Can anyone shed any light on this? Rachel Reeve's lies.

[xenon]

The most outrageous thing in this is: "She then had lots of doctor and dental appointments and so was followed". What sort of fucking workplace is this?

The most outrageous thing is that she managed to have multiple doctors and dental appointments. I bet someone has said this already.
It was different times man.

 

[xenon]

It's a FACTUAL FACT IN FACT.

It was posted on Facebook. Is that not factual enough for you? Bloody lefties.

 

[xenon]

I left a job once and they had a whip round. Then I joined back there a couple of weeks later as they found some money. I didn’t give the whip round back. Much to my colleagues jockey derision.

 

[rasputin]

Ignore the online CV truthers. If anything, Rachel Reeves is overqualified to be UK chancellor | Gaby Hinsliff

Gordon Brown and George Osborne studied history, but neither faced the questions of suitability levelled at the first woman in the job, says Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff

www.theguardian.com

 

[Pickman's model]

Ignore the online CV truthers. If anything, Rachel Reeves is overqualified to be UK chancellor | Gaby Hinsliff

Gordon Brown and George Osborne studied history, but neither faced the questions of suitability levelled at the first woman in the job, says Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff

www.theguardian.com

Do you agree with hinsliff?

 

[ska invita]

Done.View attachment 452465

 

[rasputin]

Do you agree with hinsliff?

I don't know why my opinion would be any more interesting than anyone else on here. But, for what it's worth...

I think the glib dismissal of Reeves' falsification of her CV is weak. This episode has damaged Reeves and rightly so.

I think the "six years in central banking" thing is unconvincing. Although she joined the Bank with an economist qualification, she seems to have been employed in a relatively junior research role. I've only ever been able to find one, very dry, published paper with her name on it from 2005.

I thought the most interesting point is, what qualification is needed to make a good Chancellor, and why did none of the other candidates in the office ever get that sort of scrutiny?

What do you think?

 

[bemused]

This was the stand-out bit for me "She said that Reeves left abruptly at the end of 2009 without a leaving event."

Ime, when people leave without notice it's usually because they would have been fired if they hadn't left.

I've never had a leaving event, I loathe them.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't know why my opinion would be any more interesting than anyone else on here. But, for what it's worth...

I think the glib dismissal of Reeves' falsification of her CV is weak. This episode has damaged Reeves and rightly so.

I think the "six years in central banking" thing is unconvincing. Although she joined the Bank with an economist qualification, she seems to have been employed in a relatively junior research role. I've only ever been able to find one, very dry, published paper with her name on it from 2005.

I thought the most interesting point is, what qualification is needed to make a good Chancellor, and why did none of the other candidates in the office ever get that sort of scrutiny?

What do you think?

i think she should be drummed out of government, out of parliament and out of the labour party.

 

[Wilf]

I don't know why my opinion would be any more interesting than anyone else on here. But, for what it's worth...

I think the glib dismissal of Reeves' falsification of her CV is weak. This episode has damaged Reeves and rightly so.

I think the "six years in central banking" thing is unconvincing. Although she joined the Bank with an economist qualification, she seems to have been employed in a relatively junior research role. I've only ever been able to find one, very dry, published paper with her name on it from 2005.

I thought the most interesting point is, what qualification is needed to make a good Chancellor, and why did none of the other candidates in the office ever get that sort of scrutiny?

What do you think?

I think Hinsliff is right about the gender divide and I don't personally give a shit about her 'enhanced' CV. Pales into insignificance compared to Johnson's lying and, say, Grant Shapps (literal) reinvention of himself. She should be judged on what she does. However it does suggest she's not very sharp as a politician - these things are easily checkable. It's like her, Starmer and Rayner still in opposition mindset, taking Lord Alli's money, not thinking about the scrutiny they will face in government. Taking his money was far worse than this non-story.

E2a: it was far worse in terms of giving their opponents buckets of ammo but, more importantly, really scummy given the poverty and inequality in this country.

 

[Boo Radley75]

View attachment 452536

Lol! Thought he looked familiar

 

[Wilf]

Lol! Thought he looked familiar
View attachment 452622

Donald Trump, the Early Years.

 

[Serene]

Can anybody shed any light on the correct use of apostrophe's?

The Pedants Revolt 1381.

 

[Saul Goodman]

View attachment 452660

The Pedants' Revolt, 1381.

CFY

 

[keybored]

Lol! Thought he looked familiar
View attachment 452622