With his final move he stabbed the knife in the backs of anybody who was waiting to stab him. It's amazing.
Think it was as much revenge for the backstabbing against him in the first place.
With his final move he stabbed the knife in the backs of anybody who was waiting to stab him. It's amazing.
Well May (or rather the party's strategy team) has already proven herself to be incredibly astute. Labour need to get their **** together sharpish.
Has she kept Corbyn on as chief Labour destroyer?
Total offtopic, but I've been following US elections pretty closely this year, and I came to the conclusion that US political system must have been designed by Mr. Bean while on LSD.
First, with presidential nominations technically the voters choose the candidate for each party, but in practice a bunch of unelected officials hold a swing vote. Okay.
Next, lobbying is not only legal but done quite openly, and corporations can legally buy politicians by funding their campaigns. The explanation seems to be that not allowing corporations to fund the campaigns would limit free speech. I'm not quite sure why exactly Microsoft or Chevrolet should have the right to free speech.
Also, apparently each state uses different way to count votes and they have some elaborate registration process before you're allowed to vote. Somehow in 2016 they don't have the technical capability to just have a list of people who are eligible.
Then you have Gore vs. Bush nonsense, where guy with less votes somehow ended up winning.
The weirdest thing though, is American Supreme Court. So they have 9 guys, hand picked by president and holding their position for life, who can knock down any and all legislation, or effectively make their own legislation by creating precedents. The only way to bypass that is to amend the constitution. So essentially, the highest power is in the hands of people who are not only unelected, but completely unremovable. One of the current judges has been appointed by Ronald Reagan, I **** you not.
This is galactic level of ****** up, and I'm probably only scratching the surface. How can people just idly accept that is mind boggling, heads would be on the pikes if you tried to institute a system like that in Europe.
Not gonna disagree with most of what you said, but it's not free speech when you start pick and choosing who has it and not (even if they are nasty evil corporations)
The bigger issue for me is how Americans - republicans in particular - can be so steadfastly resolute in their defence of liberty when it comes to certain issues i.e. guns, but happy to take people's liberty when it comes to things like abortion and spying on citizens. They're not even that big on free speech, they have a few random censorship laws IIRC.
Well, Google isn't a person nor it is eligible to vote, so how can it have the right to free speech?
I don't see any problem if Google's CEO and board of directors want to personally endorse a politician. They're not entities, they're people. But of course they're not going to do that, because it would aggregate their consumer base, while handing a politician a warchest for the campaign carries no such risks. Seems to me more like legalized bribery than executing the rights to free spech.
Yeah American fixation about liberty is always amusing. It's 2016, similar freedoms are probably in well over 50 countries, you'd think they'd figure out it's time to change a tune a little bit.