I don't really know much about Scottish nationalism, never express an opinion about it, and am not entirely opposed to Scottish independence if that's what Scots eventually want. But this sort of post just seems gratuitously unpleasant. I'm not sure if you care whether you're giving us a good impression of the SNP, but if you do, maybe rein it in a bit, huh? I'm not Outraged, faux or otherwise, just mildly turned off.
Ditto.
And also stop with the "Loyalism" thing. It has a very specific meaning in the context of UK politics and is unbelievably insulting to ordinary Unionists to be branded as such.
...snip...
Unlike terms such as "Separatist", "Successionist" or referring to the SNP as the Scottish Nationalist Party.
Is there nowhere else you can go and exercise your views on what is frankly a niche topic, Scottish politics. Because frankly it's boring the tits off the rest of us.
The SNP website describes itself as "A left leaning nationalist party advocating secession from the United Kingdom"
I don't really know much about Scottish nationalism, never express an opinion about it, and am not entirely opposed to Scottish independence if that's what Scots eventually want. But this sort of post just seems gratuitously unpleasant. I'm not sure if you care whether you're giving us a good impression of the SNP, but if you do, maybe rein it in a bit, huh? I'm not Outraged, faux or otherwise, just mildly turned off.
Ditto.
And also stop with the "Loyalism" thing. It has a very specific meaning in the context of UK politics and is unbelievably insulting to ordinary Unionists to be branded as such.
...snip...
Unlike terms such as "Separatist", "Successionist" or referring to the SNP as the Scottish Nationalist Party.
Is there nowhere else you can go and exercise your views on what is frankly a niche topic, Scottish politics. Because frankly it's boring the tits off the rest of us.
The SNP website describes itself as "A left leaning nationalist party advocating secession from the United Kingdom"
Except, it doesn't say that. At all.
Google the SNP and see how it describes itself for google results.
Edit: Sorry Dair. Look like it might be (?) described by someone else like that... bizarre if that is the case that Google would do that.
One thing I found profoundly disturbing about the Jedi Census phenomenon is that people would lie about their religion for fun...which if you think about it is absolutely horrible ("well, it's only a bit of fun, yeah?" "No. Really, no. You dumb fuck.").
Has it occurred to you that many of the "Jedi" were actually protesting about the question being asked at all?
Yes it did. The importance of religion outweighs the benefit of the protest. It's like bombing Serbia to protest at Eurovision bloc voting.
Religion has no place in society. Fortunately Britain is ever moving towards this goal. Let us all hope it is reached soon.
I don't really know much about Scottish nationalism, never express an opinion about it, and am not entirely opposed to Scottish independence if that's what Scots eventually want. But this sort of post just seems gratuitously unpleasant. I'm not sure if you care whether you're giving us a good impression of the SNP, but if you do, maybe rein it in a bit, huh? I'm not Outraged, faux or otherwise, just mildly turned off.
Ditto.
And also stop with the "Loyalism" thing. It has a very specific meaning in the context of UK politics and is unbelievably insulting to ordinary Unionists to be branded as such.
...snip...
Unlike terms such as "Separatist", "Successionist" or referring to the SNP as the Scottish Nationalist Party.
Is there nowhere else you can go and exercise your views on what is frankly a niche topic, Scottish politics. Because frankly it's boring the tits off the rest of us.
The SNP website describes itself as "A left leaning nationalist party advocating secession from the United Kingdom"
Except, it doesn't say that. At all.
Yep. I think that is the wikipedia page on the SNP
One thing I found profoundly disturbing about the Jedi Census phenomenon is that people would lie about their religion for fun...which if you think about it is absolutely horrible ("well, it's only a bit of fun, yeah?" "No. Really, no. You dumb fuck.").
Has it occurred to you that many of the "Jedi" were actually protesting about the question being asked at all?
Yes it did. The importance of religion outweighs the benefit of the protest. It's like bombing Serbia to protest at Eurovision bloc voting.
Religion has no place in society. Fortunately Britain is ever moving towards this goal. Let us all hope it is reached soon.
Millions of people disagree with you. Fortunately they are not under your dictat.
If you are not a member of the SNP, you damned well sound like one.
I don't really know much about Scottish nationalism, never express an opinion about it, and am not entirely opposed to Scottish independence if that's what Scots eventually want. But this sort of post just seems gratuitously unpleasant. I'm not sure if you care whether you're giving us a good impression of the SNP, but if you do, maybe rein it in a bit, huh? I'm not Outraged, faux or otherwise, just mildly turned off.
Ditto.
And also stop with the "Loyalism" thing. It has a very specific meaning in the context of UK politics and is unbelievably insulting to ordinary Unionists to be branded as such.
...snip...
Unlike terms such as "Separatist", "Successionist" or referring to the SNP as the Scottish Nationalist Party.
Is there nowhere else you can go and exercise your views on what is frankly a niche topic, Scottish politics. Because frankly it's boring the tits off the rest of us.
The SNP website describes itself as "A left leaning nationalist party advocating secession from the United Kingdom"
Except, it doesn't say that. At all.
Google the SNP and see how it describes itself for google results.
Edit: Sorry Dair. Look like it might be (?) described by someone else like that... bizarre if that is the case that Google would do that.
Eric Morecambe famously said to Mr Preview !! that he was playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order.
Labour on the other hand are playing all the wrong notes and undoubtedly in the wrong order. From the fighting that's going on in front of the media (cf The World at One), and what I read in the Daily Jackboot, no one wants Ed anywhere near their candidature or would offer him any kind of job.. Oh the deep ingratitude of it all.
Will Ed end up over the waves just like his brother?
Ed could join International Rescue like his brother - but only if he agrees to be up in space in Thunderbird 5....
It's what the Labour Party would want.
Maybe but if I recollect correctly Thunderbird 3 has a restriction on carry on, bit like Squeezyjet which is why T3 is painted orange. What to do with all that additional baggage he comes with heh? Don't even start on mentioning the EdStone at the check in desk.
Space. The perfect final resting place for the Edstone.
But I'm thinking of giving [Jeremy Corbyn] my first preference at the moment if he's on the ballot (and I'm not your typical hard left member) - he's clearly not a likely winner of floating voters, but I'd like to send a message to the candidates that I want a clear theme from them, not just lots of platitudes.
It would be very funny if Jeremy Corbyn accidentally ended up as Labour leader as a result of lots of people doing that!
I mentioned I met the deeply unimpressive Rupa Huq recently. I said to her that, as a member of the opposing team, I naturally wanted her to pick Jeremy Corbyn for leader. She said that was very illogical.
So either: a) she sees Corbyn as a live prospect to lead Lab to power in 2020; or b) it confirms my impression of her.
I don't really know much about Scottish nationalism, never express an opinion about it, and am not entirely opposed to Scottish independence if that's what Scots eventually want. But this sort of post just seems gratuitously unpleasant. I'm not sure if you care whether you're giving us a good impression of the SNP, but if you do, maybe rein it in a bit, huh? I'm not Outraged, faux or otherwise, just mildly turned off.
Ditto.
And also stop with the "Loyalism" thing. It has a very specific meaning in the context of UK politics and is unbelievably insulting to ordinary Unionists to be branded as such.
...snip...
Unlike terms such as "Separatist", "Successionist" or referring to the SNP as the Scottish Nationalist Party.
Is there nowhere else you can go and exercise your views on what is frankly a niche topic, Scottish politics. Because frankly it's boring the tits off the rest of us.
The SNP website describes itself as "A left leaning nationalist party advocating secession from the United Kingdom"
Except, it doesn't say that. At all.
Google the SNP and see how it describes itself for google results.
Edit: Sorry Dair. Look like it might be (?) described by someone else like that... bizarre if that is the case that Google would do that.
That is quite... bizarre. I've never come across this before with a Google link.
The problem Labour have is not sticking with a leader too long. The problem they have is that they are committed to an ideology defined by the New Statesman and Guardian over the views of existing and potential Labour voters. The result is they get students and the less successful ethnic minorities to vote for them in very large numbers, but the Scots have switched to the SNP, the white working class are increasingly preferring UKIP, and the aspirational middle classes have switched to the Conservatives.
But I'm thinking of giving [Jeremy Corbyn] my first preference at the moment if he's on the ballot (and I'm not your typical hard left member) - he's clearly not a likely winner of floating voters, but I'd like to send a message to the candidates that I want a clear theme from them, not just lots of platitudes.
It would be very funny if Jeremy Corbyn accidentally ended up as Labour leader as a result of lots of people doing that!
I mentioned I met the deeply unimpressive Rupa Huq recently. I said to her that, as a member of the opposing team, I naturally wanted her to pick Jeremy Corbyn for leader. She said that was very illogical.
So either: a) she sees Corbyn as a live prospect to lead Lab to power in 2020; or b) it confirms my impression of her.
(Edit: or of course c) all of the above)
You're both being logical. You assume he can't win, therefore he is the best way of ensuring Tory government. She is assuming he can win, and hence you are setting yourself up for your worst outcome.
At worst, that makes her (or your) assumptions, not her (or your) logic, wrong.
One thing I found profoundly disturbing about the Jedi Census phenomenon is that people would lie about their religion for fun...which if you think about it is absolutely horrible ("well, it's only a bit of fun, yeah?" "No. Really, no. You dumb fuck.").
Has it occurred to you that many of the "Jedi" were actually protesting about the question being asked at all?
Yes it did. The importance of religion outweighs the benefit of the protest. It's like bombing Serbia to protest at Eurovision bloc voting.
Religion has no place in society. Fortunately Britain is ever moving towards this goal. Let us all hope it is reached soon.
That is a rather totalitarian mindset. It was religious motivation that drove the abolitionist and suffragette movements.
One thing I found profoundly disturbing about the Jedi Census phenomenon is that people would lie about their religion for fun...which if you think about it is absolutely horrible ("well, it's only a bit of fun, yeah?" "No. Really, no. You dumb fuck.").
Has it occurred to you that many of the "Jedi" were actually protesting about the question being asked at all?
Yes it did. The importance of religion outweighs the benefit of the protest. It's like bombing Serbia to protest at Eurovision bloc voting.
That's a false comparison. The importance of "asking people what their religion is for purposes of gathering national statistics" almost certainly does not rank higher than the benefit of protest.
But I'm thinking of giving [Jeremy Corbyn] my first preference at the moment if he's on the ballot (and I'm not your typical hard left member) - he's clearly not a likely winner of floating voters, but I'd like to send a message to the candidates that I want a clear theme from them, not just lots of platitudes.
It would be very funny if Jeremy Corbyn accidentally ended up as Labour leader as a result of lots of people doing that!
I mentioned I met the deeply unimpressive Rupa Huq recently. I said to her that, as a member of the opposing team, I naturally wanted her to pick Jeremy Corbyn for leader. She said that was very illogical.
So either: a) she sees Corbyn as a live prospect to lead Lab to power in 2020; or b) it confirms my impression of her.
(Edit: or of course c) all of the above)
You're both being logical. You assume he can't win, therefore he is the best way of ensuring Tory government. She is assuming he can win, and hence you are setting yourself up for your worst outcome.
At worst, that makes her (or your) assumptions, not her (or your) logic, wrong.
I think the critical point in your otherwise acute post is: "she is assuming he can win."
I must admit that I have found a some what black humour in reading the CK eulogies in the press and remembering some of the criticsms that were made of him by the same journals in the past.
I believe that the Sun even produced a picture of him to be pinned to dartboards.
The difference between the papers and the CyberNATs is that you can make a choice to buy or not a paper, which even print contact details so that you can challenge them - the CyberNATs attack is to destroy with what ever is to hand and to hide in the shadows.
What makes it so insidious, is that they could be a workmate, a neighbour, a friend, a relative or a spouse writing these things and you would never know. ...snip...
Yes you would know. Because there are workplaces all across the country where Charles Kennedy would be called a "drunken slob" regularly. Because, to the average person in the street, that is what he was. He was not a towering colossus of UK Politics as the hypocritical former critics of Kennedy would try to have us believe, he was a man with a woeful attendance record and a serious alcohol problem who did not have any friends strong or good enough to persuade him to step down from public life while he still any sort of decent reputation.
There is an apparent disconnect that the Faux Outrage wants us to believe whenever they start their latest tirade against twitter or other social media. It is based on an utterly ridiculous belief that the language used on twitter is not the language that people use EVERY DAY in the workplace, in the pub, in the text message or in the private conversation.
I don't really know much about Scottish nationalism, never express an opinion about it, and am not entirely opposed to Scottish independence if that's what Scots eventually want. But this sort of post just seems gratuitously unpleasant. I'm not sure if you care whether you're giving us a good impression of the SNP, but if you do, maybe rein it in a bit, huh? I'm not Outraged, faux or otherwise, just mildly turned off.
I find Dair's post to often be unpleasant and aggressive but I thought that was a reasonable post by him or her. While it's a nice idea to never say ill of the dead, I can completely understand the mentality. It's one of those occasions where parliament closes ranks and pretends one of their own was a saintly figure. It is reasonable to point out that most people don't remember an alcoholic in their midst as being like that.
Labour has long suffered from internal paralysis when it comes to dealing with ineffective leadership and it raises the question 'If Labour is not prepared to act to save itself why should it be trusted with the affairs of the nation'? It was very obvious by early 1983 that the party would have fared a good deal better under Healey, yet it still proceeded to act like lemmings by following Foot over the cliff to a Tory landslide. In the run-up to 2010 all the evidence suggested that a range of alternative leaders would have outperforned Brown and perhaps given Labour an additional 20 seats to make a Lib/Lab deal a realistic option. I genuinely wonder how Brown and Milliband have been able to cope with the aftermath of defeat. Do they feel any sense of guilt that by hanging on they brought about a defeat that might otherwise have been avoided - or do they deep down really believe that nobody else would have done better?
Comments
Edit: Sorry Dair. Look like it might be (?) described by someone else like that... bizarre if that is the case that Google would do that.
If you are not a member of the SNP, you damned well sound like one.
In space, no-one can hear you laugh.....
So either:
a) she sees Corbyn as a live prospect to lead Lab to power in 2020; or
b) it confirms my impression of her.
(Edit: or of course c) all of the above)
At worst, that makes her (or your) assumptions, not her (or your) logic, wrong.
New Thread
QED
In space, no-one can hear you laugh.....
Oh, that's good.