DonnyTJS

It's certainly simplistic, ignoring as it does Scotland's Calvinist reformation and James VI's plantation of Ulster.

Aye, but they don't give them tools...

The greatest winger in the league, full stop. An incredible player.

I know, it's a serious weakness; but the alternative is utter despair... True, and I suppose I was addressing those through my response to you. Ach well, I'm too out of touch with all this to make a sufficiently informed contribution anyway. Hope Sheff's sunny.

No, I grant you, that aspect of it is pretty straightforward. I wasn't around (and I'm still not), but even on here 'the vow' was subjected to some reasonable critical thought prior to the vote; and a number of the links in the thread quoted from below show that some of the English press, at any rate, were predicting problems: Still, my main point (in response to Hertsscot): that the Mark Steel piece wasn't worth lifting from mid-paper obscurity (and my secondary point: that Mark Steel is seriously overrated as a satirist) weren't really to do with that. My tertiary point about the need for some analysis was more to do with the constitutional implications of all this. Thing is, I don't understand people's response to this. Steel's rib-tickling take on Cameron finally having to face up to the WLQ is characterized thus: 'Two days after signing a "vow" to hand over "extensive new powers", David Cameron announced he would indeed act swiftly to ensure Scottish MPs had less power,' (cue howls of TAMB anguish), yet this is precisely what SNP MPs have been doing for years, because in a devolved political landscape it's the principled stance to take. Of course Cameron's prime motivation is his own political ends, but that doesn't change the fact that the WLQ has to be addressed post-NO. The vow was a bribe brought about by panic. That we have party leaders who were so blind to its implications is staggering. Whether it had a decisive effect on the result is neither here nor there, it will now have to be seen to be carried out. But to do so English votes on English matters has to be dealt with, as Tam Dalyell and the SNP in Westminster have long realized. Mark Steel can go himself frankly.

A little Mark Steel goes a long long long way. Do you honestly think that example of 'biting satire' should be given front-page column inches? There should certainly be massive publicity about the political and constitutional mess created by 'the vow', but it would be better if the issues were subjected to some kind of analysis rather than bludgeoned by Steel's wornout wit.

Fascinating read that. Thanks.

Weird - I was advised to use it by our IT guru at work. Anyroad, I understand about not wanting to take chances.

This is a good Youtube downloader that is free and doesn't need installing as it's web based: http://www.clipconverter.cc/ Paste in the URL and click MP4, then Continue. Next screen choose a high resolution and click Start. Next screen it's best to uncheck the accelerated download box as you avoid 'offers'. The video will appear in your downloads folder.

I'd guess a good number of 'Tartan Tories' favoured independence; they're not going to make a comeback while tied to Westminster Conservatism.

You know what they say about changing your toothbrushes after a burglary? I'm sorry this happened, but sounds like you're dealing with vermin.

Except that the opportunity to leave and show the rest of us how a proper 21st-century constitution should be created was blown.

What's common sense about that? Why should the English change their system of governance to accommodate a bunch of politicians who felt the need to try and bribe the Scots regardless of its constitutional implications? Prescott's plans for English regional assemblies were rejected in referendums in 2004. It may be attempted again - a federal solution to the constitutional mess devolution has caused would require it - but as was frequently pointed out on here over the years when people pushed for a devo-max question in the Scottish referendum, it would require a UK-wide referendum.

Understatement - it's an English thing...

Yup.

Well, if you take my total inaccuracy on the issue of Anya being dropped, and combine it with the on-the-nose precision regarding the issue of Anya's Scotchness, then I think they equal each other out, more or less ....

Ach, I was only being an arse through a combination of boredom and booze - but as longshots go, mate, that's intergalactic.

To be fair I missread it slightly - it's 'Anya shouldn't be dropped despite not being Scottish'.

But this is the Tartan Army many of whom, like the White Queen, live in a looking-glass world and "believe in six impossible things before breakfast". Leaving aside the proverbial 'luck of the Irish' (simply disproved by pointing out that Ireland sits within the north Atlantic rather than the Caribbean), recent posts have given us 'Anya should be dropped for not being Scottish' and 'The SFA could ask the Polish FA to arrange getting oor flags back' from some pubescent would-be hooligans. Not so much baffling as rather touching...

Stadionowi Oprawcy - 'the stadium torturers'. Hmmm

Bit tough on the Palestinians ...

Me too.

Brant is quintessentially Scottish-like ...

I'm lucky to have clear recall of the past 30 seconds these days. It was a genuine question. I'm assuming this has been SNP Westminster policy since Holyrood, but I don't know.

That's since 1999, I assume.