• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

glasgowspur said:
As a Scottish tory he will be viewing it through that prism.
The biggest threat to Scotland isn't the tories, or covid but independence, and the Cummins situation is pure gold for the SNP.
By taking this stance it takes a bit of the heat out their fight, bit much but a little.
The cynic in me also says that he's angling for a holyrood seat instead of a Westminster one because the pay is better.
Click to expand...
And let's not forget he was one of the ones insisting the Scottish one had to resign.

Painted himself into a corner there.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
He will come back but for the SNP
Click to expand...

Worked for a lot of the ex Labour politicians and councillors.

If anything in the world shows how politically stupid Scotland is, this is it.
Labour failed the Scottish people, not as a party but as individuals when the local party became rife with nepotism, extortion, crooked deals.
When the people finally got sick of it they voted the party out, but a lot of the same people in just because they had changed rosettes.
The SNP now has a list of current and former elected officials convicted or awaiting trial on fraud cases, and almost all are ex labour.
They aren't really ex labour of course, they are career "politicians" who will do anything to stay on the gravy train.
 
scaramanga said:
And let's not forget he was one of the ones insisting the Scottish one had to resign.

Painted himself into a corner there.
Click to expand...


Yes, but I think he is taking a longer term view of this, and not necessarily a UK one.

Sauce for the goose and all that.
We are a sanctimonious lot up here, dumb, but there you go.
 
scaramanga said:
Have you read the guidelines? Have you read the exception for those with children?

Those were published in March and still extant when Cummings travelled with his family. Whether or not he needed to use that exception or used it as a loophole, he stayed within the boundaries of that guidance.

Even assuming that guidance didn't say what it did, even then he would only have broken a very minor rule that carries less of a penalty than driving 35 in a 30 and about the same as parking on double yellows.

Storm in an echochamber
Click to expand...

Where in the guidelines does it say you can drive 60 miles (on your wife’s birthday) to ‘test your eye sight’?

The guidelines say we should exercise locally.

Then, if sick, the family should isolate. If well enough to drive 260 miles, you are well enough to care for a child, and don’t need to drive.

Technically he did break the guidelines.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
SpurMeUp said:
If he was interested in serving the nation only, he’d have shown some humility and contrition. By setting a precedent a small % of the nation will now feel they can visit parents, check in with sick relatives or loved ones etc.

Whether aware or not he is putting protection of his ego - I was right - over public safety.

He should have stayed on, but after paying a fine explaining the mitigating factors and apologising. Now he looks like one of the elites he previously liked to criticise.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...
Are you applying the ego observation to the 'blog thing' or the 'durham trip'?
 
SpurMeUp said:
Where in the guidelines does it say you can drive 60 miles (on your wife’s birthday) to ‘test your eye sight’?

The guidelines say we should exercise locally.

Then, if sick, the family should isolate. If well enough to drive 260 miles, you are well enough to care for a child, and don’t need to drive.

Technically he did break the guidelines.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...
I genuinely don’t know the details of his “eye test” trip but I know it was said it was a 30 minute drive.... so was it also 60 miles? So basically he was driving at 120 miles an hour!!!
 
scaramanga said:
You're right about the lack of ego - he's just not that kind of person.

In terms of how they've handled it - I think it would be a very dangerous precedent to start apologising when no wrongdoing has occurred just because a hostile media demands it.
Click to expand...
I dont want to jump into the debate on whether he was right or wrong, too much rubbish written about that already, but I certainly think they could have handled it better. Getting ahead of the story, apologising, showing contrition and controlling the narrative was a better course. Now the story has run away from them. I know admitting you're wrong is not something that you would do (;)) irrespective if you had a case to argue or not, but sometimes it is the smart move.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Are you applying the ego observation to the 'blog thing' or the 'durham trip'?
Click to expand...

Neither. I was looking at this character and history. He's a bit of a know it all. With the blog, he wants to say 'see I told you so'. He wrote about something related, he was frustrated he didn't explicitly cite Corona so he could perpetuate his super-intelligent prescient status (ego), so he edited it. I'm sure it was his intention all along! I don't think it is anything more than that to be honest.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Where in the guidelines does it say you can drive 60 miles (on your wife’s birthday) to ‘test your eye sight’?

The guidelines say we should exercise locally.

Then, if sick, the family should isolate. If well enough to drive 260 miles, you are well enough to care for a child, and don’t need to drive.

Technically he did break the guidelines.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...
If you are living with children
Keep following this advice to the best of your ability, however, we are aware that not all these measures will be possible.
Click to expand...

This has been repeatedly quoted here again and again. Please don't simply ignore it because it doesn't suit your argument.

It even has its own link from the table of contents at the top.
 
scaramanga said:
This has been repeatedly quoted here again and again. Please don't simply ignore it because it doesn't suit your argument.

It even has its own link from the table of contents at the top.
Click to expand...

Living with Children does not affect his ability to exercise locally does it? The guidelines are very clear on that. You should use green space local to you and not drive. So technically he has breached guidelines. 'Please don't simply ignore this because it doesn't suit your agenda'
 
Rorschach said:
I dont want to jump into the debate on whether he was right or wrong, too much rubbish written about that already, but I certainly think they could have handled it better. Getting ahead of the story, apologising, showing contrition and controlling the narrative was a better course. Now the story has run away from them. I know admitting you're wrong is not something that you would do (;)) irrespective if you had a case to argue or not, but sometimes it is the smart move.
Click to expand...
I still think that sets a dangerous precedent.

That way the Mirror or any other paper with an agenda can make up anything similarly tenuous and the public perception will always be one of guilt.
 
Rorschach said:
I dont want to jump into the debate on whether he was right or wrong, too much rubbish written about that already, but I certainly think they could have handled it better. Getting ahead of the story, apologising, showing contrition and controlling the narrative was a better course. Now the story has run away from them. I know admitting you're wrong is not something that you would do (;)) irrespective if you had a case to argue or not, but sometimes it is the smart move.
Click to expand...
I do agree, but two things to consider. 1. Whether that would be enough for people with other agendas 2. The wounded/offended father can be a difficult beast to reason with. I'm pretty laid back BUT if anyone dictates that I've done wrong when protecting the welfare of my family, they'll need to move along. Even if I'm wrong in some element, if it was the right thing to do for my wife and son, that trump's everything. And I'd expect any father that puts himself in that same circumstance to relate to that.

In fact rather than be riled by the media etc intrusion...he'd of been better, to do as you say, apologise, show contrition and said something along the lines of what I've said above. And even paid the nominal fine in line with other offenders.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Neither. I was looking at this character and history. He's a bit of a know it all. With the blog, he wants to say 'see I told you so'. He wrote about something related, he was frustrated he didn't explicitly cite Corona so he could perpetuate his super-intelligent prescient status (ego), so he edited it. I'm sure it was his intention all along! I don't think it is anything more than that to be honest.
Click to expand...
I’d say he is less of a know it all and more of a wannabe revolutionary
He focussed massively on the failing I his view of our current governmental structure and practices
it’s why IMO she is hated by the old school phalanx as that why he wants to change, for the benefit of the normal people
I’ve seen it first hand in the civil service and none of that has been reported as it’s things the tax payer would have expected to be in place anyway
 
scaramanga said:
And let's not forget he was one of the ones insisting the Scottish one had to resign.

Painted himself into a corner there.
Click to expand...

I still believe there's a significant difference between (possibly) infringing the rules relating to childcare for infected parents, and sticking two fingers up at the public from your holiday home without even a decent cover story for it.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
I do agree, but two things to consider. 1. Whether that would be enough for people with other agendas 2. The wounded/offended father can be a difficult hunk of burning love to reason with. I'm pretty laid back BUT if anyone dictates that I've done wrong when protecting the welfare of my family, they'll need to move along. Even if I'm wrong in some element, if it was the right thing to do for my wife and son, that trump's everything. And I'd expect any father that puts himself in that same circumstance to relate to that.

In fact rather than be riled by the media etc intrusion...he'd of been better, to do as you say, apologise, show contrition and said something along the lines of what I've said above. And even paid the nominal fine in line with other offenders.
Click to expand...
And just too add...I'd hope doing as suggested would harness enough understanding to put any group with other agendas in such a minority they'd pipe down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back