So if someone suggests that senior judges' political affiliations may be problematic

[Burney]

in relation to a particular judgment, umpteen bien pensant voices pop up to tell them they're undermining the foundations of our democracy and are basically a Nazi.

But it emerges that a pro-EU PM actively seeks to get a senior newspaper editor sacked because his views on the EU are inconvenient and the same people seem strangely unbothered.

Odd. :rubchin:

[Sir C]

in relation to a particular judgment, umpteen bien pensant voices pop up to tell them they're undermining the foundations of our democracy and are basically Nazis.

But it emerges that a pro-EU PM actively seeks to get a senior newspaper editor sacked because his views on the EU are inconvenient and the same people seem strangely unbothered.

Odd. :rubchin:

Oddly, in the States it appears to be accepted wisdom that senior judges' political affiliations are of the utmost importance. This is also odd.

[Burney]

Oddly, in the States it appears to be accepted wisdom that senior judges' political affiliations are of the utmost importance. This is also odd.

I pointed this out at the time, but got 'Ah, but that's America. OUR judges are superhuman types who would never dream of allowing their political feelings to affect a judgment'. :hehe:

I don't know whether the legal profession's apparently child-like faith in their own capacity for disinterest is real or whether they just think the rest of us are stupid enough to believe it. Either way, it's pretty funny - as is the left's sudden hard-on for the rectitude and incorruptibility of our judiciary.

[Ash]

in relation to a particular judgment, umpteen bien pensant voices pop up to tell them they're undermining the foundations of our democracy and are basically a Nazi.

Democracy no longer means rule by the demos. Get with the script. It now means rule by judges.


But it emerges that a pro-EU PM actively seeks to get a senior newspaper editor sacked because his views on the EU are inconvenient and the same people seem strangely unbothered.


What's this?

[Burney]

Democracy no longer means rule by the demos. Get with the script. It now means rule by judges.



What's this?

Yes, I suppose one should expect no better from those happy to be ruled by unelected, unaccountable technocrats, really.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/…

[Ash]

Yes, I suppose one should expect no better from those happy to be ruled by unelected, unaccountable technocrats, really.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/…

LInk doesn't work but I found the story.
---
A spokesman for Cameron said: “It is wrong to suggest that David Cameron believed he could determine who edits the Daily Mail. It is a matter of public record that he made the case that it was wrong for newspapers to argue that we give up our membership of the EU."
---

So Cameroon denies trying to get Dacre sacked, but just expects all newspapers to toe the line.

That's ok then.

[Burney]

LInk doesn't work but I found the story.
---
A spokesman for Cameron said: “It is wrong to suggest that David Cameron believed he could determine who edits the Daily Mail. It is a matter of public record that he made the case that it was wrong for newspapers to argue that we give up our membership of the EU."
---

So Cameroon denies trying to get Dacre sacked, but just expects all newspapers to toe the line.

That's ok then.

Actually, that isn't a denial at all. It's essentially an admission that he did have a word with Lord Rothermere to that effect, but that Rothermere to his credit told him to fück off in no uncertain terms.