Chris Smith

"The only limits we have is (delete as appropriate: Il Duce's / the Führer's / Vozhd's / El Caudillo's / Brother Number One's / The Great Helmsman's / El Caballo's) desire to achieve specific effects on behalf of the People."

Yep. A lesson to PhD students and vivas. Admit when something is pointed out to you, and you hadn't thought about it or got it wrong. But if the examiners have some point you fundamentally disagree with, stand your ground. Offer to better clarify it, but don't concede when you're right.

And certainly not Franklin Roosevelt.

So I watched the SNL Tourette's sketch everyone has been talking about. Lazy and South Park basically did it much better years ago. I'm all for edgy comedy, but this isn't edgy. It's old. This weak sauce is all an army of joke writers could come up with? Really?

YouTube video by MrOSTMusic Freedom Isn't Free - Team America OST

youtu.be/BVkTmnJkAN8?...

Depends on what you mean by "better", if by essentially hiding the extent of British support from the public... I guess.

Attempting to navigate the same tightrope as Wilson did over Vietnam.

That doesn't seem to really exist at the moment.

Let's be clear, no matter what Starmer did - full throated support for the war - it wouldn't be enough for the Tories or Reform. If he refused to allow a single resource to either the Americans or Israel, that wouldn't be enough for the Corbynite left or the Greens.

Remember when membership of the Labour Party was highest in Europe? Me too, I also recall what happened next.

The right of British politics is absolutely melting down because Starmer has not taken Britain into an illegal war with Iran. The left is absolutely melting down because he is a warmonger and entirely complicit in an illegal war with Iran.

British social media commentary is so unserious.

Wait! So Labour's doomed efforts to park their tanks on the Reform lawn and soak up their voters, have resulted in a poor policy antithetical to basic Labour values that will drive even more of the left into the arms of the Greens?

Starmer need to utterly reverse direction or go. That simple.

I'm starting to think Labour don't want to win elections at the moment. Maybe give Reform or the Tories a go for another 14 years again?

You might want to delete this ignorant claptrap.

You mean he had to apologise because it transpired he had reposted obviously antisemitic shit?

Yeah, the media absolutely had a wild approach to Corbyn but let's not minimise what he did. The excuse of "oh, I didn't see it" was so utterly bad it's probably true. And isn't any better.

Oh my. Surely she should resign for *that*?

Unsurprisingly, Farage has gone full Trump and claimed that the by-election defeat his party suffered was the product of "sectarianism and cheating". Of course, the former is pure projection as he has whipped up more sectarianism than any other politician this generation. The latter... bullshit.

The hottest of takes.

More audibly clear on the tape?

Seems to me that the two hour delay was clearly not enough, not enough BBC oversight, not enough awareness to make the right preparations, not enough communication with colleagues in the room, and not enough speed on the part of the BBC. Not good enough all round.

They don't do the edit in the room where it was very clear, the production company said they missed it on the recording. All plausible. Why the BBC didn't pull the programme from iPlayer that night. Perfect storm of cockups.

Of course, they knew JD would be there so clearly the prep work they did was inadequate. The BBC also failed by not responding by taking the programme down immediately.

But still, much more likely grave cock ups not malice. Still, serious lessons need learning.

Having been interviewed live at a loud event, the editing people aren't inside the room but elsewhere. The word over the mic was somewhat muffled and they edited out other instances. Even with a two hour delay they have to work very fast. So, with bad communication, it is possible to see the error.

You thought you were making a point about the history of African Americans but in doing so demonstrated your profound ignorance of the history of disability. This isn't a "both sides" argument, it is that you denied a genocide.

Nope. You thought you had a point but because you didn't know something about history, you discovered the answer makes your question appear ratger embarrassing. Now you're doubling down.

Move on. Learn. Be better.

You asked when the disabled have been persecuted. I told you.

Rhe disabled have been targets of dehumanisation and murder throughout various periods of human history. In Nazi Germany and occupied Europe, they were exterminated by the regime.

No, it is a conspiracy theory. You are concocting scenarios for which you have no evidence while ignoring the actual evidence to justify your preconceived position.

The BBC is the broadcaster not the production company, their failure was inadequate reviewing of the programme. The production company is at fault for missing the word in the editing process.

Doubtless there were mics dotted around the audience you know, to capture the audience's reaction. They also wouldn't have been placed by the person doing the editing.

If you genuinely think this was a vast conspiracy involving multiple people, you are beyond logic and reason.