Posts by Steve Barnes
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Romney wasn't the popular choice in Oklahoma, they preferred Santorum. Perhaps, with luck and a fair wind those that didn't want Romney will go to Obama... Tui moment.
eta now showing a 70-30 split to Romney. :-(
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Miche Campbell,
They’ve coloured Oklahoma for Romney and given him the Electoral Votes, but they’re at 0% reported.
Was just going to mention that myself.
I shall go digging. -
The HuffPo numbers are looking better now 61/49 to the O man. @ 2.00pm
-
Quite apt I thought, what with the horses an' stuff. Red Moon Green Moon or Blue Moon?.
If Obama wins I think we can be assured that the voting system in the US, however amateur it seems to us civilised people, is reasonably robust. If Romney romps home I think we could safely assume the opposite. -
The HuffPo Results page is looking scary, still early days though.
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
What language is that Steve? PL-1?
From what I remember it's C- well, C- is what they wrote on my exam paper ;-)
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
(oh, you want 100 mm down by 80 mm across, let me look that measurement up on my table, that falls within the range of this person, I’ll put a tick in their box
I wonder what the code looks like....
IF:: 100,80 THEN:: "Obama"
IF NOT:: THEN:: "Romney"
Rigged or Lazy?
;-) -
Hard News: Media3: Whistleblower Season, in reply to Russell Brown,
I think that’s a pretty good parallel.
I agree and would add that because it was so recent should be regarded as worse.
Society didn’t tolerate it, THEY DIDN’T KNOW IT WAS HAPPENING. Perhaps people should have twigged. If anybody DID know, they are guilty of concealing a horrible crime.
I don't know how you can be so certain that they didn't know as to be able to SHOUT about it. Much as you would like to believe otherwise it was tolerated and denied. I spent the first 30 odd years of my life in that society and find it rather odd that people that have had little or no experience of British society in the 60s and 70s are telling me that I don't know what I am talking about.
-
Thank you linger, I'm glad someone can see where I'm coming from.
But.1970s England wasn’t that different to today,
It was. You have to remember that things like sexual harassment in the work place was the norm for women, and many men, that what we now consider sexual abuse, at the lower scale (some would, these days, say that there is no scale, it is all bad) was not considered as abuse, just inappropriate in polite company.
I am certainly not condoning Saviles behaviour which, at best, was an abuse of power and position but the point remains. If you are going to condemn someone for doing what society tolerated back then then you also have to condemn that society.
Watch Esther Rantzen's body language in the "Exposed" documentary and you will see someone trying to hide their shame, she knew what was happening and did nothing because, back then, it was accepted and she is not a bad person.— if we are not careful — there is always the possibility of a return to a morality in which the powerful can do what they like to the less powerful with this being seen as “normal”.
There is also the danger that the moral panic will become pervasive and we do not want to see a return of the Spanish Inquisition but nobody would expect that, eh?.
-
Hard News: Media3: Whistleblower Season, in reply to Lilith __,
I don’t mean legally. I mean MORALLY.
Morals change, that is the whole point, and when they change those on the "wrong" side get punished without understanding why their behaviour is now considered to be immoral.
Imagine a situation like this. For years you have been selling your home grown vegetables and a new law comes into force that not only makes it illegal for you sell them but makes you liable for any perceived damage from (or indeed to) any vegetables you may have sold in the past. Would that be "fair"? of course not. That is why we do not pass retrospective laws (often).
I know you are going to say there is no comparison but there is and that is the conflation of "Moral Laws' and real laws and the public perception of both.