Ridgeway84 Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 What a fascinating thread! I take it your branch of the law doesn't require you to appear in court very often, ECCOnoob? - Or are you deliberately losing the arguments with the Gardener? In what way has he lost? You agree with Gardener that all MP's are stoopid and it would be better if people who've shown no inclination towards politics should be in charge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megalithic Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 In what way has he lost? You agree with Gardener that all MP's are stoopid and it would be better if people who've shown no inclination towards politics should be in charge? Well we'd be no worse off would we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 In what way has he lost? You agree with Gardener that all MP's are stoopid and it would be better if people who've shown no inclination towards politics should be in charge? Do you think that the whole of Andy Gardener's argument hinges around that one phrase? I don't agree with everything Gardener says - but nor am I prepared to try to take one argument out of context and use it to try to demolish his arguments. This is supposed to be a forum where we debate. Sometimes we are good at it, sometimes we are not. In general, the standard of debate on this forum is quite high. There is no requirement to be a General to debate on the forum, but a bit of 'give and take' (conceding to some of the views of others) is necessary if you want to persuade others of the strength of your argument. IMO (and it is MY opinion) ECCOnoob failed dismally in his attempt to demolish Gardener's argument. I was surprised. - He ordinarily gives at least as good as he gets. Perhaps we all have 'off days'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgeway84 Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 Well we'd be no worse off would we. Mob rule, pogroms, public hangings? ---------- Post added 15-08-2013 at 04:10 ---------- Do you think that the whole of Andy Gardener's argument hinges around that one phrase? I don't agree with everything Gardener says - but nor am I prepared to try to take one argument out of context and use it to try to demolish his arguments. This is supposed to be a forum where we debate. Sometimes we are good at it, sometimes we are not. In general, the standard of debate on this forum is quite high. There is no requirement to be a General to debate on the forum, but a bit of 'give and take' (conceding to some of the views of others) is necessary if you want to persuade others of the strength of your argument. IMO (and it is MY opinion) ECCOnoob failed dismally in his attempt to demolish Gardener's argument. I was surprised. - He ordinarily gives at least as good as he gets. Perhaps we all have 'off days'? I saw Econoob as dignified and pointing out the detail behind what MP's do instead of the trendy "they do nowt and are all corrupt" crap on here. Gardener went way over the top on Prescott and was rude to Econoob who didn't stoop to that level. Or that's how it came across to me. I hate whingers who reckon a lot about MP's yet do nothing comparable themselves and have no alternative. They seem to assume human nature doesn't apply to them and are shocked when MP's are subject to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 We each read posts differently (one of the strengths of this forum.) I'm not going to try to shout you down (I don't go in for that) but we will have to agree to disagree. I've read a lot of ECCONoobs arguments over the years and ordinarily they are persuasive. There is no rule which says I have to be persuaded by every argument he (or anybody else) writes and this time I was not impressed. I've read - or listened to - my share of legal arguments. There is nothing in any forum rule which says I have to agree with any argument propounded by any poster on this forum. This time, I think ECCONoob got it wrong. YMMV. You said: "I hate whingers who reckon a lot about MP's yet do nothing comparable themselves and have no alternative. They seem to assume human nature doesn't apply to them and are shocked when MP's are subject to it." I've no argument with that, but the 'human fragility' of MPS is not an excuse for inadequate performance. IMO. when things go wrong MPs are all too ready to shelter behind the shields provided by the whips. When they are trying to get elected, the candidates become 'friends of the people'. The minute they are elected, the people can go and take a hike, 'because we're party members.' It's no accident that they are called 'Members of Parliament' and not 'Representatives' They do not represent anybody (other, perhaps than the head of the party or his Whips.) I spend 7 months of the year in the US. I'm not an American Citizen and I can't vote there. My 'Representative' is not aware that he's not really my representative (and I'm not about to tell him) so when I bitch about things I don't like, he tends to listen. He probably doesn't listen very closely, but he is a representative and I suspect he pays more attention to me than your MP (who is not a representative) pays to you. You've got hundreds of the buggers! - And not one of them is a representative. Not one of them is committed (or required) to pay any attention whatsoever to what you say or do. Well, if that system suits you - Go for it! ... but don't complain when they rip you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchemist Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 My first sentence refers to MPs. My second to professional dolees. didnt realise that there was a difference Tory opinion of scrounger - sits around all day drinking, doing sod all and grabbing anything they consider they are entitled to whether they are entitled or not Public opinion of an MP - see above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 It's the same old thing, most people are happy to jump on someone's head by saying that people should have this or that forced upon them, but when it's something that might personally affect them they soon get the face on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 When Prescott took a swing at a protestor, was that 'scabrous and socialist' or was it what one might expect from a senior member of Parliament? The Labour party didn't seem too embarrassed, did they? Prescott was worth every penny of his salary. I'm no so sure about the pounds, however. No it was Karma - the mullet head attacked Prescott, he fought back, good for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 didnt realise that there was a difference Tory opinion of scrounger - sits around all day drinking, doing sod all and grabbing anything they consider they are entitled to whether they are entitled or not Public opinion of an MP - see above Dolee tends to do no work and get money from the public purse. Mp does a lot of work. Has to put him/herself up for reelection every x years. If public opinion is as you say, then the public is wrong. I have met many politicians of different affiliations. I have yet to meet one who is lazy and incompetent and devious as many of the dolees I have met. ---------- Post added 15-08-2013 at 21:02 ---------- This is such a silly thread. Suggesting that someone gives up a perfectly good, well-paid job to become an MP to live off minimum wage or the dole to do it. Just plain stupid. Why would anyone of any quality do that? ---------- Post added 15-08-2013 at 21:05 ---------- No it was Karma - the mullet head attacked Prescott, he fought back, good for him. This is the only sensible thing I've read that you've posted. Prescott, ineloquent as he is, did the right thing by punching the useless thug that started it. ---------- Post added 15-08-2013 at 21:09 ---------- It was in response to the scabrous and snobbish attack on John Prescott in#71; so no, I'm not embarrassed. Is it just this gardener that is the lowest of the low, or is it all gardeners?? You indirectly called me unintelligent I didn't dis your job. Or your social standing. Jeez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 yes you can. Stand, and get others to stand in constituencies. Persuade people to raise funds for your campaign. Of course these will have to be separate funds - no party affiliation allowed, with the associated economies of scale - have various different incongruous (sp?) policies and spend the next five years arguing and trying to form allegiances (a bit like a political Party) and get nothing done at all. really??? How many independent MPs are there in parliament? Many have tried, very few prospered. Only those who are already famous or very rich stand a chance of making any sort of impact, and getting themselves elected, without a party machine behind them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.