Never bought much via Tesco, when I did I only ever bought from "Tesco" as a seller as the sellers that did use it always cost a lot more than anywhere else.
Photek wrote:My daughter goes to a catholic school but is not baptised. She won’t be doing her communion or confirmation or taking part in any church activities. The teacher is understanding which is grand. She got a note Home yesterday asking if she could take part singing in church for class above communion and she had already written NOPE in huge letters where it had “Parents Consent:”
My niece is probably going to be going to a Catholic school but mainly because it has the best Ofsted reports around the area outside of private schools. None of my family are Catholic but she'll likely be baptised this year or next.
Jenuall wrote:That said it is interesting that Labour in general and people like Livingstone in particular are being hounded regarding arguments that they might possibly be antisemitic, whereas the party in power (and indeed the PM specifically) which has shown to be openly racist and xenophobic through things like the sanctioned "go back home" slogans and the deporting of British citizens over windrush appears, to my eyes at least, to be getting a relatively easy ride.
We are all guilty of doing this, but I don’t think it is helpful to compare the two like that. I know you don’t mean it this way, but it often looks like Labour are ignoring their problems and just pointing at the Tories problems to deflect attention away.
I don’t believe Labour have a bigger (as in lots of the their members/MPs) problem than the Tories when it comes to racism, but I think they need to deal with the issues that they do have. It is a far bigger “strawberry float you” to the Tories if Labour first removed their anti-semitic members before pointing out Tory racism.
The media is mostly right wing and so they will always attack Labour over the Tories, which is why the Windrush story was dropped as soon as Rudd quit as Home Secretary. Again though, Labour could help themselves if they were seen to be removing any members that were taking part in any form of anti-semitic abuse.
Indeed, whilst I'd say it's not a completely apples and oranges debate, I wasn't attempting to use one as a deflection for the other. I agree that Labour need to sort their gooseberry fool out and that going "but what about them!" is not an acceptable action to take (people in glass houses and all that).
My comment regarding the Tories "easy ride" on racism was more about the public reaction than that of the press - as you say they will always go after the left. In my mind it feels like we should be seeing much more hostility toward the Conservatives for things like Windrush on social media and potentially in public demonstrations than what we are.
I guess the press also has the excuse that Labour really should be better than this and they can also point out the hypocrisy of the left who lecture on racism and then are guilty of it themselves. Left wingers are (generally speaking) supposed to be anti-racist whereas you expect this sort of gooseberry fool from the right wing.
Obviously that is mostly bollocks, there is nothing that says a trade unionist has to be non-racist or that a capitalist banker has to be a racist. But the perception is that racism on the left = hypocrisy! Racism on the right = a normal Tuesday.
Sad but true. You would have hoped that we might have arrived at a point where nobody expects anyone to be racist whether they're on the right or the left, and that reaction to anyone who is revealed to be would be equally strong regardless of political affiliation!
Sadly you can still watch pretty much any Not the Nine O'Clock News sketch from the 80's about racism within the Tory party, or within the country generally, and it all still seems pretty accurate.
We might hope that racism had died away, but our MPs are still receiving letters like this.
I do admire David Lammy for being so upfront about the kind of gooseberry fool he deals with.
I guess my (foolish) hope was that whilst you are always going to get closet racists and people outside of "the public sphere" who hold these views - those in politics and power should surely be beyond it by now?
But then I guess you can never tell what people are thinking under the surface, those who appear tolerant may only be doing so for their own benefit. Reminds me of the Stewart Lee quote: "if political correctness has achieved one thing, it's to make the Conservative Party cloak its inherent racism behind more creative language."
Jenuall wrote:That said it is interesting that Labour in general and people like Livingstone in particular are being hounded regarding arguments that they might possibly be antisemitic, whereas the party in power (and indeed the PM specifically) which has shown to be openly racist and xenophobic through things like the sanctioned "go back home" slogans and the deporting of British citizens over windrush appears, to my eyes at least, to be getting a relatively easy ride.
We are all guilty of doing this, but I don’t think it is helpful to compare the two like that. I know you don’t mean it this way, but it often looks like Labour are ignoring their problems and just pointing at the Tories problems to deflect attention away.
I don’t believe Labour have a bigger (as in lots of the their members/MPs) problem than the Tories when it comes to racism, but I think they need to deal with the issues that they do have. It is a far bigger “strawberry float you” to the Tories if Labour first removed their anti-semitic members before pointing out Tory racism.
The media is mostly right wing and so they will always attack Labour over the Tories, which is why the Windrush story was dropped as soon as Rudd quit as Home Secretary. Again though, Labour could help themselves if they were seen to be removing any members that were taking part in any form of anti-semitic abuse.
Indeed, whilst I'd say it's not a completely apples and oranges debate, I wasn't attempting to use one as a deflection for the other. I agree that Labour need to sort their gooseberry fool out and that going "but what about them!" is not an acceptable action to take (people in glass houses and all that).
My comment regarding the Tories "easy ride" on racism was more about the public reaction than that of the press - as you say they will always go after the left. In my mind it feels like we should be seeing much more hostility toward the Conservatives for things like Windrush on social media and potentially in public demonstrations than what we are.
I guess the press also has the excuse that Labour really should be better than this and they can also point out the hypocrisy of the left who lecture on racism and then are guilty of it themselves. Left wingers are (generally speaking) supposed to be anti-racist whereas you expect this sort of gooseberry fool from the right wing.
Obviously that is mostly bollocks, there is nothing that says a trade unionist has to be non-racist or that a capitalist banker has to be a racist. But the perception is that racism on the left = hypocrisy! Racism on the right = a normal Tuesday.
Sad but true. You would have hoped that we might have arrived at a point where nobody expects anyone to be racist whether they're on the right or the left, and that reaction to anyone who is revealed to be would be equally strong regardless of political affiliation!
Sadly you can still watch pretty much any Not the Nine O'Clock News sketch from the 80's about racism within the Tory party, or within the country generally, and it all still seems pretty accurate.
We might hope that racism had died away, but our MPs are still receiving letters like this.
I do admire David Lammy for being so upfront about the kind of gooseberry fool he deals with.
I guess my (foolish) hope was that whilst you are always going to get closet racists and people outside of "the public sphere" who hold these views - those in politics and power should surely be beyond it by now?
But then I guess you can never tell what people are thinking under the surface, those who appear tolerant may only be doing so for their own benefit. Reminds me of the Stewart Lee quote: "if political correctness has achieved one thing, it's to make the Conservative Party cloak its inherent racism behind more creative language."
I do wonder though if making these things public will actually encourage some people. Overall though i think its a good thing to make masses aware of.
Jenuall wrote:That said it is interesting that Labour in general and people like Livingstone in particular are being hounded regarding arguments that they might possibly be antisemitic, whereas the party in power (and indeed the PM specifically) which has shown to be openly racist and xenophobic through things like the sanctioned "go back home" slogans and the deporting of British citizens over windrush appears, to my eyes at least, to be getting a relatively easy ride.
We are all guilty of doing this, but I don’t think it is helpful to compare the two like that. I know you don’t mean it this way, but it often looks like Labour are ignoring their problems and just pointing at the Tories problems to deflect attention away.
I don’t believe Labour have a bigger (as in lots of the their members/MPs) problem than the Tories when it comes to racism, but I think they need to deal with the issues that they do have. It is a far bigger “strawberry float you” to the Tories if Labour first removed their anti-semitic members before pointing out Tory racism.
The media is mostly right wing and so they will always attack Labour over the Tories, which is why the Windrush story was dropped as soon as Rudd quit as Home Secretary. Again though, Labour could help themselves if they were seen to be removing any members that were taking part in any form of anti-semitic abuse.
Indeed, whilst I'd say it's not a completely apples and oranges debate, I wasn't attempting to use one as a deflection for the other. I agree that Labour need to sort their gooseberry fool out and that going "but what about them!" is not an acceptable action to take (people in glass houses and all that).
My comment regarding the Tories "easy ride" on racism was more about the public reaction than that of the press - as you say they will always go after the left. In my mind it feels like we should be seeing much more hostility toward the Conservatives for things like Windrush on social media and potentially in public demonstrations than what we are.
I guess the press also has the excuse that Labour really should be better than this and they can also point out the hypocrisy of the left who lecture on racism and then are guilty of it themselves. Left wingers are (generally speaking) supposed to be anti-racist whereas you expect this sort of gooseberry fool from the right wing.
Obviously that is mostly bollocks, there is nothing that says a trade unionist has to be non-racist or that a capitalist banker has to be a racist. But the perception is that racism on the left = hypocrisy! Racism on the right = a normal Tuesday.
Sad but true. You would have hoped that we might have arrived at a point where nobody expects anyone to be racist whether they're on the right or the left, and that reaction to anyone who is revealed to be would be equally strong regardless of political affiliation!
Sadly you can still watch pretty much any Not the Nine O'Clock News sketch from the 80's about racism within the Tory party, or within the country generally, and it all still seems pretty accurate.
We might hope that racism had died away, but our MPs are still receiving letters like this.
I do admire David Lammy for being so upfront about the kind of gooseberry fool he deals with.
I guess my (foolish) hope was that whilst you are always going to get closet racists and people outside of "the public sphere" who hold these views - those in politics and power should surely be beyond it by now?
But then I guess you can never tell what people are thinking under the surface, those who appear tolerant may only be doing so for their own benefit. Reminds me of the Stewart Lee quote: "if political correctness has achieved one thing, it's to make the Conservative Party cloak its inherent racism behind more creative language."
I do wonder though if making these things public will actually encourage some people. Overall though i think its a good thing to make masses aware of.
Making it public also increases the likelihood of someone going "Lol, that was me! Top bants right lads?" all over Facebook so hopefully leading to them being found out and arrested for it.
I was surprised to see that Tesco Direct is going however reading more into it, some of the products and services that they offer will just be incorporated into tesco.com. How much is not clear though.
The only problem with M&S food is that the use by dates are terrible, but I assume that's because they aren't stuffing it all full of preservatives and shite.
I get my trousers, smart shirts and socks n shoes from M&S, they’re very good and cheaper than John Lewis and the brands. Belts were bloody terrible quality though so I use Savile Row for those.
M&S Food is where it’s really at though. Transport hubs wouldn’t be the same without them. Pret without the Pret price tag.
I think where M&S has routinely struggled is with women’s clothing. They just can’t seem to hit their stride on that front.
Wonder how many of the closing M&S stores are Littlewoods shops they rebranded after the buyout. We've had two separate stores in our local shopping centre ever since, and the rent can't be cheap there (everything is closing down).
Labour allows male activist to stand as women's officer 'because he identifies as a woman on Wednesdays'
For those who aren't going to read the article: the guy is intentionally being ridiculous to show how easy it is to abuse Labour's "Self-ID" rules. He himself admits he's taking the piss, but points out that party rules stop anyone doing anything about it because he's said he's a woman (on Wednesdays) and, by their rules, his word cannot be challenged.
