• 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

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Gilzeantoscore said:
I called you out because clearly you have higher expectations of Labour. Yes the Tories can play politics, the Tories can hold the country to ransom, but Corbyn he can't put a contrary position, not him, he's just playing politics. Can't say I'm surprised as this double standard has always been thus,
Click to expand...

Labour present themselves as being better, do they not? Even their members - YOU - its always "those nasty Tories who dont care about 'the people'" and how Labour would look after everyone...

But I am not to have high expectations of them to actually put the people first? Clearly you are a paid up member, I would expect you to be more agreeable to that than as aggressively defensive as you are.

The Tories are an utter mess, Ive said it countless times. Quite frankly it goes without saying, doesnt it?

I shouldnt have to prefix any Labour comment with "The Tories are terrible but...", should I? I should be able to expect a grown man to keep his knee from jerking and engage.

May is playing politics, it is obvious. She is doing everything she can to appease the divided arms of her party and keep them in power. This is all obvious.

Labour are the opposition, they have a job to do. And, so far, and IMO at least, are failing.

There is no double standard in pointing this out, particularly with posters like you calling Labour the second coming as if they would actually be any different. They arent now, why would they be if I voted them in?

Gilzeantoscore said:
Crickets from Nayim re May playing games by just re submitting the same plan in the hope that as time runs out the undecided prefer it to a no deal Brexit. What a cynic, but according to Nayim, that is not worthy of condemnation... but what's this Corbyn has just said... Corbyn is playing....
Click to expand...

I havent been online since Monday afternoon, "crickets", or "better things to do"?

Mays a clam, as stated it really goes without saying. I find it odd I would need to keep pointing out the obvious just to keep you from losing your rag.

The difference between May and Corbyn/Labour? She isnt being held up as some sort of solution.

Instead of playing the same games as May Corbyn could actually be making a difference and living up to his rhetoric. He isnt. And that is worthy of condemnation, particularly when his fan club are so aggressive in shouting down anything negative ever said about him.
 
galeforce said:
they have also said we can revoke a50 (which was initiated without any planning by us whatsoever by the way) at any time.
Click to expand...

Clearly a mistake with hindsight, though let's not forget that at the time the leader of the opposition wanted it invoked quicker still.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Labour present themselves as being better, do they not? Even their members - YOU - its always "those nasty Tories who dont care about 'the people'" and how Labour would look after everyone...

But I am not to have high expectations of them to actually put the people first? Clearly you are a paid up member, I would expect you to be more agreeable to that than as aggressively defensive as you are.

The Tories are an utter mess, Ive said it countless times. Quite frankly it goes without saying, doesnt it?

I shouldnt have to prefix any Labour comment with "The Tories are terrible but...", should I? I should be able to expect a grown man to keep his knee from jerking and engage.

May is playing politics, it is obvious. She is doing everything she can to appease the divided arms of her party and keep them in power. This is all obvious.

Labour are the opposition, they have a job to do. And, so far, and IMO at least, are failing.

There is no double standard in pointing this out, particularly with posters like you calling Labour the second coming as if they would actually be any different. They arent now, why would they be if I voted them in?



I havent been online since Monday afternoon, "crickets", or "better things to do"?

Mays a clam, as stated it really goes without saying. I find it odd I would need to keep pointing out the obvious just to keep you from losing your rag.

The difference between May and Corbyn/Labour? She isnt being held up as some sort of solution.

Instead of playing the same games as May Corbyn could actually be making a difference and living up to his rhetoric. He isnt. And that is worthy of condemnation, particularly when his fan club are so aggressive in shouting down anything negative ever said about him.
Click to expand...

False moral equivalence. You know May's incompetent and all, but Corbyn and Labour are just as bad. It's a broken record mate. No point in voting for another party because they are all the same. For your information i am not a member.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
False moral equivalence. You know May's incompetent and all, but Corbyn and Labour are just as bad. It's a broken record mate. No point in voting for another party because they are all the same. For your information i am not a member.
Click to expand...

Given your rather aggressive stance on here, you might as well be.

They are all just as bad - and believe me I would love for someone to set themselves apart. As I say though, only one gets held up as some sort of solution.

And yet that same person/party shouldnt bear any scrutiny....

The point here, in this historic moment, is that Corbyn really could live up to the hype, to his own words, to what the cultists think and say of him - he could set himself apart.

And instead he is showing himself to be no different to May. You think that doesnt warrant some sort of condemnation?

None of which does anything to justify May. The Tories have acted shamefully througout. Its not an either/or thing, is it?
 
The two of them make Blair look like a genius. Under his control, probably Cameron’s too, we would not be flogging a dead horse like this. There isn’t leadership from either Nay or Corbyn. Both lack ideas and invention and take a back seat while others sway their direction. In that they are quite similar.

Brexit is not an easy job for any politician to deliver. But that means we actually need brilliance and creativity at the top more than ever. We clearly don’t have it!


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Parklaner81 said:
Well that's a hugely debatable point, and one I'd suggest there's little point in getting into again. But either way it doesn't change the outcome. If no deal = armageddon, surely the EU should not be condoned for casually hinting at it when May got slaughtered for doing so.
Click to expand...
Its Mays job to ensure the best for the UK, its not the EUs job to ensure the best for the UK - given that I don't see any double standards in getting angry at May but not the EU.

Its a crappy situation that I hope can be avoided.
 
r-u-s-x said:
Its Mays job to ensure the best for the UK, its not the EUs job to ensure the best for the UK - given that I don't see any double standards in getting angry at May but not the EU.

Its a crappy situation that I hope can be avoided.
Click to expand...

Granted, but it is surely reasonable to expect the EU to act in good faith and to seek to avoid hardship all round (for themselves, and for a soon-to-be ex-member and 'future partner' who has contributed a significant overall proportion of the funding for their entire project to date) if they could reasonably do so. I find it very hard to see how casually hinting that they might simply refuse to grant an extension, and thereby bring about a no deal scenario constitutes behaviour that would fall into those categories.
 
Parklaner81 said:
Granted, but it is surely reasonable to expect the EU to act in good faith and to seek to avoid hardship all round (for themselves, and for a soon-to-be ex-member and 'future partner' who has contributed a significant overall proportion of the funding for their entire project to date) if they could reasonably do so. I find it very hard to see how casually hinting that they might simply refuse to grant an extension, and thereby bring about a no deal scenario constitutes behaviour that would fall into those categories.
Click to expand...

one does not equal the other, even if they refuse an extension we can still approve the WA in parliament or revoke a50, we still have full control of the situation
 
Parklaner81 said:
Granted, but it is surely reasonable to expect the EU to act in good faith and to seek to avoid hardship all round (for themselves, and for a soon-to-be ex-member and 'future partner' who has contributed a significant overall proportion of the funding for their entire project to date) if they could reasonably do so. I find it very hard to see how casually hinting that they might simply refuse to grant an extension, and thereby bring about a no deal scenario constitutes behaviour that would fall into those categories.
Click to expand...
Yes I do expect them to act in good faith, as of yet I have not seen anything that they have not.

this seems reasonable to me:
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has warned Theresa May that she should not take it for granted that the EU will agree to an article 50 extension. At a press conference in Brussels, he said that delaying Brexit could bring economic and political costs, that the EU would want reasons for an extension, and that he would only favour agreeing a long extension in return for the UK offering “something new”. See
 
galeforce said:
one does not equal the other, even if they refuse an extension we can still approve the WA in parliament or revoke a50, we still have full control of the situation
Click to expand...

As things stand at this moment, it's very likely/arguable that one does in fact equal the other. That may change, but the hints I've referred to have been made knowing that a 3rd vote on the WA, as things stand, has for now been ruled out.
 
Parklaner81 said:
As things stand at this moment, it's very likely/arguable that one does in fact equal the other. That may change, but the hints I've referred to have been made knowing that a 3rd vote on the WA, as things stand, has for now been ruled out.
Click to expand...

by ourselves

it's just another example of us setting impossible barriers, we are still chasing a unicorn
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
Parklaner81 said:
I don't think I can offer any more on this than to refer you to my previous 4 or 5 posts on the matter.
Click to expand...

If we leave they have no obligation to us, in fact they have an obligation to promote their members at our expense.

Maybe they figure no deal means that in five or 10 years time a shed load of British businesses will relocate... Maybe no deal is actually their preferred option now. Because it will benifit their members the most.

Maybe and here is a shocker... We need them more than they need us?

But being the reasonable cheese eating chaps they are, they have left us with three whole options to prevent this:

1: revoke article 50
2: pass the deal that the UK initially asked for (Mays deal)
3: come up with a proper reason for a delay, IE a referendum or a general election.

If May can't pick one of those... It's not the EUs fault, it's the fault of this shower of s hit we have as a government.
 
DTA said:
If we leave they have no obligation to us, in fact they have an obligation to promote their members at our expense.

Maybe they figure no deal means that in five or 10 years time a shed load of British businesses will relocate... Maybe no deal is actually their preferred option now. Because it will benifit their members the most.

Maybe and here is a shocker... We need them more than they need us?

But being the reasonable cheese eating chaps they are, they have left us with three whole options to prevent this:

1: revoke article 50
2: pass the deal that the UK initially asked for (Mays deal)
3: come up with a proper reason for a delay, IE a referendum or a general election.

If May can't pick one of those... It's not the EUs fault, it's the fault of this shower of s hit we have as a government.
Click to expand...
It 1 all day long.

Based on 2 & 3 being full of sh.it deals, sh.it politicians, sh.it Sun and Daily Mail readers and a sh.it load of sh.it spouted on social media. :)
 
DTA said:
If we leave they have no obligation to us, in fact they have an obligation to promote their members at our expense.

Maybe they figure no deal means that in five or 10 years time a shed load of British businesses will relocate... Maybe no deal is actually their preferred option now. Because it will benifit their members the most.

Maybe and here is a shocker... We need them more than they need us?

But being the reasonable cheese eating chaps they are, they have left us with three whole options to prevent this:

1: revoke article 50
2: pass the deal that the UK initially asked for (Mays deal)
3: come up with a proper reason for a delay, IE a referendum or a general election.

If May can't pick one of those... It's not the EUs fault, it's the fault of this shower of s hit we have as a government.
Click to expand...

I'm in no way suggesting they have any obligation to us. I'm not even arguing against their right to drive things towards no deal at our expense if that is their wish. I don't for a minute believe that is their wish by the way, I think it's mere strategy on their part to hint at it. Which again, in and of itself I have no issue with whatsoever.

What I do have an issue with is the people who so rigourously opposed the UK employing such tactics, but now (surprise surprise) seem to have no issue at all with the EU doing likewise.
 
Parklaner81 said:
I'm in no way suggesting they have any obligation to us. I'm not even arguing against their right to drive things towards no deal at our expense if that is their wish. I don't for a minute believe that is their wish by the way, I think it's mere strategy on their part to hint at it. Which again, in and of itself I have no issue with whatsoever.

What I do have an issue with is the people who so rigourously opposed the UK employing such tactics, but now seem to have no issue whatsoever with the EU doing likewise.
Click to expand...

But there is three things you can do which will prevent no deal (which I have outlined).

The EU have outlined them... They said:

"hey UK stop Punching yourself in the face"

We said
"no it's the will of the people"

They said:

"Ok but now you are punching yourself in the face while running toward that cliff edge"

We said:

"No deal is better than a bad deal, we have to keep the the prospect of No deal on the table to scare the EU in to submission"

They said:

"Hey UK maybe because you were punching yourself in face so much, you didn't actually notice that you are now very close to the cliff edge... It's ok though... We have three ways you can avoid falling over the cliff edge... Here they are: "

UK:
"Move the cliff edge"

EU: "what"

UK: " move the cliff edge or build us a bridge"

EU: um... We don't even... We can't do that .. but we have outlined three easy ways for you to change direction and not fall off the edge. Just choose one.

UK: "NO ... Move the cliff edge"

EU: "maybe you should stop Punching yourself in the face for a while"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back