17 hours ago, JonnyF said:

It's great to see Lady Hussey back in the fold. She never should have been removed as I said at the time.

 

As for Ngozi (or should I use her real name Marlene?) it's hilarious to see her nasty little publicity stunt backfire so spectacularly.  ???? 

 

Not quite instant Karma, but close. 

I am sure Lady Hussey has a new-found respect for Harry and Meghan after she saw how fast the Royals would throw her under the bus.

It's becoming clear that the US has a policing problem.  Many of these cities are plagued by police departments with an extremely toxic work environment.  

I suspect the toxicity is exacerbated by the huge number of guns circulating in the public.  I certainly wouldn't want to face the danger that many officers face.  

On 3/6/2023 at 9:27 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

I disagree, mainly because I don't think they are well educated at all.

And I suspect you might know a lot about the poorly educated.

14 hours ago, Emster23 said:

And just how will they determine who gets how much? Not talking about right/wrong, but just administering it seems impossible... "direct payments"... for who? What if just moved to the state? If I'm 1/96th black, would I get 1/96 payment? All those find your roots DNA test kits would have a field day.... why just blacks? Argument could be made that native Americans had a worse experience... where is their pay? Same goes for Asian Americans, especially Chinese stock considering all the prohibitions, exclusions etc that were placed on them...

As I understand it, the payments would be made to those who are descendants of slaves.  So, if you are a black immigrant or somehow were descendant from a black free person who had no roots in slavery, you're not eligible.   

I think another problem is going to happen if the federal gov't ever decides to grant reparations.  Will people who received state reparations be eligible for a 2nd payment?   

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other on reparations, but it should be noted that reparations were paid to slave owners who lost their slaves after the Civil War.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

OR

 

Work out which degrees actually benefit society, like doctors, engineers, mathematicians, certain types of scientists, etc and give them reduced or even free university education and make the rest pay as normal. Do we really need a degree in media studies?

Yes, we do need people with an education in media studies.  We also need people with an education in journalism and all the other components that most people believe are important to a well-informed democracy.   

9 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Well I have read the article.

 

BuzzFeed is a US based website. A cursory glance through the other content it headlines suggests that much of it's product is inconsequential tittle tattle.

 

Nor does it's American focus suggest that it is well placed to discern any media bias within British national newspapers.

 

None of the contrasts drawn were really evidence of a deliberate editorial policy, some of the articles contrasted  had publication dates separated by several years.

 

They (BuzzFeed) do suggest that the decision by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to withdraw from "Royal life" was a result of a sustained press campaign over many years against them - the Duke and Duchess of Sussex withdrew less than a year after they entered "Royal life"; many of the accounts of actions on their part, and reactions from other members of the Royal Family, which presumably led to that withdrawal have been published subsequently, and spring from  interviews films and books published by them after withdrawal. Now of course the pair are entitled to withdraw from "Royal life", but they have hardly withdrawn, rather they have set up a rival hostile and extremely vocal "court" in a foreign country which seeks to undermine, rubbish and "spoil" the established one. 

 

They can hardly be surprised if that provokes a reaction!

They have not trashed the monarchy, and they certainly don't have a rival court.  Much of what Harry has written about is well-within the type of conflict that many families have.  Two brothers who don't always get along and who come to physical blows -- which they apparently did in their younger days as well.  They had a stepmother whom they didn't exactly like.  They had a father who was emotionally distant and showed little to no physical affection.  These are all signs of a dysfunctional family, but not out of the bounds of what many have experienced.  

Harry's big problem is with the paparazzi and the press, who have seriously mischaracterized some of his actions.   He acknowledges many of his antics.  The press has been relentless in pursuing him and when they went after his wife, it was too close to the situation that took the life of his mother.  

His big beef with the palace was their inability or unwillingness to provide the support and protection he felt he needed for his family.   Charles and Camilla may have been either involved in or complicit in leaking stories that reflected bad on Harry and Meghan.  Keeping the spotlight on them kept it off Camilla.   Much of what happened was not so much what the palace did, but what it did not do to get the relentless paparazzi and press coverage off of them.  In some cases, a simple official statement would have been sufficient, but was never forthcoming.

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

It's a bit more than a family dispute. They are actively trying to bring down the British Monarchy.

 

They'd better have thick skin if they do come back. All the good will and adoration that was originally shown to Meghan has gone. They will be booed everywhere they go. Rightly so, they are a disgrace.

 

Very real security concerns as well. After his comments on the Taliban he'd better be careful in places like London where there are plenty of sleeper cells that would be more than happy to become martyrs by exacting revenge for his boasting about his kill count. 

 

From Invictus to Evict Us. Not too smart that boy Harry.

Please show us where he has indicated that he is trying to bring down the Monarchy.

Well, it is a training sit, and it looks like this could be a good training exercise.  

Another coward from Jan. 6.

19 minutes ago, Tug said:

Why do I get the feeling if this is signed into law it will come back to haunt them?

Boy, oh boy, oh boy, I do think Trump will be in court on a constant basis!

One can only hope their weapons are as bad as most of the <deleted> they make.

I have nothing against student loan forgiveness.  I do think it is emblematic of a systemic problem with how the US does things.  It is doing with education what it did with health care, and that is to try and fit a solution around a problem rather than to solve the problem.   Education is important, and university level education is extremely important to a society.  Our economic security depends on a well-educated citizenry.  Certainly, our national security requires well-educated people.  

The basic problem is the prohibitive cost of education.  If the overall cost of university level education is brought down to a reasonable cost, the problem is solved and things like debt forgiveness won't be necessary.  

15 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

 

<snipped>

 As for attacking the whistleblowers, I remember when even mentioning Adam Schiff's whistleblower pal Eric Ciaramella was enough to get you dinged from the internet(because all whistleblowers must be protected was the narrative). Now the democrats are freely doing exactly what they banned us from doing? Nice.

To put it into a context you can understand, just because they IDENTIFY as whistleblowers doesn't mean they are whistleblowers.

Charles is a bit of a nerd.  Camilla looks like she needs a bag of oats and a bale of hay.   They simply lack the charisma that the Queen had.  She had such a positive, long history with her people.   She was enigmatic, charismatic and slightly mysterious.  

I think Charles will make a good King, but he's far from having the strong allegiance and loyalty that his mother garnered.   I am actually surprised he hasn't had better luck finding talent.  He seems like the kind of person who has better planning ability than to let this go for so long.

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

He blew it when he attacked, or colluded in attacks on his own family. Honourable people just don't do family dirty washing in public.

Obviously another poster who didn't read the book.  I'd hardly say he 'attacked or colluded in attacks' on his family.  

And there are enough right wing judges to impose it and enough governors to carry it out.