:sunglasses: 47.8 % :laughing: 30.4 % 🧥 4.3 % :cry: 8.7 % :poo: 8.7 %
User avatar
By The Weeping Angel
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:06 pm The what? Why would you purchase "capacity that went unused" when you're trying to get waiting lists down? How would that work? Would you forget to send people over? Or not notice when they came back without having had their operations?

Oh yeah I saw people losing their shit over that plus when he tried to be reasonable and nuanced about JK Rowling.

Here's an ex-MP's reasonable nuanced take.

By mattomac
Well it’s not privatisation.

In fact if you look at the very start of the NHS it’s pretty much Nye’s approach, he isn’t saying let’s privatise the NHS, he is saying let’s use some private provision to reduce waiting lists brought on by chronic underfunding, bloated unnesscary reform and Conservative inability to run a service with the added 2 years of Covid and the inability to control that.

You are buying additional provision which the NHS is doing all the time anyhow.
User avatar
By Nigredo
Today's Mail front page desperately trying to make a false equivalence between Starmer and Johnson's lockdown drinking in April 2020.

At the very least, can any investigation be set up by Starmer, with his choice of investigator, remit and conclusions? No? Then fuck off, Dacre.
Spoonman liked this
By RedSparrows
The moral void behind the behaviour is definitively not the same, and that's what the Mail is ultimately interested in defending.

Crush the saboteurs, destroy the enemy, let capital and prejudice reign so me and my mates can still get erections from our bank balances and vicarious cruelty, if not our partners.
Malcolm Armsteen, mattomac, Spoonman and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By Crabcakes
The Mail’s strategy is a very dangerous/short sighted one (which makes it all the more likely it’s Dacre-powered, because he’s grasping for a moral high ground that simply isn’t there). In trying to imply having food in a room with a handful of people in a brief break from work is wrong - and most folk will see through this because this is exactly how normal people did behave within the rules during lockdown if they had to go out to work - they’re just underlining how considerably worse it is that Johnson oversaw frequent non-work piss-ups with triple digit numbers of invitees from multiple offices, with an added bonus of emphasising Starmer stayed within the rules. It’s like trying to get someone off of a murder charge by saying another person called the victim a silly sausage once and they didn’t go to trial.
Dalem Lake, Nigredo liked this
By davidjay
The big problem is how it gets into the mindset of the whatabout tendency. In the past few weeks we've seen the narrative go from Starmer ignored grooming gangs to Starmer refused to prosecute and now I've seen Starmer defended them. Similarly, give it a few days and he'll have been dancing round Hartlepool.
  • 1
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 111
long long title how many chars? lets see 123 ok more? yes 60

We have created lots of YouTube videos just so you can achieve [...]

Another post test yes yes yes or no, maybe ni? :-/

The best flat phpBB theme around. Period. Fine craftmanship and [...]

Do you need a super MOD? Well here it is. chew on this

All you need is right here. Content tag, SEO, listing, Pizza and spaghetti [...]

Lasagna on me this time ok? I got plenty of cash

this should be fantastic. but what about links,images, bbcodes etc etc? [...]