Now that has to be a wind up. Surely?Radiophonic wrote:Bring back Maggie. We had a country to be proud of then.
Me? I'll be dancing on the old witches grave.
StevePSB
It was, partly.StevePSB wrote:Now that has to be a wind up. Surely?Radiophonic wrote:Bring back Maggie. We had a country to be proud of then.
Me? I'll be dancing on the old witches grave.
StevePSB
The report also says "But if, for example, a headmistress wanted to discriminate in favour of a male teacher to balance an all female team that would be allowed too."Patrick Bateman wrote:Sorry for being a white male, by the way. It appears that the government considers that to be a crime these days. ABSOLUTELY SCANDALOUS.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7474801.stm
Galloway versus Hitchens was rather fabulous.Deschanel wrote:I do believe Hitchens and his brother have been feuding for years..
I actually like Hitchens - he's never being boring, and likes to lob verbal grenades into any conversation, which is a godsend- he's a great contrast to the dull , careful , careerist drones in navy suits on Sunday chat shows. And it's hilarious how bullied some of them are by his English accent, but probably it's more his stinging delivery, in his rumbling baronial voice,- he's a master of rhetoric.
On the down side, his rhetoric is 100% in the service of his brand, Christopher Hitchens Contrarianism, Inc. Which is fine- yes he was pro-war in Iraq, because he has friends in Kurdish Iraq who, he says, "I made them a solemn promise". So basically, the most disastrous folly in US history is justified by his drunk-talk in the desert once. He's a well-ensconced , amazingly prolific writer and high-functioning alcoholic on the DC social scene, a star there in what they call, "Hollywood for ugly people", ie, politics.
I like Hitch fine, I just don't take him or his prescriptions seriously, at all.
(And forget his waterboarding- his explicit account of waxing his "back, crack, and sack" in Vanity Fair was totes must-not-read material. TMI, Hitch.)