|
|
Post by HStorm on Mar 21, 2006 12:38:29 GMT
Well it could be worse Rob, he could of actually voted for the legislation he has been protesting against.....  Heh, very easily done too; all it takes is to step through one wrong door. Thank you, although we've had our share of maniacs on here as well. If TheMekanik or Ooohcarrots ever return, you'll see what I mean. (Use the search mechanism to see some of their old posts if you don't believe me!  ) |
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Apr 5, 2006 8:14:38 GMT
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4875026.stmBit of a blunder on Cameron's part don't you think? His comments were spot on of course (although they may upset some of the closet rascists in the Tory party) but by making them so publically he's handed UKIP an ideal publicity opportunity. After all we'd heard nothing from them for months and now they've grabben some attention on the back of Tory Blair...
|
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Apr 5, 2006 11:19:10 GMT
It's kind of difficult to know how to look at this in fact. On the one hand, yes, his remarks were a bit crass and have invited some free publicity for UKIP. On the other, it's kind of refreshing hearing a prominent politician saying what he really thinks rather than just following the party line all the time. They say it's a resumption of Punch-And-Judy politics, but in truth these kind of remarks are a little removed from that; not trained or set-piece insults but a real, public castigation.
In the end though, it's not exactly skilled diplomacy is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Apr 5, 2006 12:25:10 GMT
UKIP have now said that they plan to sue over the remark... |
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Apr 5, 2006 13:15:14 GMT
Ah, using the law to silence opponents. I think we can therefore conclude, going back to the original question with which the topic began... well, I'm sure you can all figure out for yourselves what I was going to say. |
|
|
|
Post by Thanatos on Apr 8, 2006 12:05:02 GMT
UKIP have now said that they plan to sue over the remark... With any luck Cameron will refer them to the reply of the defendant in the case of Arkell vs. Pressdram. |
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Apr 8, 2006 16:40:06 GMT
With any luck Cameron will refer them to the reply of the defendant in the case of Arkell vs. Pressdram. Indeed! One of the best, if not the best, legal replies ever. Out of interest, Thanatos, seeing as this is also the Galloway thread and you have been a very vocal supporter of Galloway in the past. Has your opinion of him changed over the last few months with the Big Brother fiasco and his new radio show? |
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Apr 8, 2006 16:45:54 GMT
Sorry for the double post, but here's an update on the UKIP Vs Cameron issue. UKIP have now withdrawn their threat to sue and are going to contest every Tory marginal at the next election. In addition UKIP have parked an Armoured Personnel Carrier outside the Conservative Party's spring conference after Tory party chairman Francis Maude refused to issue an apology and accused some UKIP members of having 'unsavoury connections' with the far right. Of course, driving a tank up to a party conference is really going to show that you don't have any links to far right militaristic groups... |
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Apr 8, 2006 17:07:25 GMT
Shooting barrel-bound ducks... there's just no satisfaction when opponents make it this easy for us, is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Naselus on Apr 8, 2006 17:53:57 GMT
Oh dear, oh dear oh dear. OK, I think it's reasonably fair to say that the three main parties are too close in ideology to make voting worthwhile, but is anyone seriously ging to vote for the kind of reactionary right-wing fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists who feel driving a tank around is acceptable in parliamentary democracy? Where the hell did they get an APC from anyway? This is the kind of thing you'd expect in one of those Balkan states where the average term in office is life or 4 months, whichever the shorter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thanatos on Apr 10, 2006 21:44:54 GMT
Yes, my opinion of Mr. Galloway changed quite substantially when I heard he was going on "Celebrity Big Brother". This is compounded by his persistent neglect of his duties in Parliament and to his constituents (which surprised me at first, as his former constituents in Glasgow seemed to think him good in this regard) in favour of one-man shows (one of which I did in fact attend, but during the summer recess; it wasn't bad, but Tony Benn's is much better).
Regarding UKIP and Cameron, I'm very glad that the latter hasn't apologised, as politicians and other 'public people' seem all to wont to do after saying anything remotely offensive even about those who deserve to be offended; one of the worst examples was Cherie Blair's disgusting apology for saying (about Palestine), "As long as people think they've got no hope but to blow themselves up, we're never going to make progress," which I for my part regard as straight out of a report by what Private Eye once referred to as the ISTBO (Institute of Stating The Bleeding Obvious).
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Apr 11, 2006 22:22:02 GMT
Yes, my opinion of Mr. Galloway changed quite substantially when I heard he was going on "Celebrity Big Brother". This is compounded by his persistent neglect of his duties in Parliament and to his constituents (which surprised me at first, as his former constituents in Glasgow seemed to think him good in this regard) in favour of one-man shows I suppose that's the unfortunate consequence of electing a personality candidate in a constituency, you may end up with just a personality rather than a skilled local MP. Sometimes the local electorate make a good choice, Martin Bell in Tatton for example, but other times they get stuck with a neglectful publicity seeker. |
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Apr 12, 2006 12:19:01 GMT
Well, to be fair to the constituents, they probably thought they were getting a skilled local MP. As Thanatos points out, Galloway was perfectly dedicated and competent in his local work when he was in Glasgow. Maybe he just doesn't value his duty to the English as highly as his duty to his fellow Scotsmen...?
|
|
|
|
Post by Naselus on Apr 12, 2006 18:47:34 GMT
I reckon he just got carried away and started believing his own hype. After all, when you get to appear in the US Senatorial Variaty Performance it's going to go to your head at least a bit, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Thanatos on Apr 12, 2006 19:48:29 GMT
I'd still rather have an off-the-rails Galloway in Parliament than Oona King. Trouble is, if he goes on like this she'll be back next time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Naselus on Apr 12, 2006 19:59:33 GMT
I'm not sure I would. Galloway's disregard for his constituency and his cavalier attitude to Parliament are really starting to grate. Oona may kowtow to Papa Blair, but at least she did half the job my taxes paid her to do, unlike Mr Galloway. He's got to give up this relentless self-promotion and get back into the House.
|
|
)
