10 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

And consequently I cannot take Cox seriously with his criticism of Hoyle. He needs to reflect on his own actions. 

Right, but what about the substance of his comments?

9 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

Right, but what about the substance of his comments?

His comments are probably right, but fuck me. Do you not see the hypocrisy at all? If someone robbed you, then said "nobody should rob people", would you forgive them because of "the substance of their comment"?

Edited February 23, 20242 yr by Cheese

2 minutes ago, Cheese said:

His comments are probably right, but fuck me. Do you not see the hypocrisy at all? If someone robbed you, then said "nobody should rob people", would you forgive them because of "the substance of their comment"?

Am I arguing for his forgiveness?

14 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

Right, but what about the substance of his comments?

Not interested. In the same way that I wont be treating the economic views of Liz Truss seriously. 

3 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

Am I arguing for his forgiveness?

Probably not. But as I've already asked - do you really not see the hypocrisy, and how that deminishes his position?

Just now, Farrelli said:

Not interested. In the same way that I wont be treating the economic views of Liz Truss seriously. 

You're not interested in MPs being intimidated into voting against their conscience

Fair enough

1 minute ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

You're not interested in MPs being intimidated into voting against their conscience

Fair enough

Which MP's voted against their conscience?

6 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

You're not interested in MPs being intimidated into voting against their conscience

Fair enough

I’m not interested in the views of Cox specifically because he is a hypocrite.

5 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

I’m not interested in the views of Cox specifically because he is a hypocrite.

Can he not be a hypocrite and also be right?

Alastair Campbell has been posted often enough in this thread despite his previous

And if it's Cox you take issue with, do you yourself not have any concerns that MPs and the Speaker of the House are so concerned for the safety of MPs and their staff that he decides to defy convention in order to abate the actions of the mob?

If Parliament can be cowed into doing what you want through threats and abuse, why bother with democracy at all?

1 hour ago, MancWanderer said:

Rarely comment on this thread and often don’t agree with NiC but I’m in complete agreement with this

Labour will win the next GE. Absolutely no doubt in my mind and it’s desperately needed. They just need to not get involved in this sort of shit so that folk don’t take the opinion as stated by NiC and not bother voting because they just see all politicians as bent

Cant say I’ve much confidence in Starmer but the bar is so low at the moment it’s horrific. I shall vote for my local Labour MP this time round, Angela Rayner, who I’ve done a complete 360 on. I was completely in Bolty’s camp regarding her a while back. Now I’d have more confidence in her than Starmer leading Labour. I think that she’d be a stronger leader. Just my opinion. No graphs or links to back it up…

You didn’t think she was a slag did you?

Can’t see you stooping as low as the Aussie

The next General Election is almost certainly going to be a re-run of the EU Referendum. "Muslims!"

Edited February 23, 20242 yr by Cheese

1 hour ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

And if it's Cox you take issue with, do you yourself not have any concerns that MPs and the Speaker of the House are so concerned for the safety of MPs and their staff that he decides to defy convention in order to abate the actions of the mob?

If Parliament can be cowed into doing what you want through threats and abuse, why bother with democracy at all?

Cox is just one of the Tory mob who allowed Johnson to undermine our parliament. None of them have any right to criticise the speaker over this. They lost that right when they defended the indefensible.

24 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

Cox is just one of the Tory mob who allowed Johnson to undermine our parliament. None of them have any right to criticise the speaker over this. They lost that right when they defended the indefensible.

Okay, but forget Cox

What about the questions I asked?

Kent in his heart is probably more of a lefty than I am, but being a centrist I don't think some of those front benchers currently in Labour with survive the first reshuffle. I'm not a huge fan of some of them but at least they have seemingly gone onto into public service because they believe in it

 

Lee Anderson next Home Secretary in all likelihood.

14 minutes ago, Spider said:

Lee Anderson next month's Home Secretary in all likelihood.

 

I still can't believe we're getting all bent out of shape, with regards to a bit of a ceasefire, that nobody in the actual conflict is going to pay any attention to whatsoever. 

Its ridiculous

Just now, Sweep said:

I still can't believe we're getting all bent out of shape, with regards to a bit of a ceasefire, that nobody in the actual conflict is going to pay any attention to whatsoever. 

Its ridiculous

Aye 

It's not like Israel would have stopped if it had been the SNP version 

But saw the labours and thought game on

3 hours ago, mickbrown said:

You didn’t think she was a slag did you?

Can’t see you stooping as low as the Aussie

Bolty gives an opinion. As do you. Varying points on the spectrum which should all be considered and not dismissed.

I thought that she was a vacuous waste of space as my local MP a while back. I’ve changed my mind. She’s twice the man Starmer is

11 minutes ago, MancWanderer said:

Bolty gives an opinion. As do you. Varying points on the spectrum which should all be considered and not dismissed.

I thought that she was a vacuous waste of space as my local MP a while back. I’ve changed my mind. She’s twice the man Starmer is

He’s full of opinions. 

1 hour ago, Sweep said:

I still can't believe we're getting all bent out of shape, with regards to a bit of a ceasefire, that nobody in the actual conflict is going to pay any attention to whatsoever. 

Its ridiculous

Absofuckinglutely  

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

He’s full of opinions. 

Good on him. His are no less valid than yours or vice versa. Entrenchment has no place and all should be heard and considered in my opinion. I agree and disagree with you and him in equal measure in all likelihood 

36 minutes ago, MancWanderer said:

Good on him. His are no less valid than yours or vice versa. Entrenchment has no place and all should be heard and considered in my opinion. I agree and disagree with you and him in equal measure in all likelihood 

Not that he’d ever see my views as he’s such a lover of the ignore button. 😁
 

Think you and me are both a bit more open minded than that fella. 
 

But each to their own. 

2 hours ago, Sweep said:

I still can't believe we're getting all bent out of shape, with regards to a bit of a ceasefire, that nobody in the actual conflict is going to pay any attention to whatsoever. 

Its ridiculous

It's not the vote itself that's the issue