Brexit Fallout

[Mack A. Damia]

Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:

"We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.

As many pointed out to him in replies, there is presently a
relationship in place! Some of the insults:

...you are one confused bag of mince.

...you boil-in-the-bag rent-a-clown.

...YOU ARSE-CHEEKED BOLLOCK-WAGON

...you incompetent ventriloquist-dummy-faced spunktrumpet

...you reprehensible spam faced tool bag!

...you back stabbing cockwomble!

...You're an absolute wankcrumpet

...you haunted pork mannequin.

...you plonker.

...mate you're a pie

...You gigantic plumb

...Every now and then there is a mix up during circumcisions and they
keep the wrong f---ing bit!

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/michael-gove-twitter-insults_uk_577b8963e4b073366f0faf62

[Tony Cooper]

I have to admit to a bit of schadenfreude over this Brexit thing and
the idea of the clowns all piling out of the tiny automobile of
political leadership in the UK.

I am embarrassed over the international image of the US that is the US
presidential race. I imagine the rest of the world wondering "What is
going on over there? Trump? Seriously?".

Now that the UK's pot is about as black as ours, our kettle doesn't
look at all that different.

If only we had some mechanism in which our politicians would resign if
their image was damaged.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Yoiu are right. Brexit and the liars who promoted it have started to
make people wonder if the Donald can be so much worse. On the whole,
though, I think he is: the Goves, Farrages, Johnsons and Camerons are
just little pipsqueaks who don't have the same possibilities of
wreaking havoc.

>
> If only we had some mechanism in which our politicians would resign if
> their image was damaged.


--

athel

[Richard Heathfield]

On 05/07/16 17:34, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

<snip>

> Brexit and the liars who promoted it

I don't doubt it. Nor do I doubt that those who promoted the 'Remain'
vote were liars. They were /politicians/. Lying is what they do.

> have started to
> make people wonder if the Donald can be so much worse. On the whole,
> though, I think he is: the Goves, Farrages, Johnsons and Camerons are
> just little pipsqueaks who don't have the same possibilities of wreaking
> havoc.

Yup. No argument there. What Britain needs is a politician who can cry
havoc! and let slip the dogs of common sense. (Ain't gonna happen.)

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[the Omrud]

The thing is, if Trump were elected, four years later he could be
replaced. If we do actually leave the EU, we can rejoin only if we
accept the current membership rules, which the political class will
never agree to. We're stuffed for 50 years.

--
David

[Pierre Jelenc]

In article <gTRez.3124$H_....@fx36.am4>,

the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If we do actually leave the EU, we can rejoin only if we
>accept the current membership rules, which the political class will
>never agree to. We're stuffed for 50 years.

Is it so bad? After all, neither Switzerland nor Norway are anywhere close
to the dire straits that alarmists are predicting for the UK.

Pierre
--
Pierre Jelenc
The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org

[Richard Heathfield]

On 05/07/16 19:13, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
> In article <gTRez.3124$H_....@fx36.am4>,
> the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If we do actually leave the EU, we can rejoin only if we
>> accept the current membership rules, which the political class will
>> never agree to. We're stuffed for 50 years.
>
> Is it so bad?

Nope. :-)

> After all, neither Switzerland nor Norway are anywhere close
> to the dire straits that alarmists are predicting for the UK.

The irony is that the alarmism was a self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm sure
that quite a few people made a lot of money from short selling, knowing
that the pound would take a dive because the alarmists had ensured that
it would.

What this country needs now (and it's one of those very few times that
we /do/ need it) is strong leadership from someone who is prepared to
honour the referendum result and take us out of the EU in a way that is
as measured, calm, and responsible as possible. I would be very happy to
take on the role myself, but I suspect that I might experience some
little difficulty in getting elected. :-) And no doubt that's just as
well, since I'd make a complete hash of it, albeit perhaps not quite as
complete a hash as some people are managing at the moment.

There is no reason why this nation should not prosper as a free country.
We are still a very wealthy and influential country with a great many
friends around the world (and yes, even in Europe).

But the biggest problem we face right now is /not/ one of economics. It
is one of tolerance. I voted for us to leave the EU. I did /not/ vote
for racial hatred, and I am appalled by the recent spate of attacks
(both verbal and physical) on people who either are, or are perceived to
be, immigrants to this country. I'm not in favour of unbridled
immigration, but I /am/ in favour of offering a genuine and warm welcome
to those who have fled their homeland because of persecution. The last
thing such people need is to find persecution right here in Britain. Let
us do all that is necessary to stamp out this barbarism without delay.
Britain is a land of freedom, not a land of oppression and hate. The
economy will more or less sort itself out as soon as people stop talking
it down, but racial persecution will not, and we need to deal with it
urgently.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 2:47:17 PM UTC-4, Richard Heathfield wrote:

> But the biggest problem we face right now is /not/ one of economics. It
> is one of tolerance. I voted for us to leave the EU. I did /not/ vote
> for racial hatred, and I am appalled by the recent spate of attacks
> (both verbal and physical) on people who either are, or are perceived to
> be, immigrants to this country. I'm not in favour of unbridled
> immigration, but I /am/ in favour of offering a genuine and warm welcome
> to those who have fled their homeland because of persecution. The last
> thing such people need is to find persecution right here in Britain. Let
> us do all that is necessary to stamp out this barbarism without delay.
> Britain is a land of freedom, not a land of oppression and hate. The
> economy will more or less sort itself out as soon as people stop talking
> it down, but racial persecution will not, and we need to deal with it
> urgently.

And making it harder for the aliens to get into the country is a good start. Right?

[the Omrud]

obAUE: BrE doesn't use "aliens" in this sense (unless you are referring
to Martians). We talk of foreigners or immigrants.

--
David

[James Hogg]

Mack A. Damia wrote:
> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
>
> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.

I wonder who's going to do the negotiating for the UK. Obviously, it
can't be left to experts in the field.

--
James

[the Omrud]

On 05/07/2016 19:13, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
> In article <gTRez.3124$H_....@fx36.am4>,
> the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If we do actually leave the EU, we can rejoin only if we
>> accept the current membership rules, which the political class will
>> never agree to. We're stuffed for 50 years.
>
> Is it so bad? After all, neither Switzerland nor Norway are anywhere close
> to the dire straits that alarmists are predicting for the UK.

Why "alarmists"? Why not: "The vast majority of credible politicans and
economists in the world"?

I must disagree with my countryman downthread. Both Switzerland and
Norway agree to free movement of EU/EEU citizens. If the UK were to
fall into line with that, I would be less worried. But the Conservative
government is planning to ditch free movement, which means that we will
not get free trade. The economy will be significantly damaged if we do
actually exit.

Furthermore, the actual process of exiting will tie up UK legislators
and civil servants for many years, undoing and replacing EU directives
and laws. And the financial gain from reducing our contribution to the
EU is going to be insignifiant when compared with the downturn in the
economy which I expect.

I'm not going to rehearse the points any more in this place - you can
read much more informed discussion in the serious UK newspapers.

I'll be delighted to be shown to be wrong, although even if I'm not, I
will still think we should not have even had a vote, never mind actually
left. But I don't believe we will have a proper view of the effects for
five or 10 years. What's happening at the moment is mostly market
jitters and can't be considered as evidence, although the drop in the
pound is having a direct effect on some. It's increased the nominal
value of my pension fund by about 5%, for example.

--
David

[Peter T. Daniels]

With no term to cover both?

Oh, right. "Dago" and "Wog."

[the Omrud]

We're told that we need hundreds of skilled international trade
negotiators, but that we currently have about 20, because all the trade
deals have been done by the EU for the last 40 years. In an ironic
turn, the government is planning to employ immigrants (from New Zealand).

--
David

[occam]

The mechanism exists, it is called human dignity. And no, it does not
work with politicians. Neither Boris nor Farage resigned on the grounds
of damaged image. Furthermore Liam Fox nominated himself as candidate
for the next leader of the Tory party - the man who was forced to resign
his post of Secretary of State of Defence over the Werritty scandal.
These people have no sense of shame or remorse.

[the Omrud]

Ignoring the fact that those are racist terms which are very rarely
heard these days, they are applied to different classes of foreigners,
and also to UK citizens of certain heritages. There are other racist
words for other classes of foreigner, but I don't propose to list them.

--
David

[Richard Heathfield]

I see no particular value in trying to educate PTD, but I admire your
perseverance.

[occam]

The current governor of the Bank of England is a Canadian. Do
ex-colonials count as immigrants?

[Peter T. Daniels]

The seconndary poster heard from yet again. The one who, so far, seems alone in
his "Leave" sentiments.

[musika]

What's ironic about that? The whole point is that they want to choose
which immigrants come into the country rather having to accept any EU
national.

--
Ray
UK

[Charles Bishop]

In article <1aWez.1596$EG....@fx45.am4>,
the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip[-Brexit and havoc]

>
> I'm not going to rehearse the points any more in this place - you can
> read much more informed discussion in the serious UK newspapers.

"rehash"? I ask in the spirit of aue.

>
> I'll be delighted to be shown to be wrong, although even if I'm not, I
> will still think we should not have even had a vote, never mind actually
> left. But I don't believe we will have a proper view of the effects for
> five or 10 years. What's happening at the moment is mostly market
> jitters and can't be considered as evidence, although the drop in the
> pound is having a direct effect on some. It's increased the nominal
> value of my pension fund by about 5%, for example.

I think discussing politics from my lowly position where I'm unable to
effect any reasonable (to me) change is a waste of time.

chrles, OTOH, . . .

[CDB]

On 05/07/2016 6:20 PM, occam wrote:

We'd like to think he's just passing through.

[charles]

In article <e_Vez.5410$WR....@fx43.am4>, the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Brit E used to - certainly when I was young. (during and immediately after
WW2)

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 22:52:10 +0100, the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com>
wrote:

"Alien" is a technical term used in UK law, but, as you say, it is not
in wider use.

British Nationality Act 1981:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/61/section/50

50 Interpretation.

“alien” means a person who is neither a Commonwealth citizen nor a
British protected person nor a citizen of the Republic of Ireland;

“British protected person” means a person who is a member of any
class of persons declared to be British protected persons by an
Order in Council for the time being in force under section 38 or is
a British protected person by virtue of the M1 Solomon Islands Act
1978;


--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 16:14:01 -0700, Charles Bishop
<ctbi...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>In article <1aWez.1596$EG....@fx45.am4>,
> the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[snip[-Brexit and havoc]
>>
>> I'm not going to rehearse the points any more in this place - you can
>> read much more informed discussion in the serious UK newspapers.
>
>"rehash"? I ask in the spirit of aue.

I think he did mean "rehearse".

OED:

rehearse, v.

Etymology: < Anglo-Norman reherser, rehearser, Anglo-Norman and Old
French rehercier, rehercer to repeat, reiterate, recite,...

I. Senses relating to the relation or recitation of words,
information, etc.
1.
a. trans. To give an account or description of; to relate, report,
narrate, tell; to describe at length.

c1300 Childhood Jesus (Laud) 353 in C. Horstmann Altengl. Legenden
(1875) 1st Ser. 14 (MED), With is staf he gan it breke; þare
fore, dame, ich reherce þis þat þou it wite he dude amis.
c1330 Seven Sages (Auch.) 45 Þe tresoun he gan hem alle reherse.
....
2003 J. Wintle Hist. Islam 24 In Islam, Jews and Christians
are..fellow monotheists..whose histories are rehearsed in the
Koran, and who are alike descended from Abraham (Ibrahim).

3. trans. To repeat (something previously said, heard, written,
etc.).In quot. 1340, prob. intr.

1340 Ayenbite (1866) 220 (MED), Þerof anoþre time we habbeþ
yspeke..an þeruore hit ne behoueþ na?t to reherci.
....
1999 G. Dale & M. Cole European Union & Migrant Labour ii. 56
The hoary argument is rehearsed.


The theatrical sense is later:

II. Senses relating to practice.
a. To practise or go through (a play, piece of music, ceremony,
etc.) in preparation for later public performance. Also intr.: (of
a play, etc.) to be rehearsed, to be in rehearsal (in earlier use
only in the progressive with passive meaning).

1579–80 in P. Cunningham Extracts Accts. Revels at Court (1842)
159 Rehersinge of dyvers plaies.

>>
>> I'll be delighted to be shown to be wrong, although even if I'm not, I
>> will still think we should not have even had a vote, never mind actually
>> left. But I don't believe we will have a proper view of the effects for
>> five or 10 years. What's happening at the moment is mostly market
>> jitters and can't be considered as evidence, although the drop in the
>> pound is having a direct effect on some. It's increased the nominal
>> value of my pension fund by about 5%, for example.
>
>I think discussing politics from my lowly position where I'm unable to
>effect any reasonable (to me) change is a waste of time.
>
>chrles, OTOH, . . .

[occam]

On 05/07/2016 18:08, Mack A. Damia wrote:
>
> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
>
> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
>
> As many pointed out to him in replies, there is presently a
> relationship in place! Some of the insults:
>
> ...you are one confused bag of mince.
>
> ...you boil-in-the-bag rent-a-clown.
>
> ...YOU ARSE-CHEEKED BOLLOCK-WAGON
>
> ...you incompetent ventriloquist-dummy-faced spunktrumpet
>
> ...you reprehensible spam faced tool bag!
>
> ...you back stabbing cockwomble!
>
> ...You're an absolute wankcrumpet
>
> ...you haunted pork mannequin.
>
> ...you plonker.
>
>>>> ...mate you're a pie

I had never heard of this as an insult. Can anyone hazard a guess as to
what is being implied?

[Peter T. Daniels]

That latter is a bit circular ...

[Harrison Hill]

Most people's pension funds - valued in pound sterling; or land-value
per square metre - have gone down; so I'm glad yours has gone up.

We as a family voted for Brexit.

House prices will fall. Good. That's what we want.

There is a joke doing the rounds: "Now nobody will *want* to come to
Britain!" Good. The relentless one-way traffic of people flooding
into Britain *has* to be controlled. If were two-way it would be fine.
Britain is a special case in that regard.

Two people regretting their stance: Boris Johnson, who was the Remainer
who tipped the balance in the opposite direction; and Jeremy Corbin who
wanted Out, but couldn't say so publicly. This was a Labour victory over
the Conservatives; the Working Classes over the Middle Classes; the old
over the young; the Have-nots over the Haves.

[Mack A. Damia]

On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 13:37:23 +0200, occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>On 05/07/2016 18:08, Mack A. Damia wrote:
>>
>> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
>>
>> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
>> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
>>
>> As many pointed out to him in replies, there is presently a
>> relationship in place! Some of the insults:
>>
>> ...you are one confused bag of mince.
>>
>> ...you boil-in-the-bag rent-a-clown.
>>
>> ...YOU ARSE-CHEEKED BOLLOCK-WAGON
>>
>> ...you incompetent ventriloquist-dummy-faced spunktrumpet
>>
>> ...you reprehensible spam faced tool bag!
>>
>> ...you back stabbing cockwomble!
>>
>> ...You're an absolute wankcrumpet
>>
>> ...you haunted pork mannequin.
>>
>> ...you plonker.
>>
>>>>> ...mate you're a pie
>
>
>I had never heard of this as an insult. Can anyone hazard a guess as to
>what is being implied?

Pie? Genitally speaking, I should think

>> ...You gigantic plumb

I think the OP meant, "plum".

[Janet]

In article <c1a19815-8204-413e...@googlegroups.com>,
gram...@verizon.net says...

Nope. I voted Leave.

Janet.

[J. J. Lodder]

If the Brits can't decide what they want right soon
the EU will dictate the terms on which they get out,
(if they still want to)

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 09:08:25 -0700, Mack A. Damia

> <mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
> >
> >"We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
> >trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
> >

> >As many pointed out to him in replies, there is presently a
> >relationship in place! Some of the insults:
> >
> >...you are one confused bag of mince.
> >
> >...you boil-in-the-bag rent-a-clown.
> >
> >...YOU ARSE-CHEEKED BOLLOCK-WAGON
> >
> >...you incompetent ventriloquist-dummy-faced spunktrumpet
> >
> >...you reprehensible spam faced tool bag!
> >
> >...you back stabbing cockwomble!
> >
> >...You're an absolute wankcrumpet
> >
> >...you haunted pork mannequin.
> >
> >...you plonker.
> >
> >...mate you're a pie
> >

> >...You gigantic plumb
> >
> >...Every now and then there is a mix up during circumcisions and they
> >keep the wrong f---ing bit!
> >
> >http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/michael-gove-twitter-insults_uk_577b896
3e4b073366f0faf62
>

> I have to admit to a bit of schadenfreude over this Brexit thing and
> the idea of the clowns all piling out of the tiny automobile of
> political leadership in the UK.
>
> I am embarrassed over the international image of the US that is the US
> presidential race. I imagine the rest of the world wondering "What is
> going on over there? Trump? Seriously?".
>
> Now that the UK's pot is about as black as ours, our kettle doesn't
> look at all that different.
>
> If only we had some mechanism in which our politicians would resign if
> their image was damaged.

The USA and Britain have the same fundamental flaw
in their political systems.
They concentrate far too much power in too few hands.

Hence the fight to get that power becomes all important,
far more important of course than such trivialities
as national dignity or national self interest,

Jan

[the Omrud]

On 06/07/2016 10:32, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 16:14:01 -0700, Charles Bishop
> <ctbi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> In article <1aWez.1596$EG....@fx45.am4>,
>> the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> [snip[-Brexit and havoc]
>>>
>>> I'm not going to rehearse the points any more in this place - you can
>>> read much more informed discussion in the serious UK newspapers.
>>
>> "rehash"? I ask in the spirit of aue.
>
> I think he did mean "rehearse".
>
> OED:
>
> rehearse, v.
>
> Etymology: < Anglo-Norman reherser, rehearser, Anglo-Norman and Old
> French rehercier, rehercer to repeat, reiterate, recite,...

I did.

--
David

[Richard Heathfield]

So did over seventeen million other people. In fact, this might come as
a bit of a surprise in some quarters, but "Leave" got even more votes
than "Remain".

[occam]

It's a nice thought, but they can't. The process has to be started by
the Brits. They [Brits] in turn will not do it until they have a new PM.
The delay and uncertainty in the meantime will create havoc in the
markets.

[occam]

On 06/07/2016 18:04, Mack A. Damia wrote:

>>>
>>>>>> ...mate you're a pie
>>
>>
>> I had never heard of this as an insult. Can anyone hazard a guess as to
>> what is being implied?
>
> Pie? Genitally speaking, I should think
>

I found this explanation in the Urban dictionary:

"2-a crude sexual slang used to refer to a woman's vagina"

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:07:05 +0100, the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com>
wrote:

In my corner of the UK there is a shortage of nurses. The NHS is
actively recruiting from abroad.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/philippines-mission-to-recruit-1000-nurses-for-northern-ireland-34717323.html

16 May 2016

Health officials from Northern Ireland are due to arrive in the
Philippines today as part of a bid to recruit up to 1,000 nurses to
work in our health service.

Officials hope to recruit 300 nurses in the Philippines, as well as
an additional 700 this month and next in trips to Italy and Romania.

[Traddict]

"occam" <oc...@127.0.0.1> a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion :
nljpbl$krl$2...@dont-email.me...

[Traddict]

"occam" <oc...@127.0.0.1> a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion :
nljpbl$krl$2...@dont-email.me...

The "hair pie" variation makes it more explicit.

[Bob Martin]

The thoughtless over the thoughtful.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Harrison also, apparently.


--
athel

[Harrison Hill]

If they were "thoughtful" they should have been capable of thinking
that one through? They have their heads in the sand. UKIP has had
more UK MEPs than any other party for two elections running - what
other outcome would they have expected?

We are hamstrung as a nation. Expanding Heathrow is a decision we can
never make. Building the houses that would ease the pressure on rents
(I think most young people have accepted that they will never be able
own their own houses; but knowing that they will never be able to
*rent* impacts all the generations; which is why entire families can
be mobilised to vote together).

We can build ourselves out of this mess. Oh but that involves using
the "green belt" :( The one thing we can all agree about? "Nimby!"

[J. J. Lodder]

occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On 06/07/2016 21:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 05/07/2016 22:55, James Hogg wrote:
> >>> Mack A. Damia wrote:
> >>>> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
> >>>>
> >>>> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
> >>>> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder who's going to do the negotiating for the UK. Obviously, it
> >>> can't be left to experts in the field.
> >>
> >> We're told that we need hundreds of skilled international trade
> >> negotiators, but that we currently have about 20, because all the trade
> >> deals have been done by the EU for the last 40 years. In an ironic
> >> turn, the government is planning to employ immigrants (from New Zealand).
> >
> > If the Brits can't decide what they want right soon
> > the EU will dictate the terms on which they get out,
> > (if they still want to)
> >
>
> It's a nice thought, but they can't. The process has to be started by
> the Brits.

From your side, yes. The EU has no such limitation.

> They [Brits] in turn will not do it until they have a new PM.

A credible government, you mean?
I guess it can't be done without having general elections.

> The delay and uncertainty in the meantime will create havoc in the
> markets.

While Britain waits, and the situation deteriorates
the position will evolve into one of:
if you want out, these are the terms you can get.
Say out yes or out no.

Of course the pill will be sugared a bit,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 05/07/2016 17:34, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> > On 2016-07-05 18:20:23 +0200, Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> said:
> >
> >> I am embarrassed over the international image of the US that is the US
> >> presidential race. I imagine the rest of the world wondering "What is
> >> going on over there? Trump? Seriously?".
> >>
> >> Now that the UK's pot is about as black as ours, our kettle doesn't
> >> look at all that different.
> >

> > Yoiu are right. Brexit and the liars who promoted it have started to
> > make people wonder if the Donald can be so much worse. On the whole,
> > though, I think he is: the Goves, Farrages, Johnsons and Camerons are
> > just little pipsqueaks who don't have the same possibilities of wreaking
> > havoc.
>
> The thing is, if Trump were elected, four years later he could be
> replaced.

Yes, but the damage he can do cannot be undone so easily.
The world still suffers from the damage done by Dubya,
for example.
And like with Dubya, the Americans may be crazy enough
to reelect him.

> If we do actually leave the EU, we can rejoin only if we
> accept the current membership rules, which the political class will
> never agree to.

There won't be much choice.
Britain no longer owns captive markets in the Commonwealth,
and the industry that served those markets no longer exists.

> We're stuffed for 50 years.

Come on, even the English will see the light sooner than that,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Don't be too sure.
The Netherlands has had just that.
The result was not a housing maket at a lower price level,
but stagnation. The market froze, and remained frozen for years.
Too many people couldn't afford to sell their house.
(bought in the previous bubble and mortgaged)

The market is by now in the next bubble,
especially in Amsterdam.
It will no doubt get worse when companies fleeing London
will move in,

Jan

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

The word "vagina" is pretty much always used in reference to a woman,
so "woman's" seems redundant. Anyway, I suspect that the author of the
dictionary was confused, and meant "vulva".

--
athel

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

What is tragic, though, is that Messrs Farrage, Johnson and Gove were
incapable of thinking it through, making it obvious once they won that
they had no actual plan as to what to do next. Farrage and Johnson just
ran away, and Gove's "plan" is so ludicrous that it stimulated all the
ridicule that has been quoted.

> They have their heads in the sand. UKIP has had
> more UK MEPs than any other party for two elections running - what
> other outcome would they have expected?
>
> We are hamstrung as a nation. Expanding Heathrow is a decision we can
> never make. Building the houses that would ease the pressure on rents
> (I think most young people have accepted that they will never be able
> own their own houses; but knowing that they will never be able to
> *rent* impacts all the generations; which is why entire families can
> be mobilised to vote together).
>
> We can build ourselves out of this mess. Oh but that involves using
> the "green belt" :( The one thing we can all agree about? "Nimby!"
>
>

--
athel

[Harrison Hill]

In that case, with inflation in the background, house prices
have fallen in the Netherlands?

Today the Nationwide Building Society announces that UK house
prices (before the Brexit vote) "fell", to an increase of only
8.4% per year. An extra 3% stamp duty on multiple homes (which
came in in April 2016), has stopped the frantic buy-to-let market,
for the time being at least.

[Richard Heathfield]

On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
<snip>

>
> A credible government, you mean?
> I guess it can't be done without having general elections.

It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?

[occam]

On 07/07/2016 09:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> On 06/07/2016 21:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/07/2016 22:55, James Hogg wrote:
>>>>> Mack A. Damia wrote:
>>>>>> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
>>>>>> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder who's going to do the negotiating for the UK. Obviously, it
>>>>> can't be left to experts in the field.
>>>>
>>>> We're told that we need hundreds of skilled international trade
>>>> negotiators, but that we currently have about 20, because all the trade
>>>> deals have been done by the EU for the last 40 years. In an ironic
>>>> turn, the government is planning to employ immigrants (from New Zealand).
>>>
>>> If the Brits can't decide what they want right soon
>>> the EU will dictate the terms on which they get out,
>>> (if they still want to)
>>>
>>
>> It's a nice thought, but they can't. The process has to be started by
>> the Brits.
>
> From your side, yes. The EU has no such limitation.

Eh? The EU members - which includes Britain - have signed the same
Article 50.

[J. J. Lodder]

Yes, in a downward spiral that lasted 5 years.
At a low turnover, however.
Many people were effectively locked in
because selling their houses had become impossible.
It picked up again two years ago.
(in Holland, Amsterdam in particular)

Houses may get sold the day they become available,
sometimes at 10% above the asking price.
Some are even sold before they are put on the net.
It's the next bubble, and with the English moving in
it will get worse,

Jan

[RH Draney]

I just watched the newest episode of "Another Period" on Comedy Central
(it's a sort of mashup of "Downtown Abbey" and "Keeping Up With the
Kardashians")...explicit reference was made not only to the vaginas of a
number of women (both characters in the show and Mary Todd Lincoln), but
to the vaginas of pigs and dogs....r

[John Ritson]

In article <1mpzmma.i4...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder
<nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> writes

>occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> On 06/07/2016 21:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> > the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 05/07/2016 22:55, James Hogg wrote:
>> >>> Mack A. Damia wrote:
>> >>>> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
>> >>>> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
>> >>>
>> >>> I wonder who's going to do the negotiating for the UK. Obviously, it
>> >>> can't be left to experts in the field.
>> >>
>> >> We're told that we need hundreds of skilled international trade
>> >> negotiators, but that we currently have about 20, because all the trade
>> >> deals have been done by the EU for the last 40 years. In an ironic
>> >> turn, the government is planning to employ immigrants (from New Zealand).
>> >
>> > If the Brits can't decide what they want right soon
>> > the EU will dictate the terms on which they get out,
>> > (if they still want to)
>> >
>>
>> It's a nice thought, but they can't. The process has to be started by
>> the Brits.
>
>From your side, yes. The EU has no such limitation.
>
>> They [Brits] in turn will not do it until they have a new PM.
>
>A credible government, you mean?
>I guess it can't be done without having general elections.

But the Fixed Term Parliaments Act says that the next general election
cannot be before 2020.
(Unless 2/3 of the MPs decide otherwise, and with the current political
turmoil, you won't get 2/3 of the MPs prepared to risk losing a nice
cosy job for the next four years)

>
>> The delay and uncertainty in the meantime will create havoc in the
>> markets.
>
>While Britain waits, and the situation deteriorates
>the position will evolve into one of:
>if you want out, these are the terms you can get.
>Say out yes or out no.
>
>Of course the pill will be sugared a bit,
>
>Jan
>

--
John Ritson

[J. J. Lodder]

Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

> On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > A credible government, you mean?
> > I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
>
> It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?

I think the only practical path out of the mess
is to have general elections,
hence a new government with freshed up legitimacy.

They can decide no Brexit,
and have another referendum on that,
if necessary.
It's hopeless only if that fails too,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Yes, but they don't want out,

Jan

[Cheryl]

Having repeated referendums until one comes up with an answer the
organizers want is a familiar political technique, but one which I
always think lacks moral legitimacy.

Whether or not the current UK government lacks legitimacy is really up
to the British to decide.

"Freshed up" sounds wrong - like it should be "freshened up", but you
can't freshen up legitimacy. It either exists or it doesn't, and that's
determined by the laws of the country in question, or perhaps the moral
views of the individual pronouncing on it.

--
Cheryl

[J. J. Lodder]

I know.
Not doing it may make reelection in 2020 unlikely though,
if the voters get really angry.
Apart from that, it is the only way out of the mess.

I agree it's unlikely.
The Brits prefer muddling through.

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

> On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > A credible government, you mean?
> > I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
>
> It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?

Not doing it won't work either,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Cheryl <cper...@med.mun.ca> wrote:

> On 2016-07-07 8:56 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> <snip>
> >>>
> >>> A credible government, you mean?
> >>> I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
> >>
> >> It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?
> >
> > I think the only practical path out of the mess
> > is to have general elections,
> > hence a new government with freshed up legitimacy.
> >
> > They can decide no Brexit,
> > and have another referendum on that,
> > if necessary.
> > It's hopeless only if that fails too,
>
> Having repeated referendums until one comes up with an answer the
> organizers want is a familiar political technique, but one which I
> always think lacks moral legitimacy.

Not if you have a new government that made a new decision.

> Whether or not the current UK government lacks legitimacy is really up
> to the British to decide.

There is nothing the people can do about it, officially.
Standing with a million or so in central London day in day out,
occupying Trafalgar square for example, may do it.
It worked in the Ukraine, and in some third world countries.

> "Freshed up" sounds wrong - like it should be "freshened up", but you
> can't freshen up legitimacy.

I know, but how else?

> It either exists or it doesn't, and that's
> determined by the laws of the country in question, or perhaps the moral
> views of the individual pronouncing on it.

Some governments feel more legitimate than others.

Jan

[Cheryl]

Ah, yes, the tactic that is either heroic or bullying, depending on what
side you are on. We had a rather small scale example of that in Toronto
recently.


--
Cheryl

[Richard Heathfield]

I know. Wretched, isn't it?

[John Ritson]

In article <1mq0mt0.pzn...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder
<nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> writes

>Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> <snip>
>> >
>> > A credible government, you mean?
>> > I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
>>
>> It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?
>
>I think the only practical path out of the mess
>is to have general elections,
>hence a new government with freshed up legitimacy.

And how exactly would that work with the two major parties both split on
Leave-Remain?
It wouldn't give any legitimacy on the EU issue.

>
>They can decide no Brexit,
>and have another referendum on that,
>if necessary.
>It's hopeless only if that fails too,
>
>Jan
>

--
John Ritson

[Pablo]

Harrison Hill wrote:
> The relentless one-way traffic of people flooding
> into Britain *has* to be controlled. If were two-way it would be fine.

Heh. remember this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auf_Wiedersehen,_Pet


--

Pablo

http://www.ipernity.com/home/313627
https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org

[Oliver Cromm]

* Cheryl:

> On 2016-07-07 8:56 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> A credible government, you mean?
>>>> I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
>>>
>>> It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?
>>
>> I think the only practical path out of the mess
>> is to have general elections,
>> hence a new government with freshed up legitimacy.
>>
>> They can decide no Brexit,
>> and have another referendum on that,
>> if necessary.
>> It's hopeless only if that fails too,
>
> Having repeated referendums until one comes up with an answer the
> organizers want is a familiar political technique, but one which I
> always think lacks moral legitimacy.

BBC's /Witness/ had an interesting episode reporting on the
situation when Denmark had a second referendum on closer EU
integration. I forgot how violent it was back then, with police
even firing on protesters.

The protester they interviewed meanwhile is pro-EU, interestingly,
but pointed out, rightly, that the second referendum had been set
up too soon.

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03zq4m3>

Also interesting that some of the anti-EU vote back then was
influenced by fabricated information from one Boris Johnson.

--
Microsoft designed a user-friendly car:
instead of the oil, alternator, gas and engine
warning lights it has just one: "General Car Fault"

[Oliver Cromm]

* Richard Heathfield:

> So did over seventeen million other people. In fact, this might come as
> a bit of a surprise in some quarters, but "Leave" got even more votes
> than "Remain".

But less than a third of the people with a university degree,
which I believe are the majority in this group.

Must be the age, then. I can't find an analysis that combines age
and education.

--
A computer will do what you tell it to do, but that may be much
different from what you had in mind. - Joseph Weizenbaum

[J. J. Lodder]

John Ritson <j.ri...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <1mq0mt0.pzn...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder
> <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> writes
> >Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> <snip>
> >> >
> >> > A credible government, you mean?
> >> > I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
> >>
> >> It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?
> >
> >I think the only practical path out of the mess
> >is to have general elections,
> >hence a new government with freshed up legitimacy.
>
> And how exactly would that work with the two major parties both split on
> Leave-Remain?
> It wouldn't give any legitimacy on the EU issue.

Candidates will obviously be challenged on their pro or contra views.
A newly elected parliament is in a much better position
to decide the issue.

Jan

[Stan Brown]

On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 09:43:09 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2016-07-06 20:23:17 +0000, occam said:
>

> > [quoted text muted]

> >
> > I found this explanation in the Urban dictionary:
> >
> > "2-a crude sexual slang used to refer to a woman's vagina"
>
> The word "vagina" is pretty much always used in reference to a woman,
> so "woman's" seems redundant.
>

In reference to a female, yes, but not necessarily a female human.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://BrownMath.com/
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the
/right/ word is ... the difference between the lightning-bug
and the lightning." --Mark Twain

[Harrison Hill]

It would be UKIP vs Lib Dems, so it cannot happen. The
issue is already decided :)

[John Ritson]

In article <1mq1dui.10c...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder

And if both the major candidates in a given constituency are pro-Leave
or pro-Remain?

A parliament not elected on the lines of the Leave-Remain split would
not have a mandate to overturn the referendum verdict.

If the Westminster Parliament was elected on a proportional
representation basis, then the big parties could each split into Leave
and Remain parties and a coalition of some kind might claim to have a
mandate. But that's not going to happen soon either.

The outgoing Prime Minister and both candidates for Conservative Party
leader, and hence the next Prime Minister, have stated that the
referendum result must stand.

--
John Ritson

[Richard Heathfield]

The decision has already been made. What we need is a Parliament that is
prepared to acknowledge the fact and execute the decision.

To be fair to the current crop of MPs, there seems to be little appetite
amongst them for a re-run of the referendum - we /will/ leave the EU -
but on the other hand they seem to think it's okay to dilly, and even to
dally before starting the formal process. We can put up with a certain
amount of that. Three months seems a little long, but we can live with
it as long as it doesn't turn into six months into twelve into eighteen...

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/7/16 4:17 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
...

> To be fair to the current crop of MPs, there seems to be little appetite
> amongst them for a re-run of the referendum - we /will/ leave the EU -
> but on the other hand they seem to think it's okay to dilly, and even to
> dally before starting the formal process.

You'd better hope they can find their way home.

> We can put up with a certain
> amount of that.

Also in the STS warning.

> Three months seems a little long, but we can live with
> it as long as it doesn't turn into six months into twelve into eighteen...

--

Jerry Friedman
"No Trump" bridge-themed political shirts: cafepress.com/jerrysdesigns
Bumper stickers ditto: cafepress/jerrysstickers

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/5/16 10:08 AM, Mack A. Damia wrote:
>
> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
>
> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
>

> As many pointed out to him in replies, there is presently a
> relationship in place! Some of the insults:
>
> ...you are one confused bag of mince.
>
> ...you boil-in-the-bag rent-a-clown.
>
> ...YOU ARSE-CHEEKED BOLLOCK-WAGON
>
> ...you incompetent ventriloquist-dummy-faced spunktrumpet

That lends some support to the possibility that "incompressible
jizztrumpet", which Donald Trump was called in a similar reaction to his
brainless tweet from Scotland, contains an predictive-typing error.

(That implies that Trump has made only one brainless tweet from
Scotland. I do not stand by the accuracy of that implication.)

> ...you reprehensible spam faced tool bag!
>
> ...you back stabbing cockwomble!

"Cockwomble" may have a future in my vocabulary.

> ...You're an absolute wankcrumpet
>
> ...you haunted pork mannequin.
>
> ...you plonker.
>
> ...mate you're a pie
>
> ...You gigantic plumb
>
> ...Every now and then there is a mix up during circumcisions and they
> keep the wrong f---ing bit!
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/michael-gove-twitter-insults_uk_577b8963e4b073366f0faf62

[David Kleinecke]

It appears that in some circles

Dear Shit-for-Brains

is the usual opening salutation

[Bob Martin]

in 2308457 20160707 080310 Harrison Hill <harrison...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, 7 July 2016 07:00:18 UTC+1, Bob Martin wrote:

>> >There is a joke doing the rounds: "Now nobody will *want* to come to
>> >Britain!" Good. The relentless one-way traffic of people flooding

>> >into Britain *has* to be controlled. If were two-way it would be fine.

>> >Britain is a special case in that regard.
>> >
>> >Two people regretting their stance: Boris Johnson, who was the Remainer
>> >who tipped the balance in the opposite direction; and Jeremy Corbin who
>> >wanted Out, but couldn't say so publicly. This was a Labour victory over
>> >the Conservatives; the Working Classes over the Middle Classes; the old
>> >over the young; the Have-nots over the Haves.
>>
>> The thoughtless over the thoughtful.
>
>If they were "thoughtful" they should have been capable of thinking
>that one through? They have their heads in the sand. UKIP has had
>more UK MEPs than any other party for two elections running - what
>other outcome would they have expected?
>
>We are hamstrung as a nation. Expanding Heathrow is a decision we can
>never make. Building the houses that would ease the pressure on rents
>(I think most young people have accepted that they will never be able
>own their own houses; but knowing that they will never be able to
>*rent* impacts all the generations; which is why entire families can
>be mobilised to vote together).
>
>We can build ourselves out of this mess. Oh but that involves using
>the "green belt" :( The one thing we can all agree about? "Nimby!"
>
>

Maybe BrExit will also cure my diabetes??

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2016-07-07 20:53:47 +0000, Stan Brown said:

> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 09:43:09 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2016-07-06 20:23:17 +0000, occam said:
>>
>>> [quoted text muted]
>>>
>>> I found this explanation in the Urban dictionary:
>>>
>>> "2-a crude sexual slang used to refer to a woman's vagina"
>>
>> The word "vagina" is pretty much always used in reference to a woman,
>> so "woman's" seems redundant.
>>
>
> In reference to a female, yes, but not necessarily a female human.

I don't understand what you're saying here. I'm perfectly well aware
that all female mammals have vaginas, but I have _never_ heard the word
used in the wild with reference to a non-human female.


--
athel

[J. J. Lodder]

Mack A. Damia <mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Michael Gove, MP, tweeted the following this morning:
>
> "We need to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free
> trade and friendly cooperation" 1:02 AM - 5 Jul 2016.
>
> As many pointed out to him in replies, there is presently a
> relationship in place! Some of the insults:
>
> ...you are one confused bag of mince.
>
> ...you boil-in-the-bag rent-a-clown.
>
> ...YOU ARSE-CHEEKED BOLLOCK-WAGON
>
> ...you incompetent ventriloquist-dummy-faced spunktrumpet
>

> ...you reprehensible spam faced tool bag!
>
> ...you back stabbing cockwomble!
>

> ...You're an absolute wankcrumpet
>
> ...you haunted pork mannequin.
>
> ...you plonker.
>
> ...mate you're a pie
>
> ...You gigantic plumb

Definitely inferior to the great Captain Haddock.
(also a Brit originally, until he discovered
that he was a Chevalier De Hadoque, really)

[Cheryl]

I wouldn't expect to hear it with reference to a non-human female
because the only time the reproductive organs of a non-human female seem
to come up in conversation is when discussing spaying, and the emphasis
is on a different part of the system.

I might have heard it mentioned when whether or not a cat was pregnant
was being discussed with a vet - if she was, it was at an early enough
stage that it wasn't really obvious.

--
Cheryl

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Janet]

In article <1mq0mt0.pzn...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, nospam@de-
ster.demon.nl says...

>
> Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > <snip>
> > >
> > > A credible government, you mean?
> > > I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
> >
> > It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?
>
> I think the only practical path out of the mess
> is to have general elections,
> hence a new government with freshed up legitimacy.

Except, that Labour is currently unelectable, (all its own handiwork);
UKIP no longer has a platform to stand on; Scotland will not vote labour
or Con so will re-elect SNP.

IOW UK would inevitably return another Conservative majority govt
facing exactly the same Brexit issues.

Janet.

[Janet]

In article <1mq0rd8.1wv...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, nospam@de-
ster.demon.nl says...

>
> Cheryl <cper...@med.mun.ca> wrote:
>
> > On 2016-07-07 8:56 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 07/07/16 08:22, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >> <snip>
> > >>>
> > >>> A credible government, you mean?
> > >>> I guess it can't be done without having general elections.
> > >>
> > >> It's never worked before. What makes you think it'll work now?
> > >
> > > I think the only practical path out of the mess
> > > is to have general elections,
> > > hence a new government with freshed up legitimacy.
> > >
> > > They can decide no Brexit,
> > > and have another referendum on that,
> > > if necessary.
> > > It's hopeless only if that fails too,
> >
> > Having repeated referendums until one comes up with an answer the
> > organizers want is a familiar political technique, but one which I
> > always think lacks moral legitimacy.
>
> Not if you have a new government that made a new decision.

What "new government"? It would be Conservative, again.

Janet

[musika]

The Isle of Wight has its own election?


--
Ray
UK

[Janet]

In article <64wukox377me$.d...@mid.crommatograph.info>,
lispa...@crommatograph.info says...

Denmark's 2015 referendum "no" vote was ? " a solid 53 to 47 per cent
margin "

If that was a decisive split it's hard to claim
the UK's 52/48 Brexit vote isn't.

Janet.

[Janet]

In article <1mq1dui.10c...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, nospam@de-
ster.demon.nl says...

So what? Both parties are split. The electorate is also split (not
along party lines). So it would vote in a repeat of the split views in
Parliament.

> A newly elected parliament is in a much better position
> to decide the issue.

The people have already done that. It would be unthinkable for
Parliament to overturn the referendum vote.

Janet

[J. J. Lodder]

And Denmark is now?

Jan

[Robert Bannister]

And, from what I've read, with another leader who is in favour of
remaining in Europe.
--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972

[John Ritson]

In article <dub3fo...@mid.individual.net>, Robert Bannister
<rob...@clubtelco.com> writes

No. the two candidates are both in favour of accepting the result of the
referendum. Theresa May called for a Remain vote, but only made one
significant speech on the subject, where she spent most of her time
listing all the things she disliked about the EU.


--
John Ritson

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2016/07/09/caturday-felid-trifecta-bobcat-climbs-tall-saguaro-cactus-cat-brain-freezes-cheetah-on-letterman/


You need to go to the very last image to see why this is relevant.


--
athel

[Janet]

In article <ductrd...@mid.individual.net>, acor...@imm.cnrs.fr
says...

LOL

Janet.

[J. J. Lodder]

That's meaningless.
They can't have the conservative leadership race
turning into an internal Brexit yes/no referendum,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

For the Brits and for the cat the same solution applies:
a gentle shove with the boot.

The only cat I am familiar with reacts to this
with a frantic turn around and a rush inside,

Jan

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Yes they can.

My description of what has happened so far is that the referendum was a
vote on the principle of Leaving or Remaining. It was not a vote for or
against a clearly-defined plan.

The voting figures were so close that David Cameron's statement "the
British people have made a very clear decision" is, to me, complete
nonsense.

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Janet]

In article <1mq62ic.20...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, nospam@de-
ster.demon.nl says...

Every contender hoping to be the new Conservative leader, including
those eliminated, all have one thing in common; they accept that the new
PM will be engaged in delivering Brexit.

Janet.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Unless there is a "Braboutturn".

[Oliver Cromm]

* J. J. Lodder:

That sounds familiar.

--
Microsoft designed a user-friendly car:
instead of the oil, alternator, gas and engine
warning lights it has just one: "General Car Fault"

[J. J. Lodder]

Yes, for now.
What they'll do once in power is another thing,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Of course they can, if they don't mind breaking the party.

> My description of what has happened so far is that the referendum was a
> vote on the principle of Leaving or Remaining. It was not a vote for or
> against a clearly-defined plan.

How could it possibly have been,
given that there was no plan at all?
(and still isn't)

> The voting figures were so close that David Cameron's statement "the
> British people have made a very clear decision" is, to me, complete
> nonsense.

Of course again.
Any way to get out of the mess will do, for him,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

It doesn't even have to be raining outside,

Jan

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 20:32:48 +0200, nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.

The Conservative (Tory) Party is already divided on Brexit.
The Labour Party is in a state of turmoil.

And:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/09/labour-tory-mps-talk

Tory and Labour MPs have held informal discussions about
establishing a new political party in the event of Andrea Leadsom
becoming prime minister and Jeremy Corbyn staying as Labour leader,
a cabinet minister has disclosed.

Senior players in the parties have discussed founding a new centrist
grouping in the mould of the Social Democratic party (SDP) [1]
should the two main parties polarise, according to the minister.
Talks should be taken seriously, though they are still at an early
stage, according to the source.

“There have been talks between Labour and Tory MPs about a new
party,” the minister said. “A number of my colleagues would not feel
comfortable in a party led by Andrea Leadsom.”

It is understood that MPs in both parties who campaigned to remain
in the European Union believe there is an opportunity to build on
the newly founded relationships between centrist MPs in both parties
made before the EU referendum.

[1] The SDP was a centrist party formed in 1988. It existed for two
years before entering into an alliance with the Liberal Party to form
the Social and Liberal Democrats (now known as the Liberal Democrats).

Even if the Conservative and Labour parties don't split, and no new
party comes into existence, the internal divisions are likely to be
there for years to come.

>
>> My description of what has happened so far is that the referendum was a
>> vote on the principle of Leaving or Remaining. It was not a vote for or
>> against a clearly-defined plan.
>
>How could it possibly have been,
>given that there was no plan at all?
>(and still isn't)
>
>> The voting figures were so close that David Cameron's statement "the
>> British people have made a very clear decision" is, to me, complete
>> nonsense.
>
>Of course again.
>Any way to get out of the mess will do, for him,
>
>Jan

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 15:23:11 +0100, Janet <nob...@home.com> wrote:

I'd be more cautious and say that the new PM will be engaged in
*negotiating* Brexit.

My prediction is that if the present level of division and disagreement
continues the government in power will find it necessary to have a
referendum to decide whether or not to accept the negotiated
arrangements for Brexit.

[Janet]

In article <lv47obl6vj8daobmn...@4ax.com>,
ma...@peterduncanson.net says...

Well, the EU insists there will be no negotiation until Britain invokes
Article 50 and once it does, there's no going back.

> My prediction is that if the present level of division and disagreement
> continues the government in power will find it necessary to have a
> referendum to decide whether or not to accept the negotiated
> arrangements for Brexit.

I don't think the EU will wear that.

Janet