Hamilton Saint

It's looking good! COYR!

It's jumpy for me.

I did it three times; I got 28, 31 and 20. I'm 57.

Read Night by Elie Wiesel. He was taken to Auschwitz as a young boy with his family. He was the only one to survive.

Here you go - both sides of possibly the best pop single (45 rpm) ever released: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7NoOhmVMac

They're down, and I hope West Ham go with them.

Thanks for those!

She does it much too slowly - almost like a dirge. I prefer the Bert Jansch version. [bTW, it's a song by the great British folk-singer/songwriter Ewan MacColl.]

This article is nonsense - I listened to the entire interview with Cortese and this article just does not reflect Cortese's attitude towards Pardew. From all that I've heard and read about Cortese, it seems to me that he is smart, competent, demanding and fully committed to his job. To call him a "bufoon" is ridiculous.

Check my PM.

Agree with this. There's nothing "wrong" with refs - they're just human beings and will always make mistakes. Some refs, of course, are better than others. Even the best refs can buckle under the intense pressure. And they are not helped by the intense partisanship of players, managers and fans. Now, most refereeing mistakes are not game-changing decisions - except for penalties. This is where TV replays should be used. Refs should have the option of stopping play and consulting with an official who can take a minute to look at the incident again - in slow motion. How many penalty decisions come up in the average game? Would a brief delay for those decisions be so disruptive to the flow of a game?

Did you actually read through my contributions to this thread? The point you make is a valid one, but it actually criticises me for something I wasn't doing. My main concern was the sloppy use of the term "socialism" and "socialist". If you want to talk specifics in discussing political philosophy, it's important to get the basic terms straight. My argument was pitched at the level of general philosophy, not the specifics of day-to-day conditions in Britain, which, as you point out, I am not in a position to judge. My other intervention in this thread was to criticise the tactic of labelling people as fellow-travellers of a demonised political movement merely because they share the same stage, or participate in the same public protest. I wasn't debating the specific policies or tactics of the two groups in question, just identifying an illegitimate debating technique.

Yes, there are "two sides to the coin". I'm giving mine; you're giving yours. If my prose "just smacks of the language of the left", well - guess what - yours "smacks" of the language of the right - with the de rigueur references to the Socialist Worker and The Guardian. I emigrated with my family when I was a teenager, BTW. My parents' decision. "User fees" are charges paid for a service or activity that used to be funded by the state, based on the philosophy that if you use it, you pay for it. Makes sense in some circumstances, but not in others. Some institutions and services require government subsidy.

Lower taxes for the rich; lower taxes for corporations. Freedom from money-market regulation for the banks; freedom from environmental regulation for corporations. Lower taxes means poorer public services and more user-fees. Greater freedom often means more greed and exploitation. Lower taxes sounds good - but what are the practical effects on society as a whole? Greater freedom sounds great - but who is it, specifically, getting this new "freedom"?

It's starting to sound like a slogan. Any other examples?

You've used that example several times before - you seem to be fixated on it. Of course, there is a different perspective - a different way of characterising things. Workers are taxed by government in order to provide services that the public demands. Some idle people take advantage of the social safety-net. So do some rich people. Many individuals and many corporations cheat on their taxes. They take advantage of tax loop-holes. They hide their assets in overseas bank accounts in order to avoid taxes. How would you characterise that? If a Liberal government imposes a health "surcharge" on every citizen in order to pay for a publicly-funded health-care system, is that socialism? If a Conservative government increases the amount that employers and employees have to contribute to the employment insurance scheme, is that socialism? If a Conservative government bails out major banks with public money, is that socialism? If Conservative governments give subsidies or tax-breaks to assist faltering industries, or to entice them to settle in their jurisdictions, is that socialism? If Conservative governments pump billions of dollars into the economy in order to counter the negative effects of the recent recession, specifically, in order to create jobs, is that socialism?

Did you take your Mum to Bingo yet?

Actually, to be fair, I was not "trying to justify the blatant hyocrisy of UAF"; I was primarily criticising your debating tactics and your political labelling techniques. Blair and Gordon are not "socialists", no matter how many times you insist on saying it. To debate politics, use correct political terminology - that's my main point.

A typically dishonest tactic. If very different groups come together on an ad-hoc basis to participate in the same protest, it doesn't mean they agree with each other's policies or tactics. I have been at anti-war marches (first and second Gulf Wars) which included participation from the Canadian Communist Party and the Canadian Communist Party Marxist-Leninist. That doesn't mean I agreed with, or sympathised with, their manifesto or political tactics. It just means we agreed (for very different reasons) in our opposition to those wars. It's a simple concept, really. You're trying to use a cheap guilt-by-association technique. It's a form of McCarthyism. Furthermore: just because you insist on using the label "socialist" when talking about the leaders of the labour Party, that does not make it so. To debate honestly and clearly about politics you ought to be accurate and fair in the terms that you use - otherwise it's sheer propaganda.

I read somewhere on a thread here that the pitch was being relaid just for the JPT final.

Yes, I was. And now that you mention it, I do recall playing for the school team during First Form at a tournamant; unfortunately, we had to play lightning chess - not my forte.

Chess is great - the ultimate board game. I don't play much any more, but I have been running a Chess Club for abouit five years at the school where I teach. Interestingly, the club consists mostly of kids with an Asian heritage - Chinese, Indian, Pakistani. Same constituency of kids that excel in my maths classes.

Congratulations and best wishes. :smt038

The Jesus of Cool by Nick Lowe. [Released in North America as Pure Pop for Now People.]