Not bad from the Daily Smash really

[World's End Stella]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiYksyM7oPWAhVlKMAKHS8MCs4QFggpMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailymash.co.uk%2Fsport%2F sport-headlines%2Fanother-12-seasons-of-this-and-youre-fired-board-warns-wenger-20170210121905&usg=AFQjCNF8flTSacfofYbPqx_Ayuvbm8GXrA

[Burney]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiYksyM7oPWAhVlKMAKHS8MCs4QFggpMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailymash.co.uk%2Fsport%2F sport-headlines%2Fanother-12-seasons-of-this-and-youre-fired-board-warns-wenger-20170210121905&usg=AFQjCNF8flTSacfofYbPqx_Ayuvbm8GXrA

Given up on the Mash since it decided to turn itself into yet another mouthpiece for lefty wànkerdom.

[World's End Stella]

Given up on the Mash since it decided to turn itself into yet another mouthpiece for lefty wànkerdom.

I thought it took the p1ss out of pretty much everything, Corbyn seems to have been one of their favourite targets over the past year or so

[Burney]

I thought it took the p1ss out of pretty much everything, Corbyn seems to have been one of their favourite targets over the past year or so

Dunno. I stopped bothering with it when it took sides on Brexit. I understand that the TV series that has spun out of it is both awful and hugely left-biased.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Dunno. I stopped bothering with it when it took sides on Brexit. I understand that the TV series that has spun out of it is both awful and hugely left-biased.

It took sides on Brexit because it's a bloody stupid idea. Just like they (and Private Eye) would slag of the SNP and the Corbynistas and the Kippers for being jokes, of course the Mash is going to slag off the Brexit cock-ups.

Had we remained, the next big EU cock-up would have seen Mash stories with headlines like "Maybe Farrage had a point, thinks everyone.", wouldn't it?

But you sound rather like one of those Kippers, Scot Nats or Corbynistas Hislop slagged off for ditching their PE subs because they couldn't take it when the joke was on them.

The majority of this country voted for someone telling them they could have their cake and eat it and they could ignore all the experts saying it would be a fiasco cos the country has had enough of experts. So now it's turning out to be a fiasco, of course it's a subject for humour.

If you read the comments below the Times, many Brexiters still seem to think that Europe should be bowing down to us cos we're British, or that if they don't we'll just walk away and it will screw them, not us, and that it's completely unfair that the EU are putting the interests of their 27 member states' voters ahead of ours.

And if this is The Times, I dread to think what they are saying on the Mail.

If the govt of this once great country are so weak that they will allow our economic future to be trashed by a bunch of deluded ideologues, of course the Mash is gonna take the piss.

We have the most useless leadership in the two main parties that I can think of - and I've studied most periods since 1689. Even during Suez, for example, there were many real heavyweights in both parties who could have stepped in and saved things. (Mac did, for the Tories, anyway.)

Yet we invite the biggest political crisis in peacetime history - in part because the right wing press told them that they shouldn't vote against austerity in the election, but it was fine to use the referendum as a protest vote to do just that - with no plan what to do when the vote is leave, and with no politicians on either side capable of solving it.

And even if there were, that would be impossible because the parties (mostly Tories, but also Corbyn) and the voters (mostly Lab as Tory remainers have nowhere to go with Corbyn in charge of Lab) are split down the middle, so our parliamentary representative democracy fails us in the biggest way in our history.

We had coalitions in 1915, 1931 and 1940.

Peel split the Tories over Free Trade with the Corn Law repeal of 1846. Joe Chamberlain split the Libs over Irish Home Rule and then the Tories over free trade vs tariff reform. (And while I oppose JC on both, at least he thought what he was doing was in the genuine interests of the majority of the population as opposed to some personal obsession.)

But in both cases, the parties could split, reshape and reform.

Yet we don't have the heavyweights on either side to put country before party and to split the parties to save the country. We need a realignment but these 650 weaklings are putting their careers first.

So when we have such a big **** up, you really think they shouldn't take the piss simply because you personally are in favour of the **** up? We risk destroying our prosperity for good.

And when that happens, B, you'll have one half of the country knowing it was all the fault of the other half.

And the Brexit half, will they blame themselves? Or will they listen to some right wing populist and the press say that they have been stabbed in the back by traitors?

I know it's never happened here - one reason why we think ourselves superior to Jonny Continental - but do you really think that means it couldn't? Are we really immune to civil strife and extremism?

This isn't a crash affecting the whole world. Or imposed by a hostile power after defeat in war. And there won't be a way of recovering the prosperity we have simply thrown away. This will be knowing that GB alone will suffer, with no hope of recovery, because of how a small majority of the population voted - thinking that they could have their cake and eat it because we really are so much better to foreigners.

Yet you don't think the Mash should be taking the piss? When the country's on the brink of civil war between the party that wants the Brexit voters to take the biggest hit and some far right populists supported by the Mail banging on about Dolchstoß and traitors, I hope you don't think the Mash should remain quiet on that, too.

[Sir C]

It took sides on Brexit because it's a bloody stupid idea. Just like they (and Private Eye) would slag of the SNP and the Corbynistas and the Kippers for being jokes, of course the Mash is going to slag off the Brexit cock-ups.

Had we remained, the next big EU cock-up would have seen Mash stories with headlines like "Maybe Farrage had a point, thinks everyone.", wouldn't it?

But you sound rather like one of those Kippers, Scot Nats or Corbynistas Hislop slagged off for ditching their PE subs because they couldn't take it when the joke was on them.

The majority of this country voted for someone telling them they could have their cake and eat it and they could ignore all the experts saying it would be a fiasco cos the country has had enough of experts. So now it's turning out to be a fiasco, of course it's a subject for humour.

If you read the comments below the Times, many Brexiters still seem to think that Europe should be bowing down to us cos we're British, or that if they don't we'll just walk away and it will screw them, not us, and that it's completely unfair that the EU are putting the interests of their 27 member states' voters ahead of ours.

And if this is The Times, I dread to think what they are saying on the Mail.

If the govt of this once great country are so weak that they will allow our economic future to be trashed by a bunch of deluded ideologues, of course the Mash is gonna take the piss.

We have the most useless leadership in the two main parties that I can think of - and I've studied most periods since 1689. Even during Suez, for example, there were many real heavyweights in both parties who could have stepped in and saved things. (Mac did, for the Tories, anyway.)

Yet we invite the biggest political crisis in peacetime history - in part because the right wing press told them that they shouldn't vote against austerity in the election, but it was fine to use the referendum as a protest vote to do just that - with no plan what to do when the vote is leave, and with no politicians on either side capable of solving it.

And even if there were, that would be impossible because the parties (mostly Tories, but also Corbyn) and the voters (mostly Lab as Tory remainers have nowhere to go with Corbyn in charge of Lab) are split down the middle, so our parliamentary representative democracy fails us in the biggest way in our history.

We had coalitions in 1915, 1931 and 1940.

Peel split the Tories over Free Trade with the Corn Law repeal of 1846. Joe Chamberlain split the Libs over Irish Home Rule and then the Tories over free trade vs tariff reform. (And while I oppose JC on both, at least he thought what he was doing was in the genuine interests of the majority of the population as opposed to some personal obsession.)

But in both cases, the parties could split, reshape and reform.

Yet we don't have the heavyweights on either side to put country before party and to split the parties to save the country. We need a realignment but these 650 weaklings are putting their careers first.

So when we have such a big **** up, you really think they shouldn't take the piss simply because you personally are in favour of the **** up? We risk destroying our prosperity for good.

And when that happens, B, you'll have one half of the country knowing it was all the fault of the other half.

And the Brexit half, will they blame themselves? Or will they listen to some right wing populist and the press say that they have been stabbed in the back by traitors?

I know it's never happened here - one reason why we think ourselves superior to Jonny Continental - but do you really think that means it couldn't? Are we really immune to civil strife and extremism?

This isn't a crash affecting the whole world. Or imposed by a hostile power after defeat in war. And there won't be a way of recovering the prosperity we have simply thrown away. This will be knowing that GB alone will suffer, with no hope of recovery, because of how a small majority of the population voted - thinking that they could have their cake and eat it because we really are so much better to foreigners.

Yet you don't think the Mash should be taking the piss? When the country's on the brink of civil war between the party that wants the Brexit voters to take the biggest hit and some far right populists supported by the Mail banging on about Dolchstoß and traitors, I hope you don't think the Mash should remain quiet on that, too.

It'll all be fine, g, never fear.

[Burney]

It took sides on Brexit because it's a bloody stupid idea. Just like they (and Private Eye) would slag of the SNP and the Corbynistas and the Kippers for being jokes, of course the Mash is going to slag off the Brexit cock-ups.

Had we remained, the next big EU cock-up would have seen Mash stories with headlines like "Maybe Farrage had a point, thinks everyone.", wouldn't it?

But you sound rather like one of those Kippers, Scot Nats or Corbynistas Hislop slagged off for ditching their PE subs because they couldn't take it when the joke was on them.

The majority of this country voted for someone telling them they could have their cake and eat it and they could ignore all the experts saying it would be a fiasco cos the country has had enough of experts. So now it's turning out to be a fiasco, of course it's a subject for humour.

If you read the comments below the Times, many Brexiters still seem to think that Europe should be bowing down to us cos we're British, or that if they don't we'll just walk away and it will screw them, not us, and that it's completely unfair that the EU are putting the interests of their 27 member states' voters ahead of ours.

And if this is The Times, I dread to think what they are saying on the Mail.

If the govt of this once great country are so weak that they will allow our economic future to be trashed by a bunch of deluded ideologues, of course the Mash is gonna take the piss.

We have the most useless leadership in the two main parties that I can think of - and I've studied most periods since 1689. Even during Suez, for example, there were many real heavyweights in both parties who could have stepped in and saved things. (Mac did, for the Tories, anyway.)

Yet we invite the biggest political crisis in peacetime history - in part because the right wing press told them that they shouldn't vote against austerity in the election, but it was fine to use the referendum as a protest vote to do just that - with no plan what to do when the vote is leave, and with no politicians on either side capable of solving it.

And even if there were, that would be impossible because the parties (mostly Tories, but also Corbyn) and the voters (mostly Lab as Tory remainers have nowhere to go with Corbyn in charge of Lab) are split down the middle, so our parliamentary representative democracy fails us in the biggest way in our history.

We had coalitions in 1915, 1931 and 1940.

Peel split the Tories over Free Trade with the Corn Law repeal of 1846. Joe Chamberlain split the Libs over Irish Home Rule and then the Tories over free trade vs tariff reform. (And while I oppose JC on both, at least he thought what he was doing was in the genuine interests of the majority of the population as opposed to some personal obsession.)

But in both cases, the parties could split, reshape and reform.

Yet we don't have the heavyweights on either side to put country before party and to split the parties to save the country. We need a realignment but these 650 weaklings are putting their careers first.

So when we have such a big **** up, you really think they shouldn't take the piss simply because you personally are in favour of the **** up? We risk destroying our prosperity for good.

And when that happens, B, you'll have one half of the country knowing it was all the fault of the other half.

And the Brexit half, will they blame themselves? Or will they listen to some right wing populist and the press say that they have been stabbed in the back by traitors?

I know it's never happened here - one reason why we think ourselves superior to Jonny Continental - but do you really think that means it couldn't? Are we really immune to civil strife and extremism?

This isn't a crash affecting the whole world. Or imposed by a hostile power after defeat in war. And there won't be a way of recovering the prosperity we have simply thrown away. This will be knowing that GB alone will suffer, with no hope of recovery, because of how a small majority of the population voted - thinking that they could have their cake and eat it because we really are so much better to foreigners.

Yet you don't think the Mash should be taking the piss? When the country's on the brink of civil war between the party that wants the Brexit voters to take the biggest hit and some far right populists supported by the Mail banging on about Dolchstoß and traitors, I hope you don't think the Mash should remain quiet on that, too.

I do find it funny how you lefties care about 'prosperity' and the environment for business and corporatism all of a sudden. :hehe:

And what I object to is not the piss taking, it's the lazy, sneering, blinkered, ignorant, snobbish, reflexive, hysterical, dishonest and frankly humourless nature of it - all traits evident in your post and all too common among Remainers as a species.

[Sir C]

I do find it funny how you lefties care about 'prosperity' and the environment for business and corporatism all of a sudden. :hehe:

And what I object to is not the piss taking, it's the lazy, sneering, blinkered, ignorant, snobbish, reflexive, hysterical, dishonest and frankly humourless nature of it - all traits evident in your post and all too common among Remainers as a species.

That really was quite the rant, wasn't it?

Can there really be no hope of recovery? Ever? It sounds awfully serious, b. :-(

[redgunamo]

That really was quite the rant, wasn't it?

Can there really be no hope of recovery? Ever? It sounds awfully serious, b. :-(

Any recovery seems an awfully long way away right now, to be honest. French cider; very bad.

Also, one of my puppies chewed up my brand new Oakley's :-\

[Sir C]

Any recovery seems an awfully long way away right now, to be honest. French cider; very bad.

Also, one of my puppies chewed up my brand new Oakley's :-\

Ooh yes, it creeps up on you, French cider. I remember a peculiarly unpleasant incident in a galeterie in, of all places, Rocamadour.

Will you punish the errant hound, r?

[Burney]

That really was quite the rant, wasn't it?

Can there really be no hope of recovery? Ever? It sounds awfully serious, b. :-(

The hysteria is being ramped up again. Only out-and-out disaster will satisfy those who are outraged by the evil masses daring to defy them. Only by ascribing the greatest possible stupidity and basest possible motives to their opponents can they make sense of it. The alternative, of course, is having to countenance the possibility that there may be good, decent, honourable and rational reasons for voting Leave. And, since their entire identity is predicated upon being in sole possession of decency, honour and rationally that will never do.

[Burney]

Ooh yes, it creeps up on you, French cider. I remember a peculiarly unpleasant incident in a galeterie in, of all places, Rocamadour.

Will you punish the errant hound, r?

I rather like it - the Norman variety anyway. Bit sweet, maybe, but not bad.

[Sir C]

I rather like it - the Norman variety anyway. Bit sweet, maybe, but not bad.

It's the sweetness that lowers one's defences; one necks bowl after bowl of the wretched stuff and then, suddenly, BLAM! De Gaulle's revenge. Furthermore, a galette lacks the substance to soak up the alcohol.

All in all, a dangerous business.

[redgunamo]

Ooh yes, it creeps up on you, French cider. I remember a peculiarly unpleasant incident in a galeterie in, of all places, Rocamadour.

Will you punish the errant hound, r?

It certainly does. My father and I weren't quite ourselves for a few hours and unavailable for comment, but we are led to believe, rather too loudly and in an unnecessarily harsh tone of voice, I felt, that the crime-wave continued on into the evening and involved, among other items, a family-sized suckling pig and a lady's hat.

Thing is, punishing salukis is simply not done; their persons are sacred, a gift from Allah. That's why the world is in such a mess, I suppose :-\

[Burney]

It certainly does. My father and I weren't quite ourselves for a few hours and unavailable for comment, but we are led to believe, rather too loudly and in an unnecessarily harsh tone of voice, I felt, that the crime-wave continued on into the evening and involved, among other items, a family-sized suckling pig and a lady's hat.

Thing is, punishing salukis is simply not done; their persons are sacred, a gift from Allah. That's why the world is in such a mess, I suppose :-\

I assume you put the hat on the pig?

[redgunamo]

I assume you put the hat on the pig?

The pig was gone. Hounds don't mess about when there's stolen roast pork going. And to Pluto with the hat, probably the mother-in-law's.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

I do find it funny how you lefties care about 'prosperity' and the environment for business and corporatism all of a sudden. :hehe:

And what I object to is not the piss taking, it's the lazy, sneering, blinkered, ignorant, snobbish, reflexive, hysterical, dishonest and frankly humourless nature of it - all traits evident in your post and all too common among Remainers as a species.

Come on, B, I've always been one of those centre-lefties who wants growth as high as poss to raise tax revenue to help the disadvantaged.

No point in bringing everyone down to equality in poverty.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

That really was quite the rant, wasn't it?

Can there really be no hope of recovery? Ever? It sounds awfully serious, b. :-(

No, C. I'm only ranting 2 things really.

1. It could be the case that we become poorer than we would have been had we stayed and we never get back to where we would have been. eg that our GDP per capita drops from French towards Spanish levels and then never ever gets back to equality with France. This is a possibility.

2. It could be the case that the country is too divided to fix, especially with these spineless ****wits on both sides of the HoC. We could have some form of civil strife as one half of the country blames the other for the **** up, and we could have extremist populists telling the Brexiters that it's not their fault that they are poorer, it's because they've been stabbed in the back by traitors a bit like Germans after WW1.

While 2 is still far, far less likely than 1, it is an outside possibility which should be considered.

[AFC East]

Given up on the Mash since it decided to turn itself into yet another mouthpiece for lefty wànkerdom.


Seriously? It's not Private Eye ffs. You're missing out on some Corbyn gold.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

The alternative, of course, is having to countenance the possibility that there may be good, decent, honourable and rational reasons for voting Leave. And, since their entire identity is predicated upon being in sole possession of decency, honour and rationally that will never do.

Yes there could. And if you are one of those, fine. If you care so much about sovereignty or the wrongs of the EU that you are prepared to see the nation become poorer in exchange for leaving, then fine. You were given the choice to vote for that and you have.

But there are a lot of people who aren't as bright, who believed the *******s about having your cake and eating it etc, who didn't vote to make themselves poorer and are going to be shocked if this comes to pass.

One sister-in-law in Cornwall is lovely but not the best educated. She doesn't even understand what taxes go on, for example. She didn't realise that Cornwall was a net EU beneficiary, and when arguing with my beloved (her sister) some months back, while it's dawning on her now that things may not be the milk and honey promised, she's convinced herself that Brexit will only hurt the London economy, not Cornwall's. {This is when my babe asked her about damaging the City and all the taxes they pay, and sis-in-law asked what taxes get spent on.}

She's not a racist, has no problem with immigrants as there aren't any down there, and doesn't even know what sovereignty means or what the ECJ is.

But she was voting out.

Why? In her words "To **** the lot of them."

Her seat is a safe Tory one. This was her one chance, in her mind, to have her voice heard and she was just going to tell all of them to get screwed.

That is what the vote meant to her, and her vote counts just as much as yours and mine despite the different level of analysis behind our respective decisions.

You have to accept that there are many voters like this, and that if we get poorer, a lot poorer, they won't blame themselves for not having researched it enough. Someone will have cheated them.

As I say, all this is a hypothetical discussion predicated on the assumption that we do become noticeably poorer, which is a possibility.

[redgunamo]

Yes there could. And if you are one of those, fine. If you care so much about sovereignty or the wrongs of the EU that you are prepared to see the nation become poorer in exchange for leaving, then fine. You were given the choice to vote for that and you have.

But there are a lot of people who aren't as bright, who believed the *******s about having your cake and eating it etc, who didn't vote to make themselves poorer and are going to be shocked if this comes to pass.

One sister-in-law in Cornwall is lovely but not the best educated. She doesn't even understand what taxes go on, for example. She didn't realise that Cornwall was a net EU beneficiary, and when arguing with my beloved (her sister) some months back, while it's dawning on her now that things may not be the milk and honey promised, she's convinced herself that Brexit will only hurt the London economy, not Cornwall's. {This is when my babe asked her about damaging the City and all the taxes they pay, and sis-in-law asked what taxes get spent on.}

She's not a racist, has no problem with immigrants as there aren't any down there, and doesn't even know what sovereignty means or what the ECJ is.

But she was voting out.

Why? In her words "To **** the lot of them."

Her seat is a safe Tory one. This was her one chance, in her mind, to have her voice heard and she was just going to tell all of them to get screwed.

That is what the vote meant to her, and her vote counts just as much as yours and mine despite the different level of analysis behind our respective decisions.

You have to accept that there are many voters like this, and that if we get poorer, a lot poorer, they won't blame themselves for not having researched it enough. Someone will have cheated them.

As I say, all this is a hypothetical discussion predicated on the assumption that we do become noticeably poorer, which is a possibility.

No, people just need to get a job, imo.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

No, people just need to get a job, imo.

She's got a job. She's good at it. She runs the nautical college canteen. But among the 52% who voted out I guess there were quite a few who voted simply to say **** you to the "elite"/"establishment"/"them".

They didn't realise how serious this could be. Not at all. I don't think any of us did. I didn't think about things like Euratom or science funding or that car components can go back and forth across the channel 190 times during manufacture. Or that we don't have the space to check all the lorries going through Dover.

It also really worries me because the only papers that are covering the negative economic consequences are behind a paywall. The Times and Economist (which I have logins for) and apparently the FT (which I don't.)

The graun is only dealing with the social side - we must take the immigrants to show how PC we are. Only the Times et al are saying we need the immigrants or we'll all be skint.

Unless you read those papers, you won't have much idea how badly this is turning out if you're a leave voter. The pro-Brexit press ignores all this and Brexiters don't share this stuff with each other on social media.

This is why it shocks me that so many intelligent Brexiters still think all is gonna be fine. Because the Times are reporting daily on all the econ consequences. With the Beeb cowed into submission and the Graun only caring about identity politics and being right on, most people are stuck in their social media echo chambers.

This new media has really divided people. I don't like it. Half the country don't realise the economic crisis we face, well a lot more actually, most Graun readers aren't aware of the economics, perhaps because they don't like supporting business as Berni suggested.

We're risking screwing the country and most people don't know.

[Sir C]

No, C. I'm only ranting 2 things really.

1. It could be the case that we become poorer than we would have been had we stayed and we never get back to where we would have been. eg that our GDP per capita drops from French towards Spanish levels and then never ever gets back to equality with France. This is a possibility.

2. It could be the case that the country is too divided to fix, especially with these spineless ****wits on both sides of the HoC. We could have some form of civil strife as one half of the country blames the other for the **** up, and we could have extremist populists telling the Brexiters that it's not their fault that they are poorer, it's because they've been stabbed in the back by traitors a bit like Germans after WW1.

While 2 is still far, far less likely than 1, it is an outside possibility which should be considered.

To be honest, I'm all in favour of a bit of civil strife. The feckless left is out of control and there appears to be no brake on the advance of toxic identity politics; we live in an age where thoughtcrime is within touching distance.

In short, a civil war is the only thing which can save our society and culture.

[dismalswamp]

Given up on the Mash since it decided to turn itself into yet another mouthpiece for lefty wànkerdom.

Agreed. Its lefty anti brexit anti Trump *******s ruined it. Shame really.

[redgunamo]

She's got a job. She's good at it. She runs the nautical college canteen. But among the 52% who voted out I guess there were quite a few who voted simply to say **** you to the "elite"/"establishment"/"them".

They didn't realise how serious this could be. Not at all. I don't think any of us did. I didn't think about things like Euratom or science funding or that car components can go back and forth across the channel 190 times during manufacture. Or that we don't have the space to check all the lorries going through Dover.

It also really worries me because the only papers that are covering the negative economic consequences are behind a paywall. The Times and Economist (which I have logins for) and apparently the FT (which I don't.)

The graun is only dealing with the social side - we must take the immigrants to show how PC we are. Only the Times et al are saying we need the immigrants or we'll all be skint.

Unless you read those papers, you won't have much idea how badly this is turning out if you're a leave voter. The pro-Brexit press ignores all this and Brexiters don't share this stuff with each other on social media.

This is why it shocks me that so many intelligent Brexiters still think all is gonna be fine. Because the Times are reporting daily on all the econ consequences. With the Beeb cowed into submission and the Graun only caring about identity politics and being right on, most people are stuck in their social media echo chambers.

This new media has really divided people. I don't like it. Half the country don't realise the economic crisis we face, well a lot more actually, most Graun readers aren't aware of the economics, perhaps because they don't like supporting business as Berni suggested.

We're risking screwing the country and most people don't know.

If you have a job then there's no worries, is there. Don't be greedy :-)