Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will Jim Murphy arrest Labour’s slide in the Scottish pol

135

Comments

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,341

    Mr. Antifrank, it's an interesting quandary.

    I recently decided against buying a book based on its use of CE and BCE. If a historian is a revisionist about the bloody calendar that both irritates me in itself and makes me wonder whether he'll be wearing politically correct goggles for the rest of his work.

    Morning, Mr Dancer. I just wonder if it might not actually be the author's fault - it could be the publisher's house style. Some publishers have the incredibly infuriating habit of decapitalising certain terms even when this changes the meaning - for instance, I have heard a complaint about Evangelical being changed to the far more generic evangelical when they have quite different meanings in C19 Scottish history.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    "In tape-recorded phone calls leaked to The Mail on Sunday..."

    Just out of interest. What exactly is the legal status of taping someones phone calls and publishing them in national newspapers?

    So far you have blamed sedatives, Libservatives, the Mail, the law and the entire town of Chigwell.

    Cameron, the EU, Walnut whips, Somalians, the lizard people and Russell Brand must be feeling left out.
    I'm not blaming anyone. I'm just trying to explain why every time the newspapers run stories like this the UKIP vote goes up not down.
    But recently there have been a lot of stories and polling graphs show a dip on the purple lines. Explain ?
    You're seeing graphs in your dreams?
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election

    http://www.mediafire.com/view/8yid4isbyi9uh3l/YouGov polls 12 months to 14 December 2014.jpg#


    Not my graphs - merely an observer of trends.
    You're focussing on trivial fluctuations. Looking at todays polls, YouGov and ComRes we get:

    YouGov
    12 Dec 2014 Con 32%, Lab 32%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%
    12 Dec 2013 Con 35%, Lab 39%, LD 9%, UKIP 11%
    12 Dec 2012 Con 31%, Lab 44%, LD 12%, UKIP 9%

    ComRes (online)
    13 Dec 2014 Con 33%, Lab 32%, LD 7%, UKIP 18%
    13 Dec 2013 Con 29%, Lab 36%, LD 8% UKIP 18%
    16 Dec 2012 Con 28%, Lab 39%, LD 9%, UKIP 14%

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014
    What stands out is that both the Tories and UKIP are up since 2012 (albeit, in the Tories' case from a pretty horrible figure)
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    It was once explained to me by an elderly relative that when you can hear the Grim Reaper metaphorically sharpening his scythe, embarrassment and being thought of as indiscrete lose their terror compared to not making the best use possible of the remaining hours and days.
  • Mr. Carnyx, a valid point, but there's no real way to know.

    And I'd also not want to support a publisher that went in for such PC revisionist bullshit.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Ninoinoz said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Rather cruel, if I may say so.

    Surely one's inhibitions are part of one's personality. If they are taken away by prescription drugs or impairment, surely your personality has been changed, not that you've changed your personality.

    Surely through growing up we learn to control are baser selves? Or do you yourself not possess one which emerges when you have a dark night of the soul?
    Quite. And it's also possible that dementia changes the balance in your brain between instinctive reptilian reactions and the logical human part of the brain that checks them. While racism and intolerance of others are wrong, there are strong evolutionary reasons for it, and we all have prejudice to some degree in that part of our brains. If the logical part of our brain breaks down, I'm sure we'd all say some nasty things. It seems very unfair to judge someone when their brain is breaking down. Dementia is a horrible thing.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,016
    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    I always loved this poem by Jenny Joseph. So much humanity in it.

    When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
    With a red hat that doesn't go, and doesn't suit me,
    And I shall spend my pension
    on brandy and summer gloves
    And satin sandals,
    and say we've no money for butter.
    I shall sit down on the pavement when I am tired,
    And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells,
    And run my stick along the public railings,
    And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
    I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
    And pick the flowers in other people's gardens,
    And learn to spit.
    You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat,
    And eat three pounds of sausages at a go,
    Or only bread and pickle for a week,
    And hoard pens and pencils and beer mats
    and things in boxes.
    But now we must have clothes that keep us dry,
    And pay our rent and not swear in the street,
    And set a good example for the children.
    We will have friends to dinner and read the papers.
    But maybe I ought to practise a little now?
    So people who know me
    are not too shocked and surprised,
    When suddenly I am old
    and start to wear purple!

  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Indigo said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    That sounds like a good game. We can also count the number of duck houses in Gosport, and the number of peerages made available to major donors just to add to the festive jollity, not forgetting the number of people offering to influence legislation for a consideration, another examination of people's expenses might be good fun as well.
    Be gentle with him. @JackW's a LibDem...so you can surely understand him feeling a little bitter about UKIP's relative success.

    Even people who like to sneer at others deserve representation.
    I have a better idea of JackW's identity than most here and I can assure you that he is not a Lib Dem.

    It was an assumption given that he gets a fit of the vapours on being accused of Tory-inclinations, but is a proud supporter of the Coalition.

    That said, his hero worship of John Thurso makes me suspicious...
    Why not address the point a poster makes on its merits rather than categorising them so that they and their arguments can be dismissed?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Well if it loses the threatening men - that'd be good.

    The only men I've ever been around and felt frightened by are uber Muslims. I know that's very unPC - but it's true. There's a quality to their eye-contact that makes me feel like inhuman prey. I can't imagine what it must feel like if you're obviously gay.

    I felt it it rural Morocco when I was touched up and hassled every single minute even when covered up head to toe. I ended up shopping for my fellow females on our drive across the Sahara because they were too intimidated to endure it themselves again. The same in what was Stratford before the Olympics development. It's an ugly threatening vibe. Luton has it too.

    There's a load of baggage the Muslim community needs to address in its own behaviour. The appalling conduct in Rotherham et al is just one manifestation of it.

    Plato said:

    I'm scared of Whitechapel. And been accused of being a racist on here for saying so.
    snip

    Diversity isn't some catch all excuse to negate others genuine fears and concerns.

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    snip

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    I live with diversity every day - my village, friends and family are all quite diverse. It's lovely. And no, it's not Burton Bradstock.

    What experience do you have of living with diversity? And weren't you the poster who claimed he was afraid of walking through Stepney Green / Whitechapel?
    Fair enough. I'm sorry you had that experience, and would not call you racist for feeling it.

    I hope it doesn't put you off Whitechapel too much - it's well worth a stroll through, even if it is just to the Whitechapel Gallery:
    http://www.whitechapelgallery.org/

    I love that area, even if I don't get to go back there very much. It will be interesting to see if and how it changes when Crossrail arrives in a few years - I guess the yuppisation creeping up from the City will accelerate, and the area will lose something.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:



    I agree with you on that, but surely the most striking example is easy to remember?

    Just last week in THURROCK of all places, a Conservative leaflet was distributed referencing UKIP candidate Tim Aker by his full name of Timur to highlight his Turkish heritage. This was placed next to pictures of Islamic terrorists and and references to the Conservative candidate being a local where as "Timur" wasn't.

    That day the Tory MP for Thurrock, Jackie Doyle-Price was tweeting from a Jim Davidson gig, saying "I salute you"

    I mentioned it tirelessly on here, saying if it were UKIP that had done this, the site would be in meltdown from faux outrage. The only non Kipper criticism came from AntiFrank. TGOHF said "Tim Aker should man up"

    As if by magic, to prove my point, today we have some unpleasant utterances from a UKIP candidate in the other Thurrock seat.. and JackW, TGOHF, Marquee Mark et al are tripping over themselves to be outraged. It is pathetic, playground behaviour.

    They pick and choose when to be offended depending on who said it, not what was said.

    Oi! I criticised it as well (albeit in the same sentence as criticising people who call Osborne "Gideon" so it may not count, according to you)
  • 'SNP On Course To Capture Labour Voters

    The Scottish National Party is on course to win over a quarter of a million ex-Labour General Election votes in Scotland, according to analysis carried out by the British Election Survey for Sky News.
    The newly-published BES data shows the SNP at 42%, over double its 19.9% share at the 2010 General Election.
    It also shows the full extent of the challenge facing the new Scottish Labour leader, Jim Murphy.'

    http://tinyurl.com/q69bsg6
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    No, they weren't.

    They just had less prominence.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Several thousand climate negotiators in Lima after three days of negotiation appear to have an agreement on the seating arrangement for the welcome dinner at Paris and the brand of tissue paper that will be used in the toilets... well almost

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11292703/Lima-climate-change-talks-UN-members-agree-deal-on-next-steps-to-tackle-global-warming.html
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited December 2014
    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    "The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters"

    Last night half a dozen mates and me went to my local for a few beers.. as it was my birthday I was allowed to talk about politics for 5 mins... every one of them said they were going to vote UKIP, but also said they don't like to mention it in case people think bad of them...

    FWIW they all said they wouldn't have their wives/girlfriends breastfeed in public either, said it was for exhibitionists.

    PBers would probably consider me and my mates as oiks, but we are actually relatively well to do for Hornchurch
    Do they have kids?

    My wife doesn't like breast feeding in public, but unless a new mother wants to be a hermit you have to sometimes (she used a poncho to preserve her modesty)
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Happy Birthday - only 6 more days til mine. Hope you don't get any stingy *combined* with Christmas ones.
    isam said:

    MikeK said:

    @isam
    @Sunil_Prasannan

    Good morning all; not another morning about the evils of Ukipism, is it?
    BTW belated birthday wishes to isam. Have one on me, and if we meet at the next PB do I'll pay up.

    Thank you both.

    Yes its another morning of UKIP bashing from the hypocrites that don't criticise Tory ethnic baiting...

    If UKIP are JackW's stroppy teenager, it seems the Tories are the middle aged parent "Do as I say not as I do"
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    @Plato

    After that video came out of the woman walking around New York dealing with endless wolf whistles and rude comments, I wondered if this sort of thing was dealt with on a common basis by British women. I asked Missus Socrates how much she had to face street harassment like this in London. She said that it's not that common here, but when she gets it, it's overwhelmingly from Asian men driving vans yelling out comments from the window.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    I always loved this poem by Jenny Joseph.



    When suddenly I am old
    and start to wear purple!

    Is that the Kippers' Prayer?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Plato said:

    I'm scared of Whitechapel. And been accused of being a racist on here for saying so.

    I got on the wrong Tube and alighted at Whitechapel to be met with menacing groups of Muslim men who clearly thought I was White Trash.

    I don't scare easy - at all, but I was unnerved. I was at college in Camberwell which is a step down from Peckham. And hail from the rough end of Newcastle.

    Diversity isn't some catch all excuse to negate others genuine fears and concerns.

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    I live with diversity every day - my village, friends and family are all quite diverse. It's lovely. And no, it's not Burton Bradstock.

    What experience do you have of living with diversity? And weren't you the poster who claimed he was afraid of walking through Stepney Green / Whitechapel?
    Fair enough. I'm sorry you had that experience, and would not call you racist for feeling it.

    I hope it doesn't put you off Whitechapel too much - it's well worth a stroll through, even if it is just to the Whitechapel Gallery:
    http://www.whitechapelgallery.org/

    I love that area, even if I don't get to go back there very much. It will be interesting to see if and how it changes when Crossrail arrives in a few years - I guess the yuppisation creeping up from the City will accelerate, and the area will lose something.
    I've just found out that the mummy I'm going to have in my office for a few months next year is a Peruvian mummy, not an Egyptian mummy.

    Is it wrong to be slightly disappointed?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,016

    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    I always loved this poem by Jenny Joseph.



    When suddenly I am old
    and start to wear purple!

    Is that the Kippers' Prayer?
    I think it predated Kippers in all honesty but yes, remarkable foresight!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    antifrank said:

    Indigo said:

    Plato said:

    Good grief

    Kulgan of Crydee @KulganofCrydee
    RT @heather_venter: Thatcher 'murder' is BBC's Book at Bedtime dailym.ai/16jU5gA via @MailOnline < #ShockerNot
    I seem to recall that this woman was interviewed about her book and she was as much of a nasty piece of work that you would expect without ever having met her.

    From WIKI

    In September 2014, in an interview published in the Guardian, Mantel confessed to fantasizing about the murdering of Margaret Thatcher in 1983, and fictionalized the event in a short story called 'The Assassination of Margaret Thatcher: 6 August 1983'. In the interview she expands on her hatred for the former British prime minister.

    The word that is missing is her IRRATIONAL hatred
    Indeed, she should stay away from contemporary writing, her books "Wolf Hall" and "Bring Up The Bodies" about the life of Thomas Cromwell, the Secretary to the Council of Henry VIII were excellent.
    I couldn't give a toss how good they are, I wouldn't read anything of hers on principle.
    On the same logic you wouldn't read Le Morte D'Arthur because Thomas Malory was a convicted rapist. Bad people can produce great work.

    Wolf Hall and Bring Up The Bodies are great works.
    they may well be , but I would give such a nasty person a cent of my hard earned cash

    If that's how you feel, I'd recommend buying them second hand. Well worth reading.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I'm lost here. Surely being born a psychopath or paedo is as legitimate as being gay or nice or black.

    Isn't this the whole basis of nature vs nuture for the socially acceptable - but not the rest?
    saddened said:

    FalseFlag said:

    FalseFlag said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    homophobia....... a simple healthy dislike of unnatural behaviour
    Where to start.....

    What is 'healthy' about disliking someone for an innate trait?

    Is it 'healthy' to dislike people with blue eyes or blonde hair?

    Why is it 'unnatural' given people, to quote a song are 'Born this way'?

    Murderers and paedophiles are born that way too.
    Drivel.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited December 2014
    Charles said:



    You just don't get it, do you. It is precisely because he refers to "Chinks", "Pooftahs" and "Peasants" (the later meaning jumped up working class people who think they are in the elite), and that using such language causes a fit of the vapours among right thinking people that he is attracting far more votes than he loses.


    You just don't get it, do you.

    Each of those terms is simply offensive name-calling.

    It doesn't add anything to political discourse.

    As my grandfather used to say: "Never offend someone unnecessarily" (along with "never make an enemy unintentionally", it's one of my favourite lessons)
    pity your grandad hadn't taken young Cameron into his counsel. Fruitcakes, loonies etc.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Plato said:

    Urgh. There aren't many sorts I can't stand - but that group behaviour is terribly unattractive.

    You're clearly too much of a gent and well brought up to be one.

    I think you're one of the most gracious posters on here. So there.

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    Surely a 'peasant's hunt' is a hunt by a single peasant. And since it was a quote - how can the BBC know if it was peasants or peasant's ? I suspect Kerry really meant *bien peasant* hunt :^ )

    CD13 said:

    JackW,

    Be careful, the report says he spoke of organising a "a peasant's hunt through Chigwell village". Unless, the BBC is ungrammatical, that means a hunt by peasants to overthrow their rightful masters.

    Not something, I thought you'd be happy with.

    No - he was mimicking some of the braying boors that I knew (but didn't associate with) at university.

    Instead of shooting "pheasants" you shoot "peasants".

    Oh! How they laughed.

    Jackasses.
    Madam, I am flattered.

    *bows gently*
  • OT Japan (snap election): Ishihara losing his seat, new right-wing populist parties getting killed and buried in a hole
  • 'SNP On Course To Capture Labour Voters

    The Scottish National Party is on course to win over a quarter of a million ex-Labour General Election votes in Scotland, according to analysis carried out by the British Election Survey for Sky News.
    The newly-published BES data shows the SNP at 42%, over double its 19.9% share at the 2010 General Election.
    It also shows the full extent of the challenge facing the new Scottish Labour leader, Jim Murphy.'

    http://tinyurl.com/q69bsg6

    Let's hope the SNP live up to the hype in the next GE. There was plenty of talk from loser Salmond about twenty SNP seats in the 2010 GE but he failed to deliver as usual. Maybe Lego head Sturgeon can deliver.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    edited December 2014
    In general, I'd be cautious about stating the majority view. PB is not typical.

    I tend to agree with Isam's view of beer-fuelled philosophy. If "In Vino Veritas" is true, Ukip will form the next government. But that might be his and my peer group. I wouldn't extrapolate that to "the majority".

    In the same way, I'm sure middle class parts of London aren't typical either.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    O/T, but I see a came first fir the US election game.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Way OT: Nice to see the cereal selling hipsters giving the patronising reporters for C4 News both barrels with a public letter on Facebook.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/11292574/Cereal-Killer-blow-as-shop-owner-takes-on-Channel-Four.html
    If you want someone to solve the poverty crises in London I don't think I'm the man to do that as I am too busy trying to cure Ebola and get Kim Kardashian to keep her clothes on. Also you didn't even pay me for the cereal which you could so easily afford with your overpriced river island suit so I will send you a bill for the extortionate £3.20.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    Well, you have chosen to leave the Conservatives and team up with people we Tories are delighted to no longer have in our midst. That says more about you than it says about me I think.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Indigo said:

    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    It was once explained to me by an elderly relative that when you can hear the Grim Reaper metaphorically sharpening his scythe, embarrassment and being thought of as indiscrete lose their terror compared to not making the best use possible of the remaining hours and days.
    I think there's actually a physical explanation. Something to do with the hippocampus I believe
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I'm quite pro-guns for hunting and shooting. If the coppers spend £200 processing a license I'd be astonished. And I speak as someone who's been there and done that.

    The anti-gun mindset here is bizarre - only criminals have them - yet Olympic sportsmen don't. Dunblane was horrific - but hard cases make bad law. Like Dangerous Dogs.
    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    RT @AGilinsky: Yvette Cooper just said the Government "subsidises" gun licences. I didn't realise you could subsidise a tax.

    She's off on one.

    LOL Yvette Cooper pretending that cutting the biscuit bill will reduce the deficit.

    Bet you they double quadruple the cost after the election.

    Their argument is that licences cost £50 to obtain but cost the police £200 to process

    http://www.labour-southeast.org.uk/gun_licence_subsidy_leaves_se_police_forces_over_3m_out_of_pocket
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Exactly.
    Indigo said:

    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    It was once explained to me by an elderly relative that when you can hear the Grim Reaper metaphorically sharpening his scythe, embarrassment and being thought of as indiscrete lose their terror compared to not making the best use possible of the remaining hours and days.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Wonderful!
    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    I always loved this poem by Jenny Joseph. So much humanity in it.

    When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
    With a red hat that doesn't go, and doesn't suit me,
    And I shall spend my pension
    on brandy and summer gloves
    And satin sandals,
    and say we've no money for butter.
    I shall sit down on the pavement when I am tired,
    And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells,
    And run my stick along the public railings,
    And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
    I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
    And pick the flowers in other people's gardens,
    And learn to spit.
    You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat,
    And eat three pounds of sausages at a go,
    Or only bread and pickle for a week,
    And hoard pens and pencils and beer mats
    and things in boxes.
    But now we must have clothes that keep us dry,
    And pay our rent and not swear in the street,
    And set a good example for the children.
    We will have friends to dinner and read the papers.
    But maybe I ought to practise a little now?
    So people who know me
    are not too shocked and surprised,
    When suddenly I am old
    and start to wear purple!

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    I always loved this poem by Jenny Joseph. So much humanity in it.

    When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
    With a red hat that doesn't go, and doesn't suit me,
    And I shall spend my pension
    on brandy and summer gloves
    And satin sandals,
    and say we've no money for butter.
    I shall sit down on the pavement when I am tired,
    And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells,
    And run my stick along the public railings,
    And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
    I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
    And pick the flowers in other people's gardens,
    And learn to spit.
    You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat,
    And eat three pounds of sausages at a go,
    Or only bread and pickle for a week,
    And hoard pens and pencils and beer mats
    and things in boxes.
    But now we must have clothes that keep us dry,
    And pay our rent and not swear in the street,
    And set a good example for the children.
    We will have friends to dinner and read the papers.
    But maybe I ought to practise a little now?
    So people who know me
    are not too shocked and surprised,
    When suddenly I am old
    and start to wear purple!

    That's nice.

    A couple of friends of mine set up this wonderful organisation - really worth looking at as I think it has the potential to be really impactful

    https://givetocure.org/
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    Well, you have chosen to leave the Conservatives and team up with people we Tories are delighted to no longer have in our midst. That says more about you than it says about me I think.
    In Outer East London, UKIP tend to be to the Left of the local Conservatives.
  • One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    Do the PB Tories who make references to 'ragheads' and 'fuzzywuzzies' also make your skin crawl ?
    Who are these PB Tories?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    Well, you have chosen to leave the Conservatives and team up with people we Tories are delighted to no longer have in our midst. That says more about you than it says about me I think.
    Have the tories chosen to become some kind of exclusive club ?

    If so it seems there just aren't enough of you to win an election. Is that wise politics ?

    Have you just given up ?

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,679
    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Although I read an article a few years ago suggesting that loss of inhibitions is related to old age generally, not dementia
    I always loved this poem by Jenny Joseph. So much humanity in it.

    When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
    With a red hat that doesn't go, and doesn't suit me,
    And I shall spend my pension
    on brandy and summer gloves
    And satin sandals,
    and say we've no money for butter.
    I shall sit down on the pavement when I am tired,
    And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells,
    And run my stick along the public railings,
    And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
    I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
    And pick the flowers in other people's gardens,
    And learn to spit.
    You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat,
    And eat three pounds of sausages at a go,
    Or only bread and pickle for a week,
    And hoard pens and pencils and beer mats
    and things in boxes.
    But now we must have clothes that keep us dry,
    And pay our rent and not swear in the street,
    And set a good example for the children.
    We will have friends to dinner and read the papers.
    But maybe I ought to practise a little now?
    So people who know me
    are not too shocked and surprised,
    When suddenly I am old
    and start to wear purple!

    That is my mother's favorite poem. She has it on her wall in her care home. She has recited it to us for years so we wouldn't be too shocked and surprised. At the age of 95 she has now got dementia and goes out in her slippers in the rain.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Indigo said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    That sounds like a good game. We can also count the number of duck houses in Gosport, and the number of peerages made available to major donors just to add to the festive jollity, not forgetting the number of people offering to influence legislation for a consideration, another examination of people's expenses might be good fun as well.
    Be gentle with him. @JackW's a LibDem...so you can surely understand him feeling a little bitter about UKIP's relative success.

    Even people who like to sneer at others deserve representation.
    I have a better idea of JackW's identity than most here and I can assure you that he is not a Lib Dem.

    It was an assumption given that he gets a fit of the vapours on being accused of Tory-inclinations, but is a proud supporter of the Coalition.

    That said, his hero worship of John Thurso makes me suspicious...
    Why not address the point a poster makes on its merits rather than categorising them so that they and their arguments can be dismissed?
    Read the thread.

    JackW made a prattish comment and I suggested that he should be forgiven because 'he is a LibDem'.

    Clearly tongue in cheek.

    Away wi' ye!
  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Indigo said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    That sounds like a good game. We can also count the number of duck houses in Gosport, and the number of peerages made available to major donors just to add to the festive jollity, not forgetting the number of people offering to influence legislation for a consideration, another examination of people's expenses might be good fun as well.
    Be gentle with him. @JackW's a LibDem...so you can surely understand him feeling a little bitter about UKIP's relative success.

    Even people who like to sneer at others deserve representation.
    I have a better idea of JackW's identity than most here and I can assure you that he is not a Lib Dem.

    It was an assumption given that he gets a fit of the vapours on being accused of Tory-inclinations, but is a proud supporter of the Coalition.

    That said, his hero worship of John Thurso makes me suspicious...
    old school conservative wet.
  • Ninoinoz said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Rather cruel, if I may say so.

    Surely one's inhibitions are part of one's personality. If they are taken away by prescription drugs or impairment, surely your personality has been changed, not that you've changed your personality.

    Surely through growing up we learn to control are baser selves? Or do you yourself not possess one which emerges when you have a dark night of the soul?
    I disagree. Like everyone else I do have a darker side but it tends to be on the perverted rather than the offensive side. I can honestly say that I could sit alongside Antifrank or TSE being either drunk, drugged or demented and be confident the worst reaction I would elicit from them would be slightly shocked amusement or bemusement.

    My sordid end would be far more likely to involve an orange than a racist rant.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:



    You just don't get it, do you. It is precisely because he refers to "Chinks", "Pooftahs" and "Peasants" (the later meaning jumped up working class people who think they are in the elite), and that using such language causes a fit of the vapours among right thinking people that he is attracting far more votes than he loses.


    You just don't get it, do you.

    Each of those terms is simply offensive name-calling.

    It doesn't add anything to political discourse.

    As my grandfather used to say: "Never offend someone unnecessarily" (along with "never make an enemy unintentionally", it's one of my favourite lessons)
    pity your grandad hadn't taken young Cameron into his counsel. Fruitcakes, loonies etc.
    He was too busy beating Thatcher into shape.

    But when he retired in 1988 it all began to go wrong...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469
    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I'm scared of Whitechapel. And been accused of being a racist on here for saying so.

    I got on the wrong Tube and alighted at Whitechapel to be met with menacing groups of Muslim men who clearly thought I was White Trash.

    I don't scare easy - at all, but I was unnerved. I was at college in Camberwell which is a step down from Peckham. And hail from the rough end of Newcastle.

    Diversity isn't some catch all excuse to negate others genuine fears and concerns.

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    I live with diversity every day - my village, friends and family are all quite diverse. It's lovely. And no, it's not Burton Bradstock.

    What experience do you have of living with diversity? And weren't you the poster who claimed he was afraid of walking through Stepney Green / Whitechapel?
    Fair enough. I'm sorry you had that experience, and would not call you racist for feeling it.

    I hope it doesn't put you off Whitechapel too much - it's well worth a stroll through, even if it is just to the Whitechapel Gallery:
    http://www.whitechapelgallery.org/

    I love that area, even if I don't get to go back there very much. It will be interesting to see if and how it changes when Crossrail arrives in a few years - I guess the yuppisation creeping up from the City will accelerate, and the area will lose something.
    I've just found out that the mummy I'm going to have in my office for a few months next year is a Peruvian mummy, not an Egyptian mummy.

    Is it wrong to be slightly disappointed?
    Urrrm, I've got no idea why you'd ask me that question. I've obviously missed something ...
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Plato said:

    I'm quite pro-guns for hunting and shooting. If the coppers spend £200 processing a license I'd be astonished. And I speak as someone who's been there and done that.

    The anti-gun mindset here is bizarre - only criminals have them - yet Olympic sportsmen don't. Dunblane was horrific - but hard cases make bad law. Like Dangerous Dogs.

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    RT @AGilinsky: Yvette Cooper just said the Government "subsidises" gun licences. I didn't realise you could subsidise a tax.

    She's off on one.

    LOL Yvette Cooper pretending that cutting the biscuit bill will reduce the deficit.

    Bet you they double quadruple the cost after the election.

    Their argument is that licences cost £50 to obtain but cost the police £200 to process

    http://www.labour-southeast.org.uk/gun_licence_subsidy_leaves_se_police_forces_over_3m_out_of_pocket
    It'll be a fully-loaded cost estimate

    (Salary + overhead + administrative support etc) * 5 hours

    Or something.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:



    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.

    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    Well, you have chosen to leave the Conservatives and team up with people we Tories are delighted to no longer have in our midst. That says more about you than it says about me I think.
    Have the tories chosen to become some kind of exclusive club ?

    If so it seems there just aren't enough of you to win an election. Is that wise politics ?

    Have you just given up ?

    The Tories will enjoy the purity of opposition, they can throw out all the "nasty" people, anyone that doesn't fit the metropolitan liberal mindset, to hell with all those golf club bores, out with all the retired colonels, white van men with their nasty flags, who needs them. Of course after a year of two of the warm feeling of being a group of fellow travellers, they might wonder why they can't get more than 25% of the vote.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited December 2014
    Plato said:

    A very good friend of mine is voting Kipper - he left London [Morden] to get away from the crime and multi-culti schooling that he felt was harming his kids' education.
    He doesn't like gay marriage [or public gayness as it makes him uncomfortable], he's a White Van Man, very traditional WWC. He'd never approve of public breastfeeding as it's uncivilised in his view. ............................

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".
    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    snip
    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, t....................
    "The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters"
    Last night half a dozen mates and me went to my local for a few beers.. as it was my birthday I was allowed to talk about politics for 5 mins... every one of them said they were going to vote UKIP, but also said they don't like to mention it in case people think bad of them...
    FWIW they all said they wouldn't have their wives/girlfriends breastfeed in public either, said it was for exhibitionists.
    PBers would probably consider me and my mates as oiks, but we are actually relatively well to do for Hornchurch
    I was only one ok about public breastfeeding vs 18 yr old daughter and the wife both against it. They are not voting UKIP. They looked at me and wondererd about my reasons, voyeurism?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I'm over 40 now, so mostly invisible to men of any background - before then, I considered a day without a wolf whistle disappointing.

    I don't mind being propositioned - I take it as a compliment. Culturally Jamaican men are very upfront about it. I found it oddly honest, but got it and easily rebuffed it with respect maintained for both sides. Muslim men who do it have a look in their eyes that I find really threatening. It's not a compliment, it's like being forewarned of rape. Feeling inhuman is the only description I can give it.

    Given I'm a bloke a woman's body and not phased by anything sexual - this was a really weird and unwelcome experience. That I ended up being a human shield for the spouses of my fellow travellers says it all.
    Socrates said:

    @Plato

    After that video came out of the woman walking around New York dealing with endless wolf whistles and rude comments, I wondered if this sort of thing was dealt with on a common basis by British women. I asked Missus Socrates how much she had to face street harassment like this in London. She said that it's not that common here, but when she gets it, it's overwhelmingly from Asian men driving vans yelling out comments from the window.

  • Plato said:

    Happy Birthday - only 6 more days til mine. Hope you don't get any stingy *combined* with Christmas ones.

    isam said:

    MikeK said:

    @isam
    @Sunil_Prasannan

    Good morning all; not another morning about the evils of Ukipism, is it?
    BTW belated birthday wishes to isam. Have one on me, and if we meet at the next PB do I'll pay up.

    Thank you both.

    Yes its another morning of UKIP bashing from the hypocrites that don't criticise Tory ethnic baiting...

    If UKIP are JackW's stroppy teenager, it seems the Tories are the middle aged parent "Do as I say not as I do"
    My brother and his son were both born on Christmas day (years apart, obviously) - the good news is people don't forget your birthday.....the bad news is they do try the 'two presents in one' con.....
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,121
    edited December 2014
    OK, looks like YG and ComRes are the only weekend polls, so it's that time of the week again, when we at the Sunil on Sunday release our ELBOW (Electoral Leader-Board Of the Week). There were nine polls with field-work end-dates from 7th to 13th Dec, with a total weighted sample of 11,776.

    Lab 33.6% (+0.7)
    Con 32.7% (+1.3)
    UKIP 15.3% (-0.8)
    LD 7.5% (+0.2)

    Lab lead 0.9% (-0.5)

    changes from our very first ELBOW on 17th August:

    Lab -2.5%
    Con -0.5%
    UKIP +2.2%
    LD -1.3%

    Lab lead -2.1% (ie. was 3.0, now 0.9%)

    Take-home:

    * Biggest ever weekly jump in Tory score in ELBOW
    * Lab also up despite this, but much less than Tories - highest Lab score since mid Oct
    * Joint-lowest score for UKIP since Clacton
    * LDs also up a touch, best score for a month

    Was it all you were hoping for? :)
  • Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,149
    edited December 2014

    'SNP On Course To Capture Labour Voters

    The Scottish National Party is on course to win over a quarter of a million ex-Labour General Election votes in Scotland, according to analysis carried out by the British Election Survey for Sky News.
    The newly-published BES data shows the SNP at 42%, over double its 19.9% share at the 2010 General Election.
    It also shows the full extent of the challenge facing the new Scottish Labour leader, Jim Murphy.'

    http://tinyurl.com/q69bsg6

    Let's hope the SNP live up to the hype in the next GE. There was plenty of talk from loser Salmond about twenty SNP seats in the 2010 GE but he failed to deliver as usual. Maybe Lego head Sturgeon can deliver.
    We can be sure whatever the result, it'll be some distance form any of your half-hearted and ever fluid predictions.

    Jim Murphy has committed himself to holding all 41 Scottish seats at the GE; there's an example of courageous prediction for you.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Plato said:

    Happy Birthday - only 6 more days til mine. Hope you don't get any stingy *combined* with Christmas ones.

    isam said:

    MikeK said:

    @isam
    @Sunil_Prasannan

    Good morning all; not another morning about the evils of Ukipism, is it?
    BTW belated birthday wishes to isam. Have one on me, and if we meet at the next PB do I'll pay up.

    Thank you both.

    Yes its another morning of UKIP bashing from the hypocrites that don't criticise Tory ethnic baiting...

    If UKIP are JackW's stroppy teenager, it seems the Tories are the middle aged parent "Do as I say not as I do"
    My brother and his son were both born on Christmas day (years apart, obviously) - the good news is people don't forget your birthday.....the bad news is they do try the 'two presents in one' con.....
    I hear you, we contrived to have two of our children on successive days, three years apart to be sure, but even so, and within two weeks after Christmas, since both my nephews Birthdays are within a week of Christmas, it can be a bit pricey at this time of year!
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited December 2014
    Cats have gone all unPC and towel head - does this count?

    s1037.photobucket.com/user/luckyeddie2/media/terrorist-cat-1.jpg.html

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    Do the PB Tories who make references to 'ragheads' and 'fuzzywuzzies' also make your skin crawl ?
    Who are these PB Tories?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    We might well look back in 20-30 years and view this as a golden age of liberalism in that respect, the number of more conservative in the cultural and religious sense, people coming to this country, who dont show much sign of relaxing those views in successive generations means that there is likely to be significant pressure in years to come to readdress those liberties.
  • Socrates said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Rather cruel, if I may say so.

    Surely one's inhibitions are part of one's personality. If they are taken away by prescription drugs or impairment, surely your personality has been changed, not that you've changed your personality.

    Surely through growing up we learn to control are baser selves? Or do you yourself not possess one which emerges when you have a dark night of the soul?
    Quite. And it's also possible that dementia changes the balance in your brain between instinctive reptilian reactions and the logical human part of the brain that checks them. While racism and intolerance of others are wrong, there are strong evolutionary reasons for it, and we all have prejudice to some degree in that part of our brains. If the logical part of our brain breaks down, I'm sure we'd all say some nasty things. It seems very unfair to judge someone when their brain is breaking down. Dementia is a horrible thing.
    I don't judge her for her dementia. As I said she has always been an extreme racist and homophobe. I am simply pointing out that what some perceive as a result of her dementia is nothing of the sort. All the dementia has done is remove the last inhibitions she had to displaying her views in public.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,149
    edited December 2014
    Assume this is part of the same Sun Yougov poll. Getting a seat at Holyrood may not be a shoe in for Murphy.

    Alasdair [Alexander] ‏@Alasdair91 53 mins53 minutes ago
    New @YouGov #Hollyrood2016 poll: @theSNP - 50% @scottishlabour - 28% @ScotTories - 14% @scotlibdems - 3% @UKIP - 3% @scotgp - 2%
  • In Graphical form

    Sunil Prasannan ‏@Sunil_P2 · 11s11 seconds ago
    Sunil_on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral Leader-Board Of the Week) update 14th Dec: Lab 33.6%, Con 32.7%, UKIP 15.3%, LD 7.5%

    https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/544101205103116288?lang=en-gb

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    edited December 2014
    Isam Happy Birthday, my birthday is on Thursday, only a few days away like Plato, like most birthdays around Christmas it often gets added on

    TUD Labour won 1,035, 528 votes in 2010 in Scotland, so if a quarter of a million of its 2010 voters are now voting SNP that means around 25% of 2010 Labour voters have switched to the SNP. That would be a majority of the 37% of 2010 Labour voters who voted Yes. They are probably lost to Labour for now. Murphy would be better targeting the 20% of 2011 SNP voters who voted No, as well as Tories, LDs and UKIP voters to make Labour the main unionist party
    http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/10/labour-worried/
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Ha! Given I'm a huge animal husbandry fan, I love watching mothers and their offspring. And get a kick out of hand-rearing orphans. But there's something too intimate about humans breast-feeding for me. It's not about being a square or prudish, it's a private thing. Like pillow talk.

    I can't work out why I feel like this. I guess it's the same as me flinching from dating younger men - I feel like their mum and it's all wrong on a visceral level. I can't be a cougar.

    Plato said:

    A very good friend of mine is voting Kipper - he left London [Morden] to get away from the crime and multi-culti schooling that he felt was harming his kids' education.
    He doesn't like gay marriage [or public gayness as it makes him uncomfortable], he's a White Van Man, very traditional WWC. He'd never approve of public breastfeeding as it's uncivilised in his view. ............................

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".
    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    snip
    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, t....................
    "The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters"
    Last night half a dozen mates and me went to my local for a few beers.. as it was my birthday I was allowed to talk about politics for 5 mins... every one of them said they were going to vote UKIP, but also said they don't like to mention it in case people think bad of them...
    FWIW they all said they wouldn't have their wives/girlfriends breastfeed in public either, said it was for exhibitionists.
    PBers would probably consider me and my mates as oiks, but we are actually relatively well to do for Hornchurch
    I was only one ok about public breastfeeding vs 18 yr old daughter and the wife both against it. They are not voting UKIP. They looked at me and wondererd about my reasons, voyeurism?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    Ninoinoz said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Rather cruel, if I may say so.

    Surely one's inhibitions are part of one's personality. If they are taken away by prescription drugs or impairment, surely your personality has been changed, not that you've changed your personality.

    Surely through growing up we learn to control are baser selves? Or do you yourself not possess one which emerges when you have a dark night of the soul?
    I disagree. Like everyone else I do have a darker side but it tends to be on the perverted rather than the offensive side. I can honestly say that I could sit alongside Antifrank or TSE being either drunk, drugged or demented and be confident the worst reaction I would elicit from them would be slightly shocked amusement or bemusement.

    My sordid end would be far more likely to involve an orange than a racist rant.
    I don't think it matters much whether one does have unpleasant prejudices, so long as the logical side of one's personality can realise that they are unfair.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    JackW said:

    Indigo said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    That sounds like a good game. We can also count the number of duck houses in Gosport, and the number of peerages made available to major donors just to add to the festive jollity, not forgetting the number of people offering to influence legislation for a consideration, another examination of people's expenses might be good fun as well.
    Duck houses, peerages and expenses scandals are Soooooooooo last year.

    Farage and his Ukip troopers represent a wonderful and seemingly endless spectacle of mirth and merriment and should be preserved for the nation and bottled as a counter weight to the burgeoning NHS cost of depression.



    surely the cost of depression comes from leaving Osborne in charge of the nation's finances ?


    In a similar vein then, placing Ed Balls in charge of the Treasury could only be described as " self harming"
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    Indigo said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    We might well look back in 20-30 years and view this as a golden age of liberalism in that respect, the number of more conservative in the cultural and religious sense, people coming to this country, who dont show much sign of relaxing those views in successive generations means that there is likely to be significant pressure in years to come to readdress those liberties.
    We've certainly moved some distance away from free speech, in my adulthood.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    Charles said:



    You just don't get it, do you. It is precisely because he refers to "Chinks", "Pooftahs" and "Peasants" (the later meaning jumped up working class people who think they are in the elite), and that using such language causes a fit of the vapours among right thinking people that he is attracting far more votes than he loses.


    You just don't get it, do you.

    Each of those terms is simply offensive name-calling.

    It doesn't add anything to political discourse.

    As my grandfather used to say: "Never offend someone unnecessarily" (along with "never make an enemy unintentionally", it's one of my favourite lessons)
    It wasn't part of political discourse. It was said in a private telephone conversation that some S**t taped and passed onto a national newspaper.

    Things said in private conversations have different thresholds to public speeches.

    And frankly I can't see much difference between hacking someones voicemail and using the information or publishing it and taping someones phonecall (presumably without their consent) and using it in that way.



    Cameron made a private comment to another politician, something about the Queen "purring" about the Scotland result.

    A cameraman picked it up with a long-range microphone, not because it was meant to be recorded.

    Is that "hacking" his private conversation without consent? Should it have been published?

    If you are overheard, then you are overheard. Taping someones phone call, without telling them you are going to do it first (as call centres do) is a crime.
    When I worked at Goldman Sachs, I was involved in uncovering a multi billion dollar fraud. The result of this was that I got death threats. Goldman organised for my line to be recorded so that we might have evidence for the police, if it were later needed. This happened without anyone at the other end of the line ever knowing. Was that a crime?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    Indigo said:

    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:



    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.

    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    Well, you have chosen to leave the Conservatives and team up with people we Tories are delighted to no longer have in our midst. That says more about you than it says about me I think.
    Have the tories chosen to become some kind of exclusive club ?

    If so it seems there just aren't enough of you to win an election. Is that wise politics ?

    Have you just given up ?

    The Tories will enjoy the purity of opposition, they can throw out all the "nasty" people, anyone that doesn't fit the metropolitan liberal mindset, to hell with all those golf club bores, out with all the retired colonels, white van men with their nasty flags, who needs them. Of course after a year of two of the warm feeling of being a group of fellow travellers, they might wonder why they can't get more than 25% of the vote.
    I'm not sure the Conservatives have any strategy for dealing with UKIP.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Plato said:



    I don't mind being propositioned - I take it as a compliment. Culturally Jamaican men are very upfront about it. I found it oddly honest, but got it and easily rebuffed it with respect maintained for both sides. Muslim men who do it have a look in their eyes that I find really threatening. It's not a compliment, it's like being forewarned of rape. Feeling inhuman is the only description I can give it.

    I think it all depends on what the proposition is. There's a big difference between whistling and shouting "DAYUM GIRL" and someone walking up to a woman and saying "Hi, I really like something about you and I'd love to grab a drink some time. Could I get your phone number?"

  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    edited December 2014
    Sunil: "Was it all you were hoping for?"

    More or less, although crossover next week would be good.
    Btw, what are the constituent parties making up the remaining 11% ..... if the Communists Green Party are set for a further surge in support, doubtless at Labour's expense, then the Sunil Publishing empire should be prepared for it.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
  • Plato said:

    Ha! Given I'm a huge animal husbandry fan, I love watching mothers and their offspring. And get a kick out of hand-rearing orphans. But there's something too intimate about humans breast-feeding for me. It's not about being a square or prudish, it's a private thing. Like pillow talk.

    I can't work out why I feel like this. I guess it's the same as me flinching from dating younger men - I feel like their mum and it's all wrong on a visceral level. I can't be a cougar.

    Plato said:

    A very good friend of mine is voting Kipper - he left London [Morden] to get away from the crime and multi-culti schooling that he felt was harming his kids' education.
    He doesn't like gay marriage [or public gayness as it makes him uncomfortable], he's a White Van Man, very traditional WWC. He'd never approve of public breastfeeding as it's uncivilised in his view. ............................

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".
    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    snip
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, t....................
    "The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters"
    Last night half a dozen mates and me went to my local for a few beers.. as it was my birthday I was allowed to talk about politics for 5 mins... every one of them said they were going to vote UKIP, but also said they don't like to mention it in case people think bad of them...
    FWIW they all said they wouldn't have their wives/girlfriends breastfeed in public either, said it was for exhibitionists.
    PBers would probably consider me and my mates as oiks, but we are actually relatively well to do for Hornchurch
    I was only one ok about public breastfeeding vs 18 yr old daughter and the wife both against it. They are not voting UKIP. They looked at me and wondererd about my reasons, voyeurism?
    Ageist :)

    Age is just a number, hun :)
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Oranges? You are Stephen Milligan and I claim £5.

    LOL

    Ninoinoz said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Rather cruel, if I may say so.

    Surely one's inhibitions are part of one's personality. If they are taken away by prescription drugs or impairment, surely your personality has been changed, not that you've changed your personality.

    Surely through growing up we learn to control are baser selves? Or do you yourself not possess one which emerges when you have a dark night of the soul?
    I disagree. Like everyone else I do have a darker side but it tends to be on the perverted rather than the offensive side. I can honestly say that I could sit alongside Antifrank or TSE being either drunk, drugged or demented and be confident the worst reaction I would elicit from them would be slightly shocked amusement or bemusement.

    My sordid end would be far more likely to involve an orange than a racist rant.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    When I worked at Goldman Sachs, I was involved in uncovering a multi billion dollar fraud. The result of this was that I got death threats. Goldman organised for my line to be recorded so that we might have evidence for the police, if it were later needed. This happened without anyone at the other end of the line ever knowing. Was that a crime?

    I'm not familiar with the legal situation here, but in the US, wiretaps to find evidence of criminal activity have to be cut once it's clear the phone call is not pertinent. That seems a reasonable compromise.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Sean_F said:

    Indigo said:

    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:



    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.

    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters. Many or most of them support UKIP's most controversial ideas, from zero net migration to the death penalty to banning the burqa or, of course, quitting the EU.

    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    Well, you have chosen to leave the Conservatives and team up with people we Tories are delighted to no longer have in our midst. That says more about you than it says about me I think.
    Have the tories chosen to become some kind of exclusive club ?

    If so it seems there just aren't enough of you to win an election. Is that wise politics ?

    Have you just given up ?

    The Tories will enjoy the purity of opposition, they can throw out all the "nasty" people, anyone that doesn't fit the metropolitan liberal mindset, to hell with all those golf club bores, out with all the retired colonels, white van men with their nasty flags, who needs them. Of course after a year of two of the warm feeling of being a group of fellow travellers, they might wonder why they can't get more than 25% of the vote.
    I'm not sure the Conservatives have any strategy for dealing with UKIP.
    Sadly the Guardian and its readers seem to feel that the "Freedom not to be offended" is far more important than Freedom of Speech. One suspects that should a real extreme government get elected in the future (rather than the slightly farther from the centre than they are used to ones they whine about now) they might modify their position slightly when they start being told what their editorial line is.
  • Ninoinoz said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Rather cruel, if I may say so.

    Surely one's inhibitions are part of one's personality. If they are taken away by prescription drugs or impairment, surely your personality has been changed, not that you've changed your personality.

    Surely through growing up we learn to control are baser selves? Or do you yourself not possess one which emerges when you have a dark night of the soul?
    I disagree. Like everyone else I do have a darker side but it tends to be on the perverted rather than the offensive side. I can honestly say that I could sit alongside Antifrank or TSE being either drunk, drugged or demented and be confident the worst reaction I would elicit from them would be slightly shocked amusement or bemusement.
    Would it be possible to persuade you to sit beside me in any other state?
  • 'SNP On Course To Capture Labour Voters

    The Scottish National Party is on course to win over a quarter of a million ex-Labour General Election votes in Scotland, according to analysis carried out by the British Election Survey for Sky News.
    The newly-published BES data shows the SNP at 42%, over double its 19.9% share at the 2010 General Election.
    It also shows the full extent of the challenge facing the new Scottish Labour leader, Jim Murphy.'

    http://tinyurl.com/q69bsg6

    Let's hope the SNP live up to the hype in the next GE. There was plenty of talk from loser Salmond about twenty SNP seats in the 2010 GE but he failed to deliver as usual. Maybe Lego head Sturgeon can deliver.
    We can be sure whatever the result, it'll be some distance form any of your half-hearted and ever fluid predictions.

    Jim Murphy has committed himself to holding all 41 Scottish seats at the GE; there's an example of courageous prediction for you.
    Thanks for your interesting insights. Anyway, good luck with your ultra-nationalist, anti-labour and anti-Union movement.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Will Haye used to say I Can Say What I Like.

    Now you can't.

    I hate this more than anything. It's liberalism pretending not to be the tyranny of speech. Only what they allow is allowed.
    Sean_F said:

    Indigo said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    We might well look back in 20-30 years and view this as a golden age of liberalism in that respect, the number of more conservative in the cultural and religious sense, people coming to this country, who dont show much sign of relaxing those views in successive generations means that there is likely to be significant pressure in years to come to readdress those liberties.
    We've certainly moved some distance away from free speech, in my adulthood.

  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
  • isam said:

    antifrank said:



    The most depressing thing about these revelations is that UKIP high command apparently knew all about Mr Smith's views and decided that they didn't matter so long as no one found out about them.

    Well they deselected him and tried to force two other candidates in his place before he was reinstated, so hopefully that might ease the weight of your black dog

    Maybe they just don't have enough candidates?

    This is one of UKIP's top target seats. If the candidate quality is running this dry this quickly, God knows what loonies they've got standing in places like Islington South & Finsbury.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Charles said:

    isam said:



    I agree with you on that, but surely the most striking example is easy to remember?

    Just last week in THURROCK of all places, a Conservative leaflet was distributed referencing UKIP candidate Tim Aker by his full name of Timur to highlight his Turkish heritage. This was placed next to pictures of Islamic terrorists and and references to the Conservative candidate being a local where as "Timur" wasn't.

    That day the Tory MP for Thurrock, Jackie Doyle-Price was tweeting from a Jim Davidson gig, saying "I salute you"

    I mentioned it tirelessly on here, saying if it were UKIP that had done this, the site would be in meltdown from faux outrage. The only non Kipper criticism came from AntiFrank. TGOHF said "Tim Aker should man up"

    As if by magic, to prove my point, today we have some unpleasant utterances from a UKIP candidate in the other Thurrock seat.. and JackW, TGOHF, Marquee Mark et al are tripping over themselves to be outraged. It is pathetic, playground behaviour.

    They pick and choose when to be offended depending on who said it, not what was said.

    Oi! I criticised it as well (albeit in the same sentence as criticising people who call Osborne "Gideon" so it may not count, according to you)
    Well played to you in that case
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Holy Cow.

    That must have been scary. I gave up my best friend to the coppers after I discovered she'd stolen £40k from our employer and lied to her husband. I still miss her. She skipped off back to the USA without him. Doing the right thing can often be really tough.
    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:



    You just don't get it, do you. It is precisely because he refers to "Chinks", "Pooftahs" and "Peasants" (the later meaning jumped up working class people who think they are in the elite), and that using such language causes a fit of the vapours among right thinking people that he is attracting far more votes than he loses.


    You just don't get it, do you.

    Each of those terms is simply offensive name-calling.

    It doesn't add anything to political discourse.

    As my grandfather used to say: "Never offend someone unnecessarily" (along with "never make an enemy unintentionally", it's one of my favourite lessons)
    It wasn't part of political discourse. It was said in a private telephone conversation that some S**t taped and passed onto a national newspaper.

    Things said in private conversations have different thresholds to public speeches.

    And frankly I can't see much difference between hacking someones voicemail and using the information or publishing it and taping someones phonecall (presumably without their consent) and using it in that way.



    Cameron made a private comment to another politician, something about the Queen "purring" about the Scotland result.

    A cameraman picked it up with a long-range microphone, not because it was meant to be recorded.

    Is that "hacking" his private conversation without consent? Should it have been published?

    If you are overheard, then you are overheard. Taping someones phone call, without telling them you are going to do it first (as call centres do) is a crime.
    When I worked at Goldman Sachs, I was involved in uncovering a multi billion dollar fraud. The result of this was that I got death threats. Goldman organised for my line to be recorded so that we might have evidence for the police, if it were later needed. This happened without anyone at the other end of the line ever knowing. Was that a crime?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    When I worked at Goldman Sachs, I was involved in uncovering a multi billion dollar fraud. The result of this was that I got death threats. Goldman organised for my line to be recorded so that we might have evidence for the police, if it were later needed. This happened without anyone at the other end of the line ever knowing. Was that a crime?

    I'm not familiar with the legal situation here, but in the US, wiretaps to find evidence of criminal activity have to be cut once it's clear the phone call is not pertinent. That seems a reasonable compromise.
    No there are a limited set of circumstances a business can use to record calls, most significantly in your case to show evidence of a crime. But they cant they go and give them to a newspaper, they are to be given to the police or competent authority.

    In the UKIP call context I am surprised it is legal:

    http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/oftel/consumer/advice/faqs/prvfaq3.htm

    Can I record telephone conversations on my home phone?

    Yes. The relevant law, RIPA, does not prohibit individuals from recording their own communications provided that the recording is for their own use. Recording or monitoring are only prohibited where some of the contents of the communication - which can be a phone conversation or an e-mail - are made available to a third party, ie someone who was neither the caller or sender nor the intended recipient of the original communication. For further information see the Home Office website where RIPA is posted.

    Do I have to let people know that I intend to record their telephone conversations with me?

    No, provided you are not intending to make the contents of the communication available to a third party. If you are you will need the consent of the person you are recording.


    So if the gentlemen in question didn't give his consent to the call recording being given to a third party, they appear to be breaking the law. I am sure one of our resident lawyers will chime in and disabuse me at some point ;-)
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited December 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:



    You just don't get it, do you. It is precisely because he refers to "Chinks", "Pooftahs" and "Peasants" (the later meaning jumped up working class people who think they are in the elite), and that using such language causes a fit of the vapours among right thinking people that he is attracting far more votes than he loses.


    You just don't get it, do you.

    Each of those terms is simply offensive name-calling.

    It doesn't add anything to political discourse.

    As my grandfather used to say: "Never offend someone unnecessarily" (along with "never make an enemy unintentionally", it's one of my favourite lessons)
    It wasn't part of political discourse. It was said in a private telephone conversation that some S**t taped and passed onto a national newspaper.

    Things said in private conversations have different thresholds to public speeches.

    And frankly I can't see much difference between hacking someones voicemail and using the information or publishing it and taping someones phonecall (presumably without their consent) and using it in that way.



    Cameron made a private comment to another politician, something about the Queen "purring" about the Scotland result.

    A cameraman picked it up with a long-range microphone, not because it was meant to be recorded.

    Is that "hacking" his private conversation without consent? Should it have been published?

    If you are overheard, then you are overheard. Taping someones phone call, without telling them you are going to do it first (as call centres do) is a crime.
    When I worked at Goldman Sachs, I was involved in uncovering a multi billion dollar fraud. The result of this was that I got death threats. Goldman organised for my line to be recorded so that we might have evidence for the police, if it were later needed. This happened without anyone at the other end of the line ever knowing. Was that a crime?
    No because the recording was being done of your own line in order to prevent or detect a crime. In an event I think the unlawful recording of calls by a private person or company is a tort actionable in the civil courts rather than a criminal offence.
  • Japan: DPJ (main opposition) leader Banri Kaeda looks to have lost his FPTP seat (but will get back in the PR section). Looks likely to be replaced as leader by Yukio Edano, whose tireless post-disaster press conferences produced a spontaneous popular movement demanding that he go to bed and get some sleep.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SNP 42, LAB 26, CON 18, LD 6
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    Indigo said:

    Sean_F said:

    Indigo said:

    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:



    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.


    See the data here:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/

    The people who are genuinely "horrified" by UKIP are the urban lefty middle classes who are, I suspect, TRULY and cordially despised by the majority of Brits, hence the gruesome unpopularity of all major political parties and their leaders.
    AND very committed Conservatives, who blame UKIP for splitting the vote. Kerry Smith's views were okay when he was a Conservative candidate.
    Well, you have chosen to leave the Conservatives and team up with people we Tories are delighted to no longer have in our midst. That says more about you than it says about me I think.
    Have the tories chosen to become some kind of exclusive club ?

    If so it seems there just aren't enough of you to win an election. Is that wise politics ?

    Have you just given up ?

    The Tories will enjoy the purity of opposition, they can throw out all the "nasty" people, anyone that doesn't fit the metropolitan liberal mindset, to hell with all those golf club bores, out with all the retired colonels, white van men with their nasty flags, who needs them. Of course after a year of two of the warm feeling of being a group of fellow travellers, they might wonder why they can't get more than 25% of the vote.
    I'm not sure the Conservatives have any strategy for dealing with UKIP.
    Sadly the Guardian and its readers seem to feel that the "Freedom not to be offended" is far more important than Freedom of Speech. One suspects that should a real extreme government get elected in the future (rather than the slightly farther from the centre than they are used to ones they whine about now) they might modify their position slightly when they start being told what their editorial line is.
    The latest fad at universities is the "right to be comfortable.". Students are apparently so lacking in intellectual confidence that they can't cope with seeing the Sun being offered for sale, or speakers expressing right of centre opinions.

  • antifrank said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    JackW said:

    Might we also have a PB competition on the number of "poofters" in Ukip's branch in South Basildon with a tiebreak question on how many brace of "peasants" Farage bags in the annual Boxing Day cull there?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897

    "A UKIP spokesman said they were "the rantings of an angry man" who was on sedatives for an injury at the time."
    What would he have said if he hadn't been on sedatives?
    Colour me a bit sceptical. Sedatives just lower inhibitions a bit, like alcohol, and in vino veritas!

    The spokesman's defence was "the rantings of an angry man". With defenders like that who needs critics!

    Imagine this fellow in parliament!
    Inclined to agree. In a similar vein an elderly relative of my wife is suffering dementia. She rants in quite horrific ways about gays, blacks and any other minority that comes to mind. Friends excuse her by saying (quite kindly) that it must be the dementia. Unfortunately we have to point out that she has always been like this in her views and all that has changed is that she has lost her inhibitions.
    Rather cruel, if I may say so.

    Surely one's inhibitions are part of one's personality. If they are taken away by prescription drugs or impairment, surely your personality has been changed, not that you've changed your personality.

    Surely through growing up we learn to control are baser selves? Or do you yourself not possess one which emerges when you have a dark night of the soul?
    I disagree. Like everyone else I do have a darker side but it tends to be on the perverted rather than the offensive side. I can honestly say that I could sit alongside Antifrank or TSE being either drunk, drugged or demented and be confident the worst reaction I would elicit from them would be slightly shocked amusement or bemusement.
    Would it be possible to persuade you to sit beside me in any other state?
    Oh rest assured it is one of the great pleasures I am looking forward to at some point In the future. Unfortunately self employment means I have never yet got the chance to get to one of the PB get togethers.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    surbiton said:

    SNP 42, LAB 26, CON 18, LD 6

    Is that your guess, or the result?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    From my perspective it's about genuine desire vs exerting power.

    You can use all sorts of unPC language and behaviour that says Crikey, I Fancy You - Please Say Yes. And then there's a whole load of other language and behaviour that says You Are Prey.

    It's very different. To the uninitiated, it may look very similar. It isn't. If you've a good friend you can be very rude to in public because you both know you don't mean it ...
    Socrates said:

    Plato said:



    I don't mind being propositioned - I take it as a compliment. Culturally Jamaican men are very upfront about it. I found it oddly honest, but got it and easily rebuffed it with respect maintained for both sides. Muslim men who do it have a look in their eyes that I find really threatening. It's not a compliment, it's like being forewarned of rape. Feeling inhuman is the only description I can give it.

    I think it all depends on what the proposition is. There's a big difference between whistling and shouting "DAYUM GIRL" and someone walking up to a woman and saying "Hi, I really like something about you and I'd love to grab a drink some time. Could I get your phone number?"

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    I'm not sure animals "solve conflicts by engaging in same gender sex"

    I'm quite willing to believe, though, that lions emphasis dominance by doing so (rather than using it to "strengthen bonds in the pride").

    Can we skip the endless "gay pride of lions" jokes though ;-)
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    Myth.
    http://www.narth.org/docs/animalmyth.html

    Creation of imaginary worlds is also inherent to humans, placing us above and unique amongst species. Storytelling is documented as early as man.

  • Charles said:

    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    I'm not sure animals "solve conflicts by engaging in same gender sex"

    I'm quite willing to believe, though, that lions emphasis dominance by doing so (rather than using it to "strengthen bonds in the pride").

    Can we skip the endless "gay pride of lions" jokes though ;-)
    It seems to be fairly well established that a proportion of rams show no interest in ewes and prefer to mount other males.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    A short guy once accused me of being Heightist when I didn't surrender to his charms.

    I LOL and that made him even madder. He was entirely correct - but that he felt the need to tell me about his own insecurity so brazenly was hilarious. He was angry at me about his footage.

    Plato said:

    Ha! Given I'm a huge animal husbandry fan, I love watching mothers and their offspring. And get a kick out of hand-rearing orphans. But there's something too intimate about humans breast-feeding for me. It's not about being a square or prudish, it's a private thing. Like pillow talk.

    I can't work out why I feel like this. I guess it's the same as me flinching from dating younger men - I feel like their mum and it's all wrong on a visceral level. I can't be a cougar.

    Plato said:

    snip

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".
    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    snip
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, t....................
    "The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters"
    Last night half a dozen mates and me went to my local for a few beers.. as it was my birthday I was allowed to talk about politics for 5 mins... every one of them said they were going to vote UKIP, but also said they don't like to mention it in case people think bad of them...
    FWIW they all said they wouldn't have their wives/girlfriends breastfeed in public either, said it was for exhibitionists.
    PBers would probably consider me and my mates as oiks, but we are actually relatively well to do for Hornchurch
    I was only one ok about public breastfeeding vs 18 yr old daughter and the wife both against it. They are not voting UKIP. They looked at me and wondererd about my reasons, voyeurism?
    Ageist :)

    Age is just a number, hun :)
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    Myth.
    http://www.narth.org/docs/animalmyth.html

    Creation of imaginary worlds is also inherent to humans, placing us above and unique amongst species. Storytelling is documented as early as man.

    That looks like a credible website.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited December 2014
    I thought lions were a matriarchal society, the guys do some of the protection bit, but the ladies do most of the hunting and dominance with the family?

    Seahorses are a feminists dreamboat.
    Charles said:

    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    I'm not sure animals "solve conflicts by engaging in same gender sex"

    I'm quite willing to believe, though, that lions emphasis dominance by doing so (rather than using it to "strengthen bonds in the pride").

    Can we skip the endless "gay pride of lions" jokes though ;-)
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    edited December 2014
    Everyone is jumping up and down about the latest UKIP scandal and perhaps missing what could conceivably be a real scandal.

    Who exactly recorded that phone call that the press tell us was recorded, why did they record it; and did they tell the other party they recorded it if they intended to pass it onto someone other than the parties making the phone call?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Charles said:

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.

    :.
    "The great majority of decent Brits do not despise UKIP, though they may nervously affect to do so when asked by pollsters"

    Last night half a dozen mates and me went to my local for a few beers.. as it was my birthday I was allowed to talk about politics for 5 mins... every one of them said they were going to vote UKIP, but also said they don't like to mention it in case people think bad of them...

    FWIW they all said they wouldn't have their wives/girlfriends breastfeed in public either, said it was for exhibitionists.

    PBers would probably consider me and my mates as oiks, but we are actually relatively well to do for Hornchurch
    Do they have kids?

    My wife doesn't like breast feeding in public, but unless a new mother wants to be a hermit you have to sometimes (she used a poncho to preserve her modesty)
    Of course they have kids! I wouldn't have said it otherwise
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Vanilla mail for you
    Charles said:

    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    I'm not sure animals "solve conflicts by engaging in same gender sex"

    I'm quite willing to believe, though, that lions emphasis dominance by doing so (rather than using it to "strengthen bonds in the pride").

    Can we skip the endless "gay pride of lions" jokes though ;-)
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Plato said:

    A short guy once accused me of being Heightist when I didn't surrender to his charms.

    I LOL and that made him even madder. He was entirely correct - but that he felt the need to tell me about his own insecurity so brazenly was hilarious. He was angry at me about his footage.

    I genuinely feel bad for short guys. There's a constant rudeness that's widespread in society about pointing out how their shortness makes them less attractive and less worthy as potential boyfriends. Some of the things I've heard women say to men about their shortness would be considered unacceptable if it was flipped to be said about women being small-breasted.

    (To be clear, I'm not including you in any of this criticism.)
  • FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    Myth.
    http://www.narth.org/docs/animalmyth.html

    Creation of imaginary worlds is also inherent to humans, placing us above and unique amongst species. Storytelling is documented as early as man.

    Er.....why not post a link from a reputable scientific source, not one:


    The American Psychological Association and the Royal College of Psychiatrists expressed concerns that the positions espoused by NARTH are not supported by science and create an environment in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_for_Research_&_Therapy_of_Homosexuality
  • Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Homosexuality is "unnatural"? In strictly evolutionary terms, oral intercourse, monogamy and contraception are equally so. Thank Heavens the Western world no longer sees fit to regulate those either.

    Homosexuality has been documented in hundreds of non-human animals. It's hardly unnatural.

    Not that "naturalness" should count for anything. Literature and the internet are unnatural. What of it?
    No it hasn't.

    A desire to communicate with our fellow human beings is profoundly natural.
    1500 species of animal have been documented displaying homosexuality:

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

    A desire to communicate with others is of course natural, but the creation of imaginary worlds does not have any evidence in nature. Rape and murder, on the other hand, do.
    Myth.
    http://www.narth.org/docs/animalmyth.html

    Creation of imaginary worlds is also inherent to humans, placing us above and unique amongst species. Storytelling is documented as early as man.

    That looks like a credible website.
    It misses the point. It is the anti-gays who state that homosexuality is unnatural, stating that it is natural and, indeed, some animals get up to it is an argument against the anti-gays. It is they who get excited by "naturalness".

    In no way is it an argument in favour of homosexuality. We are humans and can make our own minds up, and can override our animal nature. Arguing that fur seals like to rape penguins would in no way be an argument in favour of bestiality, for example.

    So the answer is simply that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, and there is no need for society to put any obstacle in homosexuals' participation in the full range of cultural norms, such as marriage.

  • One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    Do the PB Tories who make references to 'ragheads' and 'fuzzywuzzies' also make your skin crawl ?
    Who are these PB Tories?
    AveryLP referred to Muslims as 'ragheads' on the evening of the 'Bomb Assad' vote.

    The 'fuzzywuzzies' comment came from a PB Tory in the discussion about the Tory racebaiting against the UKIP candidate in Thurrock a couple of weeks ago.

    I don't recall either comment being condemned by other Conservative supporters here.
  • One man's "rough around the edges" is another man's racism, homophobia, scape-goating. The search for the person they believe has poisoned their well. Who has robbed them of their deserved entitlement to " something better than this".

    UKIP's Utopia is for many their embodiment of Hell on Earth.

    What the elite dismiss as racism the 'rough around the edges' bloke sees as realism, you know the people who actually live with diversity every day instead of heading off to live in Burton Bradstock.

    As for homophobia I don't know a single Kipper that is in any way, shape or form homophobic, though I am sure there are some as there in all parties. Quick question, how do the Left square the Muslim stance on homosexuality or there abuse of womens rights?

    I'm afraid the 'rough around the edges' person has had enough of being told what they should or should not believe by people that have no idea of their everyday life.
    Your delusion starts with saying it is "the elite" that call out Kippers for spouting racist, homophobic, downright nasty sentiment. No. It is the majority. The great majority of decent Brits, of whatever heritage. These representatives of your party make our skin crawl.
    Do the PB Tories who make references to 'ragheads' and 'fuzzywuzzies' also make your skin crawl ?
    Who are these PB Tories?
    AveryLP referred to Muslims as 'ragheads' on the evening of the 'Bomb Assad' vote.

    The 'fuzzywuzzies' comment came from a PB Tory in the discussion about the Tory racebaiting against the UKIP candidate in Thurrock a couple of weeks ago.

    I don't recall either comment being condemned by other Conservative supporters here.
    I see no reason to keep banging on about other people using words that I wouldn't. People see them post here and can judge them. Of course if I was a lefty I would be expected to bray like an ass demonstrating my political correctness.

This discussion has been closed.