Like I say, remember when you come to vote next time that the Tories initially put Nadine on the Parliamentary Education and Skills Committee. Not that she doesn’t badly need some (scientific) education, but I fear it would be wasted on her.

As has been repeatedly observed, if you are “not anti-abortion”, but genuinely think 24 wks is too late a limit, than your position should logically be to put in measures to increase access to termination early in pregnancy. This is the position of, e.g., Prof Stuart Campbell the 4D ultrasound man. I don’t agre with him but at least the view is logically consistent.

If you don’t support better access and services, both for those seeking terminations in the first trimester and for contraception, the morning after pill etc etc, and don’t support more and better sex education, and so on, then anyone with any nous will justifiably conclude you are flat-out anti-abortion, whatever bullshit and flannel you put out to the contrary.

I raised an eyebrow when she claimed to actually be pro-abortion and said she was only against late abortion. Which is peculiar, because previously she has said “I believe life begins and ends with the first and last heartbeat which is around 9-12 weeks” and “you are right about one thing, I do want to go lower than 20 weeks – I would settle for the European average of 13 weeks, but would prefer 9.”

Liberal Conspiracy

Ministry of Truth

Originally on a Spectator-hosted blog piece.

The best metal for a connector is apparantly Silver, but then that’s so expensive that it wouldn’t be worth the care required to keep it from rusting up.

– Deus X Machina -

I work for an electronics retailer (and no it isnt comet) and, mainly by experimentation to relive boredom, can confirm that more expensive av cables do actually make a difference to the picture and sound output.

Although the signal sent down a hdmi cable is digital there is a visible difference between a cheap standard one and a medium quality cable. However i do agree any cable priced over around £30 is a waste of money as the increased quality from there on is negligible.

In fact the only people who could plausibly argue that their position is not intuitive are those of a fundamentalist religious bent who take a literal interpretation of their sacred texts and will stick to that interpretation even if it runs counter to intuition.

The rest of us have to live with the fact that our moral beliefs are ultimately based on gut feeling.

A three-foot pair, sir? Only $2,750.

“Simply put these are very danceable cables … Great swing and pace — these cables smack that right on the nose big time.”

There does come a point – especially with digital – that you’ve got maximum transmission rates and any more won’t get those 0s and 1s any more 0ish or 1ish.

But very high speed 0s and 1s smear and distort and crossover resulting in re-sends or corrupted signals if you don’t have good enough hardware, or you bundle cables together without proper shielding etc.

(Any 80s geek can tell you what speed your dialup is from listening to the modem connect)

to misquote and misuse the scientific and medical evidence to make soundbites for their ideological POV

In any other walk of life we would call it lying. Why are they so fond of it because “bearing false witness”, as I understand it, is something despised by their sky fairy leader (whose own existence depends on bearing false witness – funnily enough). It is written in stone, is it not?

What comes across mainly is a duly serious discussion about something serious. It actually restored my sometimes wavering belief in the idea that the people in the Commons are really doing, and capable of doing, the job they are elected for. This is because the debate noticeably transcends the political party affiliations of the MPs speaking.

What does come over is that the opposition to the bill consists of two groups of people: (i) the catholic and evangelical Christian MPs, who oppose all embryo research – even what is currently legal – and all abortion; and (ii) the Conservative front bench – see Andrew Lansley’s speech, presumably made with his leader’s approbation – which is cynically jumping onboard with (i) to embarrass the Government, most particularly over the 24-wk limit.

What further comes across is that many of the gang under (i), like Nadine Dorries, are, as ever, prepared to misquote and misuse the scientific and medical evidence to make soundbites for their ideological POV. And again, the Tory front bench is prepared to re-quote these lines for political advantage. Feel free to draw your own inferences.