The Unitarian Jihad. Extremism in defence of moderation is no vice.
10:37:09 PM    

If I've ever said that a Government statement sounded like a Daily Mail headline, I'm sorry, OK? Now I realise how terrifying that would really be.
1:51:30 PM    

Who should I vote for?

Your expected outcome:

Labour

Your actual outcome:

	Labour 20
Conservative -51
	Liberal Democrat 50
UK Independence Party -24
	Green 20

You should vote: Liberal Democrat

The LibDems take a strong stand against tax cuts and a strong one in favour of public services: they would make long-term residential care for the elderly free across the UK, and scrap university tuition fees. They are in favour of a ban on smoking in public places, but would relax laws on cannabis. They propose to change vehicle taxation to be based on usage rather than ownership.

Take the test at Who Should You Vote For
11:58:48 PM    

The Green Party, practising what it preaches (or saving money) is releasing an online-only manifesto.
9:14:08 PM    

Vote for the blogs that best support freedom of expression around the world.
9:10:03 PM    

A great list of UK election resources at DO-wire.
2:59:48 PM    

So, that Terri Schiavo memo that was obviously a fake, er, wasn't a fake. But it was, umm, not completely accurately presented, or something.

Is there a moral equivalence between bloggers who get it wrong, and 'big media' who get it wrong? Metafilter discusses.
8:14:57 PM    

Martin Peretz writes about the war on terror in the current New Republic. He says, inter alia:

What the Bush administration gradually came to realize was that fighting the Muslim terrorist international could not be done in a vacuum.

Even if one agrees that Al-Qaeda and their allies are a 'terrorist international' (they are certainly less organised than the Communist version), it sounds very wrong to describe them as the "Muslim terrorist international". That infelicitous phrase implies some sort of sponsorship arrangement on behalf of the hundreds of millions of Muslims who want nothing to do with bin Laden.

To compare a similar case, would the IRA have been called "the Catholic terrorist organisation"? Or - perhaps even more like the current situation - would ETA, the IRA, the Red Brigades have been banded together as a "Catholic terrorist international"?

Bin Laden and his ilk are terrorists, are Muslims, and are - at least perhaps - an 'international'. But then again, they all have beards and read the Koran. Can we settle on 'beardy terrorist international'?
6:03:25 PM    

Great vox pop on Newsnight earlier today, from some random punter in Leicester:

I'm not a racist, but I just think there are too many coloureds.

Coming soon to a voter near you - "I'm not a Liverpool supporter, but I've dyed my hair red, named my child Milan Baros, and I want You'll never walk alone played at my funeral."
10:52:38 PM    

Election day is May 5th.
8:22:45 PM    

There are many worrying aspects of the Terri Schiavo case - not least the hostility to the separation of powers expressed by people who really should know better. Perhaps the most worrying aspect, however, is the way in which the individual wishes of Mrs Schiavo have become a secondary issue, or almost an irrelevance.

The courts that have looked at this case - extensively - determined as a matter of fact that Mrs Schiavo would not have wished to be kept alive artificially. No factual challenge was ever made to this evidence, for all the fulminations against activist judges and cultures of life. But even though the courts appeared to be ensuring the fulfilment of Mrs Schiavo's wishes, as the law requires, for some people that just doesn't seem to matter.

For the protesters outside the hospice, Terri wanted to live, no matter what the evidence. Her parents, even, implied that they would not have respected her wishes even had there been clear, incontrovertible evidence that she wanted to be allowed to die.

How can people know what she wanted? They can't, for sure, but a determination can be reached through a fair, impartial process, such as the law provides. Beyond that, once a finding of fact has been made, that has to stand unless there is compelling new evidence - evidence which is beyond personal attacks on judges, Mr Schiavo, or anyone else.

Personal belief and morality are essential parts of human life, but this case has seen personal morality imposed on others - which becomes cruelty, and leads to tyranny. Too many of the 'pro-life' protesters in this case claimed Mrs Schiavo wanted to live because, well, that's what she should have wanted - but no matter how strongly that view is held, it just won't do, against the evidence and the finding that she wanted to die.

The spread of public personal morality - especially when used as a substitute for thought - is dangerous. Democracy has to allow the contention of ideas and views aside, as much as possible, from difficult moral issues. Morality in politics lies in diversity and equal law, not in uniformity and higher authority.

The religious right wouldn't like the analogy, but this whole moral panic reminds me of the old story of the socialist who tells a friend "Comrade, come the revolution, everyone will have caviare." "But I don't like caviare," replies his friend. "Comrade," replies the socialist, "come the revolution, everyone will have caviare, and everyone will like caviare."
11:29:56 PM    

The Brighton Argus reports that road safety campaigners were surprised when people polled by West Sussex County Council rejected a proposed 20mph speed limit outside schools.

The stunned outrage of the campaigners is amusing to read. "I can only assume that they aren't parents, or have never lost a child", one democratically-minded campaigner says. Or perhaps they just, you know, disagree with you.
7:50:36 PM