Brexit, aka, the UK Becomes a Clown Car of the Highest Order

Nigel Farage signs on with effort to split California into two states.

While it’s not a shock to find Farage’s name associated with something so derpy, what’s surprising is that this isn’t the CalExit proposal supported by the Russians.

Allow me to introduce my counter proposal to split Nigel Farage into two states…

Seeing as Farage is in the States a lot, can anyone just shoot the {insert a very British swearword here} ?

Parsnip Smuggler

He’d have to knock on someone’s door in Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, or Arizona while in blackface.

Gaseous and liquid, I hope?

Head, and body?

I was thinking we put him in a box and keep anyone from observing him.

If the box is airtight im all for it.

http://i.imgur.com/ctiH3nG.gif

Hold onto your butts, everyone!

Here’s the Great Repeal Bill white paper. Not a lot we didn’t already know, but a couple of interesting bits jumped out at me.

This seems very similar to the status of the common law of England in the US. It also raises the question of what English (and Welsh) judges do with post-Brexit European case law on transposed laws. It won’t be formally binding but presumably it will be extremely persuasive if the underlying statute hasn’t changed materially. The English judiciary is already pretty open in terms of looking at other common law jurisdictions for guidance where there is no UK precedent, but this opens a whole new can of worms.

[quote]In areas where the devolved administrations and legislatures have competence, such as agriculture, environment and some transport issues, the devolved administrations and legislatures are responsible for implementing the common policy frameworks set by the EU. At EU level, the UK Government represents the whole of the UK’s interests in the process for setting those common frameworks and these also then provide common UK frameworks, including safeguarding the harmonious functioning of the UK’s own single market. When the UK leaves the EU, the powers which the EU currently exercises in relation to the common frameworks will return to the UK, allowing these rules to be set here in the UK by democratically-elected representatives.

In parallel we will begin intensive discussions with the devolved administrations to identify where common frameworks need to be retained in the future, what these should be, and where common frameworks covering the UK are not necessary.[/quote]

I’m not hugely knowledgeable on the details of devolution, but this seems at best problematic as a long term arrangement. It seems to be basically clawing back devolved powers - understandable as a transitional measure but constitutionally worrying if it’s permanent.

The Quitlers are now threatening war with Spain. Seriously.

If the Spanish Foreign Legion can guarantee people will get to kill some Brexiters then I think they’ll get a few million new British members. I’m sure many would volunteer to go to Spain to defend it from fascists and nationalists. Again.

They may have confused Elizabeth I and II. Easy enough mistake to make.

Howard is being bonkers, but he’s also a washed up ex-leader with all the relevance of a chocolate teapot.

Why don’t we talk about the EU’s choices in feeding fire to this dispute? What need is there to threaten the Gibraltan people? This isn’t their fight. It just seems punitive - far more so than any of the stuff about trade terms or similar.

I really thought that the biggest threat to a deal was the crazy Brexiteer optimism about what kind of deal would be possible, but I’m having second thoughts.() I thought on the EU side the adults would be in charge, and would try and steer things towards a final deal that could best be described as “harsh but reasonable”(), but increasingly it’s clear that the EU institutions have a lot of people who either think the UK will change its mind if they make things look sufficiently bad(), or simply want to be punitive out of European nationalism (which somehow is different from every other kind of nationalism in the eyes of the left.)

(*: Not least because David Davis is apparently being reasonable, which I really did not expect. Now we have to hope the disgraced minister Liam Fox is in the cabinet as some kind of fall guy and will be sacked soon).

(**: Which we should take.)

(***: These, of course, are the same people who are the first to complain about British “blackmail”, which is an example of the kind of self-righteous hypocrisy that makes me deeply suspicious of the EU institutions.)

I understand English isn’t my first language, but I guess my comprehension is lower than what I thought.
I read Spain’s claim, and stupid me, I saw it as a way to allow the UK to have a Brexit deal without Spain having to veto it over Gibraltar.

Because Spain already has that veto. And strangely enough, wants to keep it for the future. Absent that, not allow any Brexit deal that could be trouble for Spain, just veto the whole thing, hard Brexit, hard border with Gibraltar and no more issues with an easily accessible tax haven.
But maybe it’s just my poor English comprehension…

BTW, just as a thought experiment, what’s going to happen when negotiations reach the serious one, Northern Ireland? Hard border with the Republic, NI inside the EU (somehow, wishing for stuff is nice), hard border between NI and the rest of the UK? With the way this is going, I’ll be surprised if people don’t get killed over that one, since any solution is going to piss someone off…

The Tory govt in the 70s forced Spain to open the Gibraltar border before they allowed Spain to join the EU, so we’re just eating the same shit we forced them too. Spain should announce it won’t veto any Scottish application to join the EU. At this point I will celebrate the dissolution of the United Kingdom, fuck the nationalists, fuck the Conversative And Unionist Party how about everything they hold good and dear is shat on too.

I would have never guessed that English isn’t your first language!

  1. Spain doesnt have a veto over Brexit. If the EU27 choose to insist on unanimity then, again, that’s the EU27 deliberately trying to make a deal harder.
  2. You’re seriously suggesting Spain should blow up the Brexit deal in order to defend its right to screw over 30000 people over a 300 year old territorial dispute?
  3. Both the UK and Ireland want a deal over the Irish border, the only way that gets screwed up is if the EU negotiators turn it into a sticking point.
  1. Depends on what you think Brexit means. If it means hard Brexit, Britain leaves, has the same relationship with the EU as say, Zimbabwe, yeah, sure, no veto. Want to have a trade deal post breakup? Spain has a veto. Spain also has a veto on how long the Brexit negotiations will go on for.

  2. I’m seriously suggesting Spain should blow up any Brexit trade deal they’re not cool with. What that might mean, I dunno. Maybe it means not having an easily accessible tax haven at their door. BTW, Britain should also blow up any trade deal it’s not cool with, it’s a trade deal, not a “Party A gets cake, Party B gets death”.

  3. Like I said, it’s nice to want things, but wanting doesn’t make it so. What happens when a British pillow is illegal in the EU, on account of the awful amount of regulations that’ll get dropped? Can Britain allow for horrible non bendy bananas to just waltz in? What if some Polish fellow goes to Ireland and from there, infiltrates Britain through it’s non existent border? There will need to be answers to this sort of questions…