Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.usage.english > #681228 > unrolled thread

Election news

Back to article view | Back to alt.usage.english

Contents

  Election news Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 01:17 -0400
    Re: Election news Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> - 2017-06-09 08:09 +0200
    Re: Election news occam <occam@127.0.0.1> - 2017-06-09 10:54 +0200
    Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-09 13:39 +0200
      Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-10 09:51 +0200
    Re: Election news the Omrud <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 14:09 +0100
      Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-09 06:30 -0700
        Re: Election news Katy Jennison <katy@spamtrap.kjennison.com> - 2017-06-09 15:12 +0100
          Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-09 16:34 +0200
            Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-09 08:09 -0700
              Re: Election news Harrison Hill <harrisonhill2345@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 08:46 -0700
                Re: Election news the Omrud <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 16:50 +0100
                  Re: Election news Harrison Hill <harrisonhill2345@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 08:51 -0700
                    Re: Election news Harrison Hill <harrisonhill2345@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 08:53 -0700
                      Re: Election news the Omrud <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 17:07 +0100
                        Re: Election news Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2017-06-12 02:32 +1000
                Re: Election news Jack Campin <bogus@purr.demon.co.uk> - 2017-06-09 17:45 +0100
                  Re: Election news Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2017-06-12 02:42 +1000
                Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-09 09:53 -0700
          Re: Election news Jack Campin <bogus@purr.demon.co.uk> - 2017-06-09 16:28 +0100
          Re: Election news "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <mail@peterduncanson.net> - 2017-06-09 17:22 +0100
            Re: Election news LFS <lauraDRAGON.spira@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 18:02 +0100
              Re: Election news "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <mail@peterduncanson.net> - 2017-06-09 18:54 +0100
                Re: Election news HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> - 2017-06-10 20:12 +0100
          Re: Election news the Omrud <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 12:24 +0100
            Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-11 11:04 +0200
          Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-10 06:42 -0700
            Re: Election news HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> - 2017-06-10 18:38 +0100
              Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-10 15:19 -0700
                Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-10 22:31 -0700
              Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-11 11:04 +0200
                Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-11 05:33 -0700
                  Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-11 17:34 +0200
                    Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-11 10:33 -0700
                    Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-11 10:37 -0700
                    Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-11 20:54 +0200
                Re: Election news Richard Yates <richard@yatesguitar.com> - 2017-06-11 06:27 -0700
                Re: Election news David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-06-11 09:49 -0700
              Re: Election news HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> - 2017-06-11 14:28 +0100
                Re: Election news Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2017-06-12 23:44 +1000
              Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-11 10:43 -0700
              Re: Election news Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2017-06-12 21:50 +1000
                Re: Election news Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2017-06-12 07:46 -0500
                  Re: Election news Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2017-06-12 23:35 +1000
                Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-12 06:16 -0700
                Re: Election news "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-12 19:57 -0700
          Re: Election news occam <occam@127.0.0.1> - 2017-06-10 23:12 +0200
          Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-11 11:04 +0200
            Re: Election news nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2017-06-11 17:34 +0200
            Re: Election news Jack Campin <bogus@purr.demon.co.uk> - 2017-06-11 17:28 +0100
      Re: Election news Quinn C <lispamateur@crommatograph.info> - 2017-06-09 13:13 -0400

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#681349

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:12:36 +0100, Katy Jennison
<katy@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:

>On 09/06/2017 14:30, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 9:09:06 AM UTC-4, the Omrud wrote:
>>
>>> We went to vote yesterday afternoon.  As we collected our ballot papers,
>>> the lady (perhaps 80 years old) who had been ahead of us returned to the
>>> desk to post her paper in the box.  She addressed us directly with some
>>> emphasis and entirely seriously: "I hope we don't get a Communist
>>> government.  We'll have Putin running things soon".
>>>
>>> We stepped sideways and got on withour own voting.
>>
>> Well, nearly ... the BBC World Service just said that May has turned to an obscure
>> Northern Ireland party with 10 seats to make her "ruling coalition."
>>
>
>"Obscure" in the sense of "dark, dim; gloomy, dismal" and 
>"unenlightened, benighted" (OED).  According to one blog (and I've no 
>reason to think it exaggerates by much) the DUP's opinions apparently 
>include:
>
>Abortion should be “ruled out for rape victims”
>The Pope is the Anti-Christ
>Gay couples “more likely to abuse children”
>“Homosexuality is an abomination”
>No gay marriage
>“Gays more vile than child abusers”
>Attempts to reduce CO2 emissions are “Green propaganda”
>Claims that fossil fuels will run out are “nonsense”
>“Man-made climate change is a con”
>Creationism should be “taught in every school”
>Removal of evolutionary teaching from the curriculum
>The 60 million-year-old Giant’s Causeway is only 6,000 years old
>Line dancing is “sinful”
>
Those opinions/beliefs may be held by some members and supporters of the
DUP however their election manifesto mentions only one or two of them.

I recognise several of those quoted opinions as having been expressed by
individuals rather than by the party as a whole.

My impression is that the DUP will not attempt to impose the religious
beliefs of its more fundamentalist Christian members on the whole of the
UK. 

Also, I think that the party's supporters and those who voted for it
have a broader range of attitudes and beliefs.

>(From 
>https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/desperate-theresa-may-gets-into-bed-with-barmy-extremist-dup-to-hang-onto-power/)

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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681354

On 09/06/2017 17:22, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:12:36 +0100, Katy Jennison
> <katy@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 09/06/2017 14:30, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 9:09:06 AM UTC-4, the Omrud wrote:
>>>
>>>> We went to vote yesterday afternoon.  As we collected our ballot papers,
>>>> the lady (perhaps 80 years old) who had been ahead of us returned to the
>>>> desk to post her paper in the box.  She addressed us directly with some
>>>> emphasis and entirely seriously: "I hope we don't get a Communist
>>>> government.  We'll have Putin running things soon".
>>>>
>>>> We stepped sideways and got on withour own voting.
>>>
>>> Well, nearly ... the BBC World Service just said that May has turned to an obscure
>>> Northern Ireland party with 10 seats to make her "ruling coalition."
>>>
>>
>> "Obscure" in the sense of "dark, dim; gloomy, dismal" and
>> "unenlightened, benighted" (OED).  According to one blog (and I've no
>> reason to think it exaggerates by much) the DUP's opinions apparently
>> include:
>>
>> Abortion should be “ruled out for rape victims”
>> The Pope is the Anti-Christ
>> Gay couples “more likely to abuse children”
>> “Homosexuality is an abomination”
>> No gay marriage
>> “Gays more vile than child abusers”
>> Attempts to reduce CO2 emissions are “Green propaganda”
>> Claims that fossil fuels will run out are “nonsense”
>> “Man-made climate change is a con”
>> Creationism should be “taught in every school”
>> Removal of evolutionary teaching from the curriculum
>> The 60 million-year-old Giant’s Causeway is only 6,000 years old
>> Line dancing is “sinful”
>>
> Those opinions/beliefs may be held by some members and supporters of the
> DUP however their election manifesto mentions only one or two of them.
> 
> I recognise several of those quoted opinions as having been expressed by
> individuals rather than by the party as a whole.
> 
> My impression is that the DUP will not attempt to impose the religious
> beliefs of its more fundamentalist Christian members on the whole of the
> UK.
> 
> Also, I think that the party's supporters and those who voted for it
> have a broader range of attitudes and beliefs.
> 
>> (From
>> https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/desperate-theresa-may-gets-into-bed-with-barmy-extremist-dup-to-hang-onto-power/)
> 

But Arlene Foster looks as if she could be a bloody difficult woman, to 
coin a phrase.

-- 
Laura (emulate St George for email)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681367

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 18:02:02 +0100, LFS <lauraDRAGON.spira@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 09/06/2017 17:22, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:12:36 +0100, Katy Jennison
>> <katy@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 09/06/2017 14:30, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 9:09:06 AM UTC-4, the Omrud wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We went to vote yesterday afternoon.  As we collected our ballot papers,
>>>>> the lady (perhaps 80 years old) who had been ahead of us returned to the
>>>>> desk to post her paper in the box.  She addressed us directly with some
>>>>> emphasis and entirely seriously: "I hope we don't get a Communist
>>>>> government.  We'll have Putin running things soon".
>>>>>
>>>>> We stepped sideways and got on withour own voting.
>>>>
>>>> Well, nearly ... the BBC World Service just said that May has turned to an obscure
>>>> Northern Ireland party with 10 seats to make her "ruling coalition."
>>>>
>>>
>>> "Obscure" in the sense of "dark, dim; gloomy, dismal" and
>>> "unenlightened, benighted" (OED).  According to one blog (and I've no
>>> reason to think it exaggerates by much) the DUP's opinions apparently
>>> include:
>>>
>>> Abortion should be “ruled out for rape victims”
>>> The Pope is the Anti-Christ
>>> Gay couples “more likely to abuse children”
>>> “Homosexuality is an abomination”
>>> No gay marriage
>>> “Gays more vile than child abusers”
>>> Attempts to reduce CO2 emissions are “Green propaganda”
>>> Claims that fossil fuels will run out are “nonsense”
>>> “Man-made climate change is a con”
>>> Creationism should be “taught in every school”
>>> Removal of evolutionary teaching from the curriculum
>>> The 60 million-year-old Giant’s Causeway is only 6,000 years old
>>> Line dancing is “sinful”
>>>
>> Those opinions/beliefs may be held by some members and supporters of the
>> DUP however their election manifesto mentions only one or two of them.
>> 
>> I recognise several of those quoted opinions as having been expressed by
>> individuals rather than by the party as a whole.
>> 
>> My impression is that the DUP will not attempt to impose the religious
>> beliefs of its more fundamentalist Christian members on the whole of the
>> UK.
>> 
>> Also, I think that the party's supporters and those who voted for it
>> have a broader range of attitudes and beliefs.
>> 
>>> (From
>>> https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/desperate-theresa-may-gets-into-bed-with-barmy-extremist-dup-to-hang-onto-power/)
>> 
>
>But Arlene Foster looks as if she could be a bloody difficult woman, to 
>coin a phrase.

That's putting it politely.

I'm not sure what her role will be. She is leader of the DUP but not an
MP. One of the 10 MPs, Nigel Dodds, is deputy leader of the party.


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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681532

On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 19:15:14 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" 
<mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 18:54:29 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
> <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:


> >On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 18:02:02 +0100, LFS 
<lauraDRAGON.spira@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On 09/06/2017 17:22, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:12:36 +0100, Katy Jennison
> >>> <katy@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> On 09/06/2017 14:30, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 9:09:06 AM UTC-4, the Omrud wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> We went to vote yesterday afternoon.  As we collected our 
ballot papers,
> >>>>>> the lady (perhaps 80 years old) who had been ahead of us 
returned to the
> >>>>>> desk to post her paper in the box.  She addressed us 
directly with some
> >>>>>> emphasis and entirely seriously: "I hope we don't get a 
Communist
> >>>>>> government.  We'll have Putin running things soon".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We stepped sideways and got on withour own voting.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Well, nearly ... the BBC World Service just said that May has 
turned to an obscure
> >>>>> Northern Ireland party with 10 seats to make her "ruling 
coalition."
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> "Obscure" in the sense of "dark, dim; gloomy, dismal" and
> >>>> "unenlightened, benighted" (OED).  According to one blog (and 
I've no
> >>>> reason to think it exaggerates by much) the DUP's opinions 
apparently
> >>>> include:
> >>>>
> >>>> Abortion should be ?uled out for rape victims?
> >>>> The Pope is the Anti-Christ
> >>>> Gay couples ?ore likely to abuse children?
> >>>> ?omosexuality is an abomination?
> >>>> No gay marriage
> >>>> ?ays more vile than child abusers?
> >>>> Attempts to reduce CO2 emissions are ?reen propaganda?
> >>>> Claims that fossil fuels will run out are ?onsense?
> >>>> ?an-made climate change is a con?
> >>>> Creationism should be ?aught in every school?
> >>>> Removal of evolutionary teaching from the curriculum
> >>>> The 60 million-year-old Giant? Causeway is only 6,000 years old
> >>>> Line dancing is ?inful?
> >>>>
> >>> Those opinions/beliefs may be held by some members and 
supporters of the
> >>> DUP however their election manifesto mentions only one or two 
of them.
> >>> 
> >>> I recognise several of those quoted opinions as having been 
expressed by
> >>> individuals rather than by the party as a whole.
> >>> 
> >>> My impression is that the DUP will not attempt to impose the 
religious
> >>> beliefs of its more fundamentalist Christian members on the 
whole of the
> >>> UK.
> >>> 
> >>> Also, I think that the party's supporters and those who voted 
for it
> >>> have a broader range of attitudes and beliefs.
> >>> 
> >>>> (From
> >>>> 
https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/desperate-theresa-may-gets-in
to-bed-with-barmy-extremist-dup-to-hang-onto-power/)
> >>> 
> >>
> >>But Arlene Foster looks as if she could be a bloody difficult 
woman, to 
> >>coin a phrase.
> >
> >That's putting it politely.
> >
> >I'm not sure what her role will be. She is leader of the DUP but 
not an
> >MP. One of the 10 MPs, Nigel Dodds, is deputy leader of the party.


> Current news reports say that The DUP with support the Conservative
> government on a "confidence and supply" basis.

That's what was initially reported, but I'm fairly sure that today's 
news was that the Conservative chief whip has gone to NI to negotiate 
a full, formal coalition. 

-explanation snipped

> So if this agreement goes ahead, the DUP MPs will vote with the
> Conservative party in the House of Commons in votes of 
no-confidence in
> the government and when Bills authorising taxation and expenditure 
are
> voted on.

-- 
Cheers, Harvey 
CanE (30 years) & BrE (34 years),
indiscriminately mixed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681466

On 10/06/2017 12:18, Janet wrote:
> In article <eq1slmFu5m0U1@mid.individual.net>, g.davie@btinternet.com
> says...
>>
>> The leader of the Scottish Conservatives (a gay woman) has been assured
>> by Theresa May that gay rights will not be eroded in return for DUP
>> support.
>
>    Anything is up for grabs now. Give the dust time to settle, and Ruth
> Davidson will soon be the new Conservative PM in Westminster; where
> she'll not need the DUP because she'll have done a deal with Nicola and
> the SNP.

Don't get my hopes up ...

-- 
David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681596

Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:

> On 2017-06-10 11:24:00 +0000, the Omrud said:
> 
> > On 10/06/2017 12:18, Janet wrote:
> >> In article <eq1slmFu5m0U1@mid.individual.net>, g.davie@btinternet.com
> >> says...
> >>> 
> >>> The leader of the Scottish Conservatives (a gay woman) has been assured
> >>> by Theresa May that gay rights will not be eroded in return for DUP
> >>> support.
> >> 
> >> Anything is up for grabs now. Give the dust time to settle, and Ruth
> >> Davidson will soon be the new Conservative PM in Westminster; where
> >> she'll not need the DUP because she'll have done a deal with Nicola and
> >> the SNP.
> > 
> > Don't get my hopes up ...
> 
> Too late: I'd already got mine up.

Let me guess, you have a hot air balloon?

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681488

On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 5:32:42 AM UTC-4, GordonD wrote:

> The leader of the Scottish Conservatives (a gay woman) has been assured
> by Theresa May that gay rights will not be eroded in return for DUP
> support.

Is her word any more trustworthy than her idol Trump's? He finally got around 
to putting forth his "trillion-dollar infrastructure proposal" (not, actually, 
much of an increase above current levels; such "proposals" are usually given 
in terms of ten years of spending, but something Democrats expected to be 
able to enthusiastically support) -- and it is now a $200 billion proposal.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681516

On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:17:22 +0100, Janet <nobody@home.com> wrote:
> In article <cdf3ddfd-7316-4b0c-96a5-a9e78513303e@googlegroups.com>, 
> grammatim@verizon.net says...
> > 
> > On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 5:32:42 AM UTC-4, GordonD wrote:
> > 
> > > The leader of the Scottish Conservatives (a gay woman) has been 
assured
> > > by Theresa May that gay rights will not be eroded in return for 
DUP
> > > support.
> > 
> > Is her word any more trustworthy than her idol Trump's? 


>   Posturing on both sides. Both May and Davidson know perfectly 
well 
> that in England, Wales and Scotland gay rights, gay marriage etc 
already 
> have legislated protection, safely beyond reach of the DUP's 
influence.


> (Ditto, abortion rights in ESW).

I'd agree that abortion rights are protected by legislation, but I 
wouldn't rule out the Tory wingnut brigade joining with the DUP to 
press for changes to the regulations which implement that legislation 
- reducing time limits, requiring mandatory counselling by services 
run by faith groups, setting up vexatious and expensive vetting 
systems for information leaflets, etc.

-- 
Cheers, Harvey 
CanE (30 years) & BrE (34 years),
indiscriminately mixed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681545

On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 4:32:22 PM UTC-4, PeterWD wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 19:36:42 +0100, Janet <nobody@home.com> wrote:
> 
> >In article <almarsoft.3226757483166972057@news.albasani.net>, 
> >usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk says...
> >
> >Janet wrote
> >> >   Posturing on both sides. Both May and Davidson know perfectly 
> >> well 
> >> > that in England, Wales and Scotland gay rights, gay marriage etc 
> >> already 
> >> > have legislated protection, safely beyond reach of the DUP's 
> >> influence.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> > (Ditto, abortion rights in ESW).
> >> 
> >> I'd agree that abortion rights are protected by legislation, but I 
> >> wouldn't rule out the Tory wingnut brigade joining with the DUP to 
> >> press for changes to the regulations which implement that legislation 
> >> - reducing time limits, requiring mandatory counselling by services 
> >> run by faith groups, setting up vexatious and expensive vetting 
> >> systems for information leaflets, etc.
> >
> >  That's been attempted several times in the 50 years since the 1967  
> >Abortion Act, and each attempt was defeated in Parliament, by 
> >substantially more than the 10 votes held by the DUP.
> >
> >  http://www.abortionreview.org/index.php/site/article/219/
> >
> >    Janet. 
> 
> Quite. The DUP MPs are not some recent addition to Parliament. They've
> been there for years.
> 
> The primary motive for supporting the Tory government was been reported:
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/09/theresa-may-reaches-deal-with-dup-to-form-government-after-shock-election-result-northern-ireland
> 
>     DUP figures insist their relationship with May’s team has been close
>     since she became prime minister 11 months ago, and that late-night
>     talks had been driven by their dismay at the possibility of Jeremy
>     Corbyn becoming prime minister.
>     
>     A DUP source said: “We want there to be a government. We have worked
>     well with May. The alternative is intolerable. For as long as Corbyn
>     leads Labour, we will ensure there’s a Tory PM.”
>     
>     It has been reported that the two parties do not believe it
>     necessary to enter a formal coalition to govern.
>     
>     Senior DUP figures claimed they moved quickly to form an agreement
>     to stop any chance of Corbyn entering No 10.
>     
>     “The two parties [Labour and DUP] have worked well together for two
>     years. There’s no reason to suppose they won’t continue to do so in
>     future. But the point made time after time to Labour MPs remains:
>     for as long as you allow yourselves to be led by an IRA cheerleader,
>     you exclude yourselves from entering No 10,” said a DUP source.
>     
>     The DUP’s “price” for propping up a new Tory government will include
>     a promise that there will be no separate post-Brexit status for
>     Northern Ireland, the party’s leader in Westminster has confirmed.
>     
>     Nigel Dodds, re-elected as MP for Belfast North, said that among the
>     DUP’s conditions would be an insistence that there be no deal that
>     would keep the region with one foot still in the EU.
>     
>     The DUP fears that separate status after Brexit – a key demand of
>     Sinn Féin – would decouple Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.
> 
> All other matters are secondary.

On NPR this evening, a Professor Scully (or perhaps Scollay) of Cardiff said 
that if DUP becomes part of the Government, it will mean the end to the entire 
peace process on the island of Ireland that has been working rather well the 
last few decades.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681583

On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 7:27:45 PM UTC-4, PeterWD wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 15:19:50 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> >On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 4:32:22 PM UTC-4, PeterWD wrote:
> >> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 19:36:42 +0100, Janet <nobody@home.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article <almarsoft.3226757483166972057@news.albasani.net>, 
> >> >usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk says...
> >> >
> >> >Janet wrote
> >> >> >   Posturing on both sides. Both May and Davidson know perfectly 
> >> >> well 
> >> >> > that in England, Wales and Scotland gay rights, gay marriage etc 
> >> >> already 
> >> >> > have legislated protection, safely beyond reach of the DUP's 
> >> >> influence.
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >> > (Ditto, abortion rights in ESW).
> >> >> 
> >> >> I'd agree that abortion rights are protected by legislation, but I 
> >> >> wouldn't rule out the Tory wingnut brigade joining with the DUP to 
> >> >> press for changes to the regulations which implement that legislation 
> >> >> - reducing time limits, requiring mandatory counselling by services 
> >> >> run by faith groups, setting up vexatious and expensive vetting 
> >> >> systems for information leaflets, etc.
> >> >
> >> >  That's been attempted several times in the 50 years since the 1967  
> >> >Abortion Act, and each attempt was defeated in Parliament, by 
> >> >substantially more than the 10 votes held by the DUP.
> >> >
> >> >  http://www.abortionreview.org/index.php/site/article/219/
> >> >
> >> >    Janet. 
> >> 
> >> Quite. The DUP MPs are not some recent addition to Parliament. They've
> >> been there for years.
> >> 
> >> The primary motive for supporting the Tory government was been reported:
> >> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/09/theresa-may-reaches-deal-with-dup-to-form-government-after-shock-election-result-northern-ireland
> >> 
> >>     DUP figures insist their relationship with May’s team has been close
> >>     since she became prime minister 11 months ago, and that late-night
> >>     talks had been driven by their dismay at the possibility of Jeremy
> >>     Corbyn becoming prime minister.
> >>     
> >>     A DUP source said: “We want there to be a government. We have worked
> >>     well with May. The alternative is intolerable. For as long as Corbyn
> >>     leads Labour, we will ensure there’s a Tory PM.”
> >>     
> >>     It has been reported that the two parties do not believe it
> >>     necessary to enter a formal coalition to govern.
> >>     
> >>     Senior DUP figures claimed they moved quickly to form an agreement
> >>     to stop any chance of Corbyn entering No 10.
> >>     
> >>     “The two parties [Labour and DUP] have worked well together for two
> >>     years. There’s no reason to suppose they won’t continue to do so in
> >>     future. But the point made time after time to Labour MPs remains:
> >>     for as long as you allow yourselves to be led by an IRA cheerleader,
> >>     you exclude yourselves from entering No 10,” said a DUP source.
> >>     
> >>     The DUP’s “price” for propping up a new Tory government will include
> >>     a promise that there will be no separate post-Brexit status for
> >>     Northern Ireland, the party’s leader in Westminster has confirmed.
> >>     
> >>     Nigel Dodds, re-elected as MP for Belfast North, said that among the
> >>     DUP’s conditions would be an insistence that there be no deal that
> >>     would keep the region with one foot still in the EU.
> >>     
> >>     The DUP fears that separate status after Brexit – a key demand of
> >>     Sinn Féin – would decouple Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.
> >> 
> >> All other matters are secondary.
> >
> >On NPR this evening, a Professor Scully (or perhaps Scollay) of Cardiff said 
> >that if DUP becomes part of the Government, it will mean the end to the entire 
> >peace process on the island of Ireland that has been working rather well the 
> >last few decades.
> 
> Extremely unlikely.
> 
> The peace process is threatened by Brexit. 

Nothing says it can't be threatened by more than one thing.

> The Northern Ireland Peace Agreement[1] that is a vital part of the
> process doesn't mention the border in Ireland because it had already
> been removed as an obstacle to the free movement of goods when the
> Republic of Ireland and the UK joined the EU at the same time. The
> border became an internal border within the EU. The underlying purpose
> of the EU is to prevent a major war breaking out in Europe. One avoiding
> action has been to leave the borders between countries where they are,
> even if they are disputed, but to reduce their practical significance.
> 
> The psychological effect on people who believe a border is in the wrong
> place is greatly reduced if they are free to cross the border without
> formalities.
> 
> The problem with Brexit is that the border between The Republic and
> Northern Ireland will become a border between the EU and a non-EU
> country. That looks likely to make the border more of an obstacle than
> it ever has been in the past.
> 
> The UK and the ROI are part of a Common Travel Area that was established
> in 1922. That allows, very largely, free movement of people in the CTA.
> With a few exceptions the principle is that some one legally in the UK
> or the ROI is free to travel and to live in the other one:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area
> 
> [1] The Northern Ireland Peace Agreement is more often referred to as
> the "Good Friday Agreement" even though agreement wasn't announced until
> the day after.
> 
> -- 
> Peter Duncanson, UK
> (in alt.usage.english)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681594

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:38:20 +0100, HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>
> wrote:
> 
> >On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:17:22 +0100, Janet <nobody@home.com> wrote:
> >> In article <cdf3ddfd-7316-4b0c-96a5-a9e78513303e@googlegroups.com>,
> >> grammatim@verizon.net says...
> >> > 
> >> > On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 5:32:42 AM UTC-4, GordonD wrote:
> >> > 
> >> > > The leader of the Scottish Conservatives (a gay woman) has been
> >assured
> >> > > by Theresa May that gay rights will not be eroded in return for
> >DUP
> >> > > support.
> >> > 
> >> > Is her word any more trustworthy than her idol Trump's? 
> >
> >
> >>   Posturing on both sides. Both May and Davidson know perfectly 
> >well 
> >> that in England, Wales and Scotland gay rights, gay marriage etc 
> >already 
> >> have legislated protection, safely beyond reach of the DUP's 
> >influence.
> >
> >
> >> (Ditto, abortion rights in ESW).
> >
> >I'd agree that abortion rights are protected by legislation, but I 
> >wouldn't rule out the Tory wingnut brigade joining with the DUP to 
> >press for changes to the regulations which implement that legislation
> >- reducing time limits, requiring mandatory counselling by services 
> >run by faith groups, setting up vexatious and expensive vetting 
> >systems for information leaflets, etc.
> 
> If the DUP needs any help in implementing restrictions, we'll be glad
> to send over a team of legislators from US states like Texas and
> Florida who are experts in slipping in restrictive requirements.  
> 
> If such a team is requested, we ask only that you keep them
> permanently. 

Why Texas or Florida?
They are quite middle of the road,
by American standards.

Anything from the bible belt will do,

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681617

On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 5:04:18 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

> > If the DUP needs any help in implementing restrictions, we'll be glad
> > to send over a team of legislators from US states like Texas and
> > Florida who are experts in slipping in restrictive requirements.  
> > 
> > If such a team is requested, we ask only that you keep them
> > permanently. 
> 
> Why Texas or Florida?
> They are quite middle of the road,
> by American standards.

Which are you: ignorant, or lying?

> Anything from the bible belt will do,

Do you know how many states there are? Do you know how many counted as 
"the Bible belt" back when that was a popular phrase?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681650

Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 5:04:18 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > If the DUP needs any help in implementing restrictions, we'll be glad
> > > to send over a team of legislators from US states like Texas and
> > > Florida who are experts in slipping in restrictive requirements.
> > > 
> > > If such a team is requested, we ask only that you keep them
> > > permanently. 
> > 
> > Why Texas or Florida?
> > They are quite middle of the road,
> > by American standards.
> 
> Which are you: ignorant, or lying?
> 
> > Anything from the bible belt will do,
> 
> Do you know how many states there are? Do you know how many counted as
> "the Bible belt" back when that was a popular phrase?

Now really, are you seriously suggesting that 'bible belt'
is an expression that is no longer popular?

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681675

On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 11:34:17 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 5:04:18 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > If the DUP needs any help in implementing restrictions, we'll be glad
> > > > to send over a team of legislators from US states like Texas and
> > > > Florida who are experts in slipping in restrictive requirements.
> > > > If such a team is requested, we ask only that you keep them
> > > > permanently. 
> > > Why Texas or Florida?
> > > They are quite middle of the road,
> > > by American standards. 
> > Which are you: ignorant, or lying? 
> > > Anything from the bible belt will do,
> > Do you know how many states there are? Do you know how many counted as
> > "the Bible belt" back when that was a popular phrase?
> 
> Now really, are you seriously suggesting that 'bible belt'
> is an expression that is no longer popular?

I am seriously suggesting that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

BTW wrt your previous post -- there was a brief Dutch interregnum in New York 
for a few months in 1672. Yet somehow the  territory soon reverted to English 
control.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681676

On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 12:06:22 PM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:34:15 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
> Lodder) wrote:
> >Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 5:04:18 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> >> > Why Texas or Florida?
> >> > They are quite middle of the road,
> >> > by American standards.
> >> Which are you: ignorant, or lying?
> >> > Anything from the bible belt will do, 
> >> Do you know how many states there are? Do you know how many counted as
> >> "the Bible belt" back when that was a popular phrase?
> >Now really, are you seriously suggesting that 'bible belt'
> >is an expression that is no longer popular?

It's no longer needed. The "belt" is not restricted to a limited geographical area. 
How often is the phrase used any more?

> I don't know what he's suggesting, but I'm suggesting that your
> knowledge of the US could be fit in a "klomp" with room left over for
> a dozen bitterballen.

Is that smaller than a tatami?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681705

Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:34:15 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
> Lodder) wrote:
> 
> >Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 5:04:18 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> > Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > > If the DUP needs any help in implementing restrictions, we'll be glad
> >> > > to send over a team of legislators from US states like Texas and
> >> > > Florida who are experts in slipping in restrictive requirements.
> >> > > 
> >> > > If such a team is requested, we ask only that you keep them
> >> > > permanently. 
> >> > 
> >> > Why Texas or Florida?
> >> > They are quite middle of the road,
> >> > by American standards.
> >> 
> >> Which are you: ignorant, or lying?
> >> 
> >> > Anything from the bible belt will do,
> >> 
> >> Do you know how many states there are? Do you know how many counted as
> >> "the Bible belt" back when that was a popular phrase?
> >
> >Now really, are you seriously suggesting that 'bible belt'
> >is an expression that is no longer popular?
> >
> 
> I don't know what he's suggesting, but I'm suggesting that your
> knowledge of the US could be fit in a "klomp" with room left over for
> a dozen bitterballen.
> 
> Texas is most definitely in the "bible belt".  In fact, some describe
> Abilene, Texas as "The buckle of the bible belt".

About every place in it has been called "The buckle of the bible belt"
by somebody.
Not surprising, since the region is more or less rectangular.
There is no natural 'buckle'.

> Northern Florida, specifically the Panhandle, is part of the bible
> belt.  Tallahassee, our state capital, is in the Panhandle.  The
> "bible belt" part of Florida stops about Ocala, though.
> 
> Texas and Florida legislators were cited because they are both known
> for introducing bills that restrict abortions, but bills that are
> patently unconstitutional or otherwise legally flawed.  The
> introducing politicians, though, get credit from their base for the
> attempt.

Yes, and so what? That's precisely what I suggested.
The Ulster right-wing protestants are an anachronism in Britain,
if in the USA they would be nothing out of the ordinary,

Jan

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681630

On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 11:04:16 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:

>Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:38:20 +0100, HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> >On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:17:22 +0100, Janet <nobody@home.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <cdf3ddfd-7316-4b0c-96a5-a9e78513303e@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> grammatim@verizon.net says...
>> >> > 
>> >> > On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 5:32:42 AM UTC-4, GordonD wrote:
>> >> > 
>> >> > > The leader of the Scottish Conservatives (a gay woman) has been
>> >assured
>> >> > > by Theresa May that gay rights will not be eroded in return for
>> >DUP
>> >> > > support.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Is her word any more trustworthy than her idol Trump's? 
>> >
>> >
>> >>   Posturing on both sides. Both May and Davidson know perfectly 
>> >well 
>> >> that in England, Wales and Scotland gay rights, gay marriage etc 
>> >already 
>> >> have legislated protection, safely beyond reach of the DUP's 
>> >influence.
>> >
>> >
>> >> (Ditto, abortion rights in ESW).
>> >
>> >I'd agree that abortion rights are protected by legislation, but I 
>> >wouldn't rule out the Tory wingnut brigade joining with the DUP to 
>> >press for changes to the regulations which implement that legislation
>> >- reducing time limits, requiring mandatory counselling by services 
>> >run by faith groups, setting up vexatious and expensive vetting 
>> >systems for information leaflets, etc.
>> 
>> If the DUP needs any help in implementing restrictions, we'll be glad
>> to send over a team of legislators from US states like Texas and
>> Florida who are experts in slipping in restrictive requirements.  
>> 
>> If such a team is requested, we ask only that you keep them
>> permanently. 
>
>Why Texas or Florida?
>They are quite middle of the road,
>by American standards.
>
>Anything from the bible belt will do,
>
>Jan

Texas and Florida legislators have a lot of these leftover after their
proposals to make them mandatory were blocked:

http://tinyurl.com/y72q9j5r

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681667

On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 2:04:18 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> 
> Why Texas or Florida?
> They are quite middle of the road,
> by American standards.
 
Not if the road is 101.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681631

On 10 Jun 2017, Janet wrote

> In article <almarsoft.3226757483166972057@news.albasani.net>, 
> usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk says...
> 
> Janet wrote
>>> Posturing on both sides. Both May and Davidson know perfectly 
>> well 
>>> that in England, Wales and Scotland gay rights, gay marriage etc 
>> already 
>>> have legislated protection, safely beyond reach of the DUP's 
>> influence.
>> 
>> 
>>> (Ditto, abortion rights in ESW).
>> 
>> I'd agree that abortion rights are protected by legislation, but I 
>> wouldn't rule out the Tory wingnut brigade joining with the DUP to 
>> press for changes to the regulations which implement that legislation 
>> - reducing time limits, requiring mandatory counselling by services 
>> run by faith groups, setting up vexatious and expensive vetting 
>> systems for information leaflets, etc.
> 
>   That's been attempted several times in the 50 years since the 1967  
> Abortion Act, and each attempt was defeated in Parliament, by 
> substantially more than the 10 votes held by the DUP.

I'm glad you're so confident of that;  I'm not, given the inevitable horse-
trading that goes on in coalitions.

One first reaction to the arrangement by Owen Paterson - a former NI 
Secretary - was that it could lead to re-opening the debate on abortion 
times:

"Asked about the impact of Mrs May’s deal with the DUP Mr Paterson, who 
served as Northern Ireland Secretary from 2010 to 2012, said: “I don't see 
many major social issues coming up in the next parliament."

"You might get a debate I suppose on further reduction of abortion times as 
medical science advances."

I'd expect it to be defeated again, but without the DUP's involvement it 
wouldn't stand much chance of being raised again in the first place.

http://tinyurl.com/ya7ow8zs

which points to:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/dup-abortion-stance-mps-could-hold-
vote-on-reducing-abortion-time-limits-a3561836.html

-- 
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng (30yrs) and BrEng (34yrs), indiscriminately mixed 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#681809

On 11/06/17 23:28, HVS wrote:
> On 10 Jun 2017, Janet wrote

>>   That's been attempted several times in the 50 years since the 1967  
>> Abortion Act, and each attempt was defeated in Parliament, by 
>> substantially more than the 10 votes held by the DUP.
> 
> I'm glad you're so confident of that;  I'm not, given the inevitable horse-
> trading that goes on in coalitions.

A recent vote in the Australian parliament resulted in what amounted to
support for the anti-abortion lobby, and indeed support for the thugs
that gather outside abortion clinics to harass the women who are trying
to enter. That surprised everyone, because it's pretty clear that the
majority opinion in this country is that abortion should be legal. It
appears that our parliamentarians do not reflect the views of the
majority. That leaves me wondering whether democracy works.

-- 
Peter Moylan                           http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.usage.english

csiph-web