 1) the refusal of supporters of the previous regime to countenance centre left dominance of the Party, and 2) British media dominated by organs in the control of tax-dodging billionaire donors of the Conservatives.

And do those who denigrate him here and elsewhere really believe his immediate predecessors were incapable of such things? Were they all pure as the driven snow?

Every Tory administration over the past however many years has stacked the future cards in their favour - from gerrymandering to making empty promises to downright criminality. Itís become extremely difficult to maintain a level playing field. Starmerís played a shrewd long game, choosing his battles carefully, and keeping his powder dry until he could use it to best effect. Today he used it, tactically and strategically, he got it right.

Is he perfect? Far from it. Would he constitute a huge improvement on Cameron, May, Johnson and Truss? Itís a stupid question.

Spot on. It seems some would prefer purity in perpetual opposition rather than actually getting into power and changing things. The greatest (unwitting) allies of Thatcher were the far left who vacated the political field and gave the Tories the space and time to rip industry and society apart. Corbyn was the same. Borisí useful clown giving him a free run at Brexit and a landslide majority. If Attlee were around today the far left would call him a warmonger and a Red Tory. Thankfully 12 years of Tory misrule has silenced them. Iím old enough to remember the same story playing out in the 80s and 90s. Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it.
56
Starmer was somewhat less than truthful when it came to his leadership pledges too, which is an uncomfortable fact rather than any 'trolling'. I know loads of people in here are perfectly okay with that as they just want 'their' brand of Labour and think the ends justify the means, etc.

He's better than the Tories (a very low bar admittedly) and given the choice of the two I'd personally want to see him win, but it's not unreasonable to look at past actions and have a bit of justified suspicion about his newest set of pledges - to a different audience, the electorate rather than Labour members.

Yeah. I think we can all agree that the Tories completely torching their electoral chances with the most "why? because fuck you" economic policy that I've witnessed in my lifetime is a good thing. I'll be voting Labour as I always have, and urging any swing-voters I know to vote Labour. But "trustworthy" is not a word you can use to describe Starmer. He U-turned on almost every policy he "pledged" in his leadership campaign/early tenure. Anything he says should be taken with a huge grain of salt imo. As I said, I'm happy to vote Labour, and convince others to (and at this point it looks like the Tories are self-imploding so spectacularly that Labour might not have to do anything to gain power), but that doesn't mean that we cannot and should not ask for better.
57
General Football and Sport / Re: UEFA League of Nations
« Last post by thaddeus on Yesterday at 11:51:51 pm »
Scotland in Section A while England will be in Section B? Fuckin' hell!  ;D
England fans can flip back to saying it's a meaningless competition having got giddy at the thought of winning it last time around.

Southgate - assuming he survives the World Cup - can return to his natural environment of grinding out attritional victories against teams stacked with Championship level players.  Kane will be secretly delighted as he can fill his boots and break Rooney's record.

I've already decided to be a killjoy and not watch a minute of the World Cup but now that it's looming large I'm wondering what to do to feed my sports habit.  Mid-season rugby not all that appealing and I've never got into the US sports.  Is there much else going on?
58
I find it incredible that there are adults who donít understand the Machiavellian nature of politics (not just here but everywhere).

Keir Starmer is essentially an honourable and principled man. As a politician he has to use an array of skills (in his case honed as a legal-advocate) -pragmatism, fine judgement and tactical nous - which battles to fight and which to either avoid or shelve for another day; without those skills heís not worth a candle to the Party he serves, the more so as leader. That is severely exacerbated in the case of a Labour leader for two reasons: 1) the refusal of supporters of the previous regime to countenance centre left dominance of the Party, and 2) British media dominated by organs in the control of tax-dodging billionaire donors of the Conservatives.

And do those who denigrate him here and elsewhere really believe his immediate predecessors were incapable of such things? Were they all pure as the driven snow?

Every Tory administration over the past however many years has stacked the future cards in their favour - from gerrymandering to making empty promises to downright criminality. Itís become extremely difficult to maintain a level playing field. Starmerís played a shrewd long game, choosing his battles carefully, and keeping his powder dry until he could use it to best effect. Today he used it, tactically and strategically, he got it right.

Is he perfect? Far from it. Would he constitute a huge improvement on Cameron, May, Johnson and Truss? Itís a stupid question.


Tories have relied on people in the Labour Party falling out with each other for years.


For labour it's often a battle of ego tied very closely to ideas (as in "I am right, you are wrong")


For Tories, it's just a naked power grab



59
It wasn't during a minute's silence though.
60
General Football and Sport / Re: New Kits Thread
« Last post by Statto Red on Yesterday at 11:42:16 pm »
That England change kit, i'm ok with all red, i'm ok with all blue too, but who decided & cleared that light shade of blue for the colour of the numbers & letters, to be paired up with that shade of red, was a good match, you could hardly read the numbers until they had a close up shot of back of the players, i thought the idea of number/letter colour was so they can be seen clearly.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10