Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - seafoid

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1510
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 04:38:05 PM »
Sammy on the lunch time news, saying unless there are significant changes to the deal they will not be backing it. So from this position even with some bungs, bribes and concessions thrown in it is hard to see how they could shift so far without something to hang it on in the new deal.

There is nothing changed for the DUP to save face on. They need something to allow them to get their heads out of this particular noose.
Mogg and the ERG have fucked them over big style.
Typical papist.

May is no longer in charge of the decision
Parliament is going to do some sort of triage to see if they can come up with something
Brexit is falling apart

General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 02:43:27 PM »
Sammy on the lunch time news, saying unless there are significant changes to the deal they will not be backing it. So from this position even with some bungs, bribes and concessions thrown in it is hard to see how they could shift so far without something to hang it on in the new deal.

26 March 2019 • 1:53pm

extension to Article 50 would be better than this awful deal

We are now engaged in a war of attrition, as the Prime Minister seeks to achieve support for the toxic deal which she allowed the EU to impose on her and the referendum-defying Remainer horde in Parliament try to beat the truculent British public into submitting to their plan to keep us in the EU.
The latest tactic is their plan for Parliament to vote on alternatives to the Withdrawal Agreement. They describe it as Parliament taking control and the message which they are blasting out is that further resistance is futile because the Remainers are in charge. This message also suits the Prime Minister because she has used the claim that a Remain Parliament is taking control to try and bully those who want to leave the EU into supporting her flawed and damaging deal. The threat is that, if the Withdrawal Agreement is not supported, these Remainers will vote for alternatives which means no Brexit.
First of all let us be clear: the Withdrawal Agreement itself means no Brexit. It ensures that the EU has the legal power to prevent us ever leaving except on their draconian terms, which would include a Customs Union and adherence to EU regulations. Those who negotiated the agreement have been quite open about that. They insist that the terms of the deal will be the basis for any future relationship with the EU. They also make it clear that different treatment for Northern Ireland will have to continue. As Leo Varadker has said, the agreement’s terms settle the arrangements required to keep the Northern Ireland border open.
We will never volunteer to Northern Ireland being torn from the rest of the UK or our economy being damaged by having trade restrictions between Northern Ireland and our main market in Great Britain. We have worked assiduously with the Government to try to get changes to the agreement and will continue to do so, but we will not vote for an unamended or unchanged version.
Secondly the prospect of the disparate views on the UK’s future relationship with the EU ever being reconciled in one alternative by the rag tag Remainer factions in Parliament is quite remote. Even if one view did emerge commanding 50 per cent plus support, would it be an alternative which a Conservative Prime Minister could go and negotiate? Whoever that person might be would surely have the same problems within their party as are being faced with the Withdrawal Agreement. The truth is that this so-called solution of “Parliament taking control” will be as chaotic and face the same stalemate as exists at present, so no one should base their decision and change their mind on the basis of that threat.
There are some colleagues who I admire greatly and who have stood firmly with us in defending Northern Ireland who now take the view that the Withdrawal Agreement, even though it is a rotten deal, is better than losing Brexit. To them I say that, if the deal goes through, we have lost our right to leave the EU. If we sign up to it, we give away our right to leave to the whim and dictates of the EU. That is not Brexit.
Even if we are forced into a one-year extension, we at least would have a say on the things which affect us during that time and would have the right to unilaterally decide to leave at the end of that one-year period through the simple decision of not applying for a further extension. Surely this is a better strategy than volunteering to be locked into the prison of the withdrawal deal with the cell door key in the pocket of Michel Barnier? Besides, the fact remains that Brexit can only be lost if the Government decides to abandon pursuing negotiations to leave the EU.
Finally the announcement of the details of the no-deal Brexit arrangements by the Irish Republic at the weekend, when they confirmed that they can deal with Irish Border trade without any need for one stick of infrastructure along the border, is the final proof that the exit deal is based on one big con job. The Irish border was never an issue. It was used to secure a leaving arrangement which would dictate the restrictive terms of the UK’s future relationship with the EU.
The EU cat is out of the bag. There is no justification for the Withdrawal Agreement. The only thing that those of us who want to leave the EU have to fear is being locked into a deal which only the EU can release us from. This week's indicative votes are unlikely to present a negotiable way forward so let us not allow ourselves to be worn down by the relentless efforts of those who despise the 17.4 million people who voted to throw off the shackles of Brussels.

Hope the hoors are identified and fired from whatever McDonald's they work in.

Also is Windsor Park not the, eh, National Stadium now?
There is a lot of work to do up there


Andrew Lilico
26 March 2019 • 1:08pm

 Was all that talk of how May’s deal was a “vassalage” just hot air?
But even an embarrassing Brexiteer climbdown can't saved  the PM's deal

Disappointingly, a number of pro-Brexit Conservative MPs, including most notably Jacob Rees-Mogg, are now apparently considering switching to backing May’s deal. That won’t make her deal pass. Even if every pro-Brexit MP had switched to backing May’s deal at the second vote, it would still have been defeated by its pro-Remain opponents. And since that time, the pro-Remain Conservative rebels’ ranks have expanded.

Last night 30 rebel Remainer Conservative MPs voted for the Letwin-Benn amendment, granting the House of Commons control of the “indicative votes” process this coming Wednesday. They now expect to be able to cancel or utterly neuter Brexit. Why would they want to switch to backing May’s deal now?
Similarly, why would Labour’s front bench now start to back May’s deal, since the Government is disintegrating under the pressure and the Conservative Party is on the point of splitting?
Of course, even if some more pro-Brexit MPs panic and switch to backing it, there will still be a hardcore of 20-30 Conservative pro-Brexit rebels who will not back the deal under any circumstances. They apparently call themselves “the Spartans”, alluding to the 300 Spartans whose glorious defeat at the famous battle of Thermopylae was the salvation of Greece, and indeed European civilisation more broadly, from the Persian invasion.
That is a pleasing historical reference, but I think a better name would be the “Old Whigs”, after the party that in 1679 supported the Exclusion Bill seeking to prevent James II becoming king. On that occasion the issue was whether England should be party of the pan-European political structure (in those days the Papacy). Those who said we should accept England falling under that pan-European structure were called “Tories”. Those who said England should be sovereign unto itself were called “Whigs”. Sound familiar?
Historical references aside, the right Leaver strategy now is as follows. Vote down May's deal. Force opponents of No Deal to revoke Article 50. By revoking they render themselves and their parties politically toxic, dooming their electoral chances. Win a general election with a Leaver party. Leave instantly with no deal and no negotiations. Job done.
But winning by forcing our opponents to render themselves politically toxic by overturning democracy, so in due course we win a general election, is not a strategy for which everyone will have either the nerve or the stomach. We have seen some of that overnight, with those switching to backing May’s deal for fear that Brexit being cancelled is the only alternative.
Such despair may indicate either a lack of faith in the voters — as if the 2016 majority to leave the EU was a freak never-to-be-repeated result, and this is the one chance ever to leave. It may also indicate a lack of stomach , because the way forward to victory will probably entail destroying the Conservative Party.
It is also frankly rather disappointing. For all that talk of how important the Union is and how we could never accept Northern Ireland’s people having their laws set by the EU with no say, when it comes to it apparently that’s not all that important.

For all the talk of how weak May supposedly was for backing down on the backstop in her deal, when it comes to it these pro-Brexit MPs are backing down too. For all the talk of how May’s deal was a “vassalage” worse than Remaining, when it came to it that and the rest was all just hot air.
Well, when I said May’s deal was worse than Remaining, what I meant was that May’s deal was worse than Remaining. When I said we’ll inevitably leave the EU regardless of whether Brexit is cancelled now, because there will be no place for a non-euro EU as the Eurozone integrates, I meant that. And when I said MPs should vote down May’s deal and force our opponents to cancel Brexit, if they must, rendering themselves and their parties politically toxic, I meant that as well.
The Spartan Whigs are right. Defeat here, in the form of Brexit being cancelled, will empower our cause, not finish it. Vote down May’s deal, and let the deluge commence.

General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 01:48:50 PM »
Mogg has folded now, saying that it is a choice between May's deal or no Brexit. The emperor has no clothes, it now looks like a case of whether or not May can muster up enough support to get her deal over the line but I wouldn't bank on that happening which leaves everything up in the air.
I don't think Grieve and friends will support the deal and May has a majority of 3
The deal is awful

Ordinarily you would think so but if she convinces enough MP's from ERG to vote with her and narrow the gap to 10-20, then DUP and any other defectors will come under serious political pressure to sign up to the deal or risk a soft Brexit/no Brexit.

The third option is a popular vote

General discussion / Re: Cookstown Incident
« on: Today at 01:45:47 PM »
Things going from bad to worse for the police regarding the tragedy at the Greenvale last week as it now emerges that the 1st police to arrive at the scene withdrew until the ambulance arrived.  This is turning into a shambles for the police so far.
GOP are claiming total vindication based on Barr but refusing to allow the full report to be issued
Sounds like their story is makey uppy

GAA Discussion / Re: NFL Division 1 2019 Dubs again?
« on: Today at 12:32:31 PM »
I presume it's Kerry to win pulling up?
I hope not but yeah probably Kerry by 5 or 6.
Mayo could do it

General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: Today at 12:14:35 PM »
Mogg has folded now, saying that it is a choice between May's deal or no Brexit. The emperor has no clothes, it now looks like a case of whether or not May can muster up enough support to get her deal over the line but I wouldn't bank on that happening which leaves everything up in the air.
I don't think Grieve and friends will support the deal and May has a majority of 3
The deal is awful

GAA Discussion / Re: NFL Division 1 2019 Dubs again?
« on: Today at 12:12:50 PM »
Ni uasal agus iseal ach thuas seal agus thios seal

I wonder how long Ros and Cavan will be orbiting up/down between  D1 one year and D2 the next. 

GAA Discussion / Re: NFL Division 1 2019 Dubs again?
« on: Today at 09:54:43 AM »
It's going to be a one sided debate from now on in regards to the final. Is there no one here who can speak for Kerry?


MPs back indicative votes to take control of Brexit process leaving Theresa May's authority in shreds
•   Gordon Rayner, POLITICAL EDITOR
25 March 2019 • 11:45pm

Theresa May’s authority was in shreds on Monday night as Parliament seized control of Brexit with the help of three ministers who resigned to vote against the Government. MPs voted by 329 to 302 in favour of a plan by Remain-supporting MPs for a temporary takeover of the Commons that will enable them to decide their own way forward. Thirty Tory MPs defied the whip to back an amendment tabled by Sir Oliver Letwin that means MPs will vote on Wednesday on options such as staying in a customs union or single market, holding a second referendum or even revoking Article 50. The rebels included Richard Harrington, a business minister, who resigned and accused Mrs May of “playing roulette with the lives and livelihoods of the vast majority of people in this country”.
Alistair Burt, the Foreign Office minister, and Steve Brine, the health minister, also quit to vote against the Government. The Prime Minister could face further resignations if she does not allow free votes on Wednesday, after Remain-backing ministers warned her they would quit if they were ordered to vote with the Government. Mrs May will be powerless to stop the votes going ahead, and if she tries to resist the outcome, Parliament could overrule her again by tabling its own Brexit Bill. Mrs May had already cancelled plans to hold a third “meaningful vote” on her Brexit deal on Tuesday, after admitting it had no chance of winning a majority in the Commons.
But she refused to give up on her deal, telling MPs a “slow Brexit” was the only alternative, and tried to persuade MPs not to back the indicative votes amendment. However, her pleas fell on deaf ears as Sir Oliver’s amendment, tabled jointly with Dominic Grieve, the former attorney general, and Hilary Benn, the Labour MP, was passed by a comfortable majority of 27. After Monday night’s vote, Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, said: “I would like to congratulate the House for taking control. The Government’s approach has been an abject failure and this House must now find a solution.”Stephen Barclay, the Brexit Secretary, warned Mrs May during a Cabinet meeting on Monday that indicative votes could lead to a general election.
Government sources said the result set a “dangerous, unpredictable precedent for the future” and Sir Bill Cash, the Brexiteer Tory, described it as a “constitutional revolution”.  Nicky Morgan, the former Cabinet minister, retaliated by saying that Mrs May, who blamed Parliament for not knowing what sort of Brexit it wanted, could not now fault them for taking steps to decide. Sir Oliver proposed a series of votes, beginning with a “plain vanilla” vote on MPs’ first preferences, but warned compromises would have to be made, because: “If we all vote for that which is our first preference, I think we almost know that we will never get to a majority solution.”
He said that once the most popular solutions were identified, Parliament could “zero in on something” that could secure a majority. Mrs May said she was “sceptical” of any one vote commanding a majority and made it clear the outcome would not be legally binding, provoking an outcry from Remain-supporting MPs. She said: “No government could give a blank cheque to commit to an outcome without knowing what it is. So I cannot commit the Government to delivering the outcome of any votes held by this House. But I do commit to engaging constructively with this process.”Nick Boles, the Tory MP and one of the architects of the Letwin amendment, told BBC Two’s Newsnight: “If Parliament refuses to listen to what Parliament has voted for, we will bring forward a Bill that will require the Government to reflect Parliament’s wishes. “I am going to wake up with a broad grin on my face. I am going to think I finally live in a parliamentary democracy where Parliament is sovereign.” Britain will leave the EU on May 22 if Mrs May’s deal is passed before the end of this week. But if the deal is not approved, the UK will leave without a deal on April 12 unless the Prime Minister asks the EU for a longer extension.
During an emergency Cabinet meeting on Monday, Eurosceptic ministers rounded on Mrs May’s dismissal of a no-deal Brexit. Mrs May said: “Unless this House agrees to it, no-deal will not happen. No Brexit must not happen. "And a slow Brexit, which extends Article 50 beyond May 22, forces the British people to take part in European elections and gives up control of any of our borders, laws, money or trade, is not a Brexit that will bring the British people together.”
Jeremy Corbyn congratulates the Commons. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said: "I would like to congratulate the House for taking control. "The Government's approach has been an abject failure and this House must now find a solution. "So I pay tribute to the Hon member for West Dorset, and the member for Leeds Central, and others, who have worked to achieve tonight's result. "The Government must take this process seriously. We do not know what the House will decide on Wednesday. But I know there are many members of this House who have been working for alternative solutions, and we must debate those to find a consensus. "And this House must also consider whether any deal should be put to the people for a confirmatory vote. "Where this Government has failed, this House must, and I believe will, succeed."
A 'dangerous precedent'
The Department for Exiting the EU said the vote on Sir Oliver Letwin's amendment set a "dangerous, unpredictable precedent" for the future. "It is disappointing to see this amendment pass, as the Government made a clear commitment to provide a process to find a majority in Parliament for a way forward this week," a spokesman said. "This amendment instead upends the balance between our democratic institutions and sets a dangerous, unpredictable precedent for the future.
"While it is now up to Parliament to set out next steps in respect of this amendment, the Government will continue to call for realism - any options considered must be deliverable in negotiations with the EU. "Parliament should take account of how long these negotiations would take and if they'd require a longer extension which would mean holding European Parliamentary elections."

General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: Today at 08:41:34 AM »
I’ve been reading the political internet tealeaves again with a particular eye on my good friends further to the right of the political spectrum and I’ve once again feel compelled to write something here when I really do have more important things to be doing. But anyway...

If anyone could care to look back when I last bothered to post on us politics I did say Muller would turn up nothing. It doesn’t actually matter. Trump has effectively dropped his agenda that got him elected. Yes the wall may be built potentially but it’s been clear that the policies that are more important aren’t going to change. Catch and release border control is being utilized, birth right citizenship won’t be touched, immigration courts are clogged and Trump was cheerleading immigration like a standard Republican to help grow the economy. He’s got a massive hard-on for Israel and is showing signs of going back on his original anti-interventionist stance. He’s been boxed in by the party establishment and while he might still tweet a good game he’s actually not doing anything he promised that someone like Jeb or Mitt Romney wouldn’t have done. That’s probably why the Muller report is going away if you allow me to wear my tinfoil hat for a minute. He gets to still play President for a bit more but he’s dancing to the establishments tune.

So if you’re a Democrat I wouldn’t worry about this. A significant chunk of Trumps voting base who haven’t got their head up his ass have finally given up on him and won’t be voting for him or any republican in 2020. So long as the Democrats don’t put forward someone utterly toxic they’ll win easily. Bearing in mind that the demographic that voted for Trump is also dying of old age, opiate overdoses and suicide at unprecedented rates (a cruel statistic but none the less may prove significant given the fine margin that Trump won by).

Given the above I have a strong feeling that Trump won’t be re-elected. In fact if the Democrats play it right like going with someone who has cross over appeal like Andrew Yang it may well be a landslide. But that said I have doubts Yang could get nominated.
Women hate him and he seems to be stuck om approval levels consistent with the size of the Evangelical vote
Plus he hasn't delivered economically for blue collar voters.
I think it's very like Brexit. A plutocrat scam

General discussion / Re: Another School Shooting in America
« on: March 25, 2019, 04:28:05 PM »
In the last week - we've seen 3 deaths in the aftermath of these events. Last week - 2 former schoolmates of the Parkland victims took their own lives.

And this morning, it's reported that one of the fathers of the Sandy Hook children took his own life.
The purpose of the extremist NRA is to deliver votes to the GOP
It is so pointless.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1510