peterms

This is very unfair. Corbyn has nothing to do all day but hang around chatting to deadbeats, whereas Mr Johnson has important matters of state to attend to.

I gather he's renounced his American citizenship to avoid tax, so hopefully he will also have renounced Americanisms of speech. I expect he will call them serfs, or domestics, or else "Hey! You! Yes, you!"

If he did, I suspect it would be "People off-colour", ie those with a funny tinge about them.

Oops

US press publishes drawings and descriptions of mediaeval torture techniques used by US forces in their illegal secret prisons.

No, it's simply a misunderstanding. What the PM actually said was "There will be no cheques in the Irish Sea". In other words, the contributions to the DUP re-election budget will all be made by electronic transfer, to avoid the possibility of post being mislaid in transit. It's so unfair to misrepresent him like this.

I agree with that point, but I do also agree that the way many presenters behave detracts from the aim of the interview, or what the aim should be. It's meant to be about eliciting information, scrutinising claims, analysing and probing, holding to account. Too often it's about the presenter grandstanding, playing gotcha, engaging in stupid little games to try and put one over on someone, like a 10 year old arguing. I suppose it's to be expected that many presenters are narcissistic, especially those who have a show branded with their name, but I would really like to see a lot more real analysis and challenge of actual ideas, rather than the look-at-me Billy Big Bollocks nonsense.

This is the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, and Professor of International Law at Glasgow Uni, referring to the BBC's unwillingness to cover his report about how Assange is being dealt with.

Well, she's 68 and a member of Liverpool Pensioners' Association. On the other hand, the Jewish Chronicle says she lied about her age, by 44 years, so perhaps she's tricked people into thinking she's a pensioner.

It was thoughful of the poster to point out which ones are the ER demonstrators. But what happens next? Do they look for pollen, and do a little dance to show the others where to find it? Or are they hibernating?

It's a fact that remainers generally have distinguished between more and less damaging forms of leaving. There may be some who think that any form of leaving is equally bad as any other so that there is nothing to choose between them, but I suggest there's very few if any who hold that view. If that is the case, then it follows that there is an upside for them in having the choice between remaining and leaving on a less bad deal, and no downside; unless you think that having an option of a less bad way of leaving might make some people vote for that who would otherwise have not, so that it tips the vote in favour of leaving. That seems unlikely. Not so much my opinion, just stating what seems to be rational for people who support remaining. If the Libdems really have no preference between Johnson's deal and any different arrangement, I'd be interested to hear their reasoning.

But if your preference is to remain, then a more sensible option would be a choice between remain and a less bad version of leave. Especially since it is quite possible that another vote would result in leaving.

The Eastenders point is a fair cop.

I think my parents occasionally watched it. I'm trying to think of anyone else I've ever known who has mentioned watching it, and no-one comes to mind. It's very odd that anyone would think there's some kind of expectation that anyone would, or that there's any more expectation that a politician would - as opposed to watching the actual queen's speech, which is the outlining of a forthcoming set of legislation, rather than the fireside chat. Also quite a comment on the Mail, that they have to try to spin not watching it or even being sure what time it airs, as some sort of failing.

You seem to overlook the key sentence in what you quote. He's not sat on his arse all day, watching telly and necking vodka. He's visiting homeless people, but without a phalanx of journos and photographers to record it.

Mmmmm. Possibly. I'd bet their compulsion to self-excuse takes over.

I think the clue is in the surname, isn't it?

May I remind you that case notes should not be shared outside a clinical setting? It is a violation of the patient's privacy.

If you do, then please also give him a cuddle, from me. Just to confuse him. I suspect he's easily confused.