Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Banjax on 09 May 2010, 14:28:49
-
"one suggestion put to me this afternoon was that they (senior Labour cabinet ministers) might hand him (Gordon Brown) the revolver, but instead of putting to his own head he'd shoot them - so determined is he to remain in no.10"
first of all Mr Craig - please let Adam Boulton handle the serious issues :o
secondly I'm sure Brown's kids are really pleased with the image of their dad murdering some cabinet ministers as opposed to blowing his own brains out :o
thirdly, why all this talk of Brown clinging to power? He's remaining as PM until another government is formed - it's one of his duties as PM 8-)
ridiculous coverage from the dirty diggers trumpet ;D
-
I think the popularist media are, for once, portraying the popular view that we need to be shot of that individual, an unelected PM, who just about everybody wants to see the back of, due to him almost single handedly bankrupting this country... ...I think there is a lot of frustration that he is still in No 10 ;)
But I'm sure those who care can read all the various articles themselves... :-X
-
constitutionally he has to wait until a viable government has formed - its not a question of him "hanging on" as far as i know - he's PM until its settled :o
-
constitutionally he has to wait until a viable government has formed - its not a question of him "hanging on" as far as i know :o
Whilst you are correct, even the most devote Labour supporter will agree he is trying to 'hang on'. He has the right to resign immediately, which a lot of people would like (personally I think we need a PM until new government is formed).
But he has, alledgedly, been trying to form his own coalitions, alledgedly shouting and swearing at another party leader who initially rejected his advances. And there is credibility to the story, based on the Bad Temper Brown revalations previously released.
-
so he resigns....and asks the Queen to form a new government and she says "with who exactly, Mr Brown?"
we all need to wait i'm afraid :o
then he jumps in the jag and starts swearing about her behind her back ;D ;D ;D
-
I'm inclined to agree BJ, news coverage - especially in the broadcast form - seems to require a degree of theatre to be exhibited in the drive/lust for ratings success.
I can't really listen to Mr Craig's contributions as I'm constantly distracted by the seemingly uncontrollable flailing of his arms during the course of his delivery.
I have to agree with G Brown remaining in office until the next Prime Minister and his/her administration are ready to assume control as he's constitutionally obliged to do so. (Even though he and his party have led this country into difficulties the full effects of which are still yet to be realized)
Mr Brown is a no-hoper as things stand and even should there be a pact with the LD's and other 'interested' parties, his tenure as Prime Minister and leader of the Labour Party now seems to be in its last days.
Digger has, and will continue to have, a lot to answer for.
-
GB is Prime Minister by title only, for the time being, a caretaker PM, if you like. He can wield no political power until such time (if ever) he enjoys the support of the House of Commons.
Under the British constitution (which doesn't actually physically exist .... it is, in reality, a collection of tradition and precedence) he has the right to remain as PM until such time as a successor (enjoying the support of the House) can be suggested to Her Majesty. If no such successor (or, indeed, GB himself) can be presented the Queen can intercede. The only other instance calling for Royal Intercession would be if an emergency were to be declared, which isn't beyond the realms of possibility.
AFAIK he has such a right, not such a responsibility.
So until such time as talks are concluded, one way or the other, GB it is :-/
-
Note those sceptics of the value of BBC political coverage that all the very many programmes I have been watching on my favourite, unbiased, channels the BBC 1, 2 and 80, News Channel, it has been made very clear that Gordon Brown is acting very statesman like.
He is following correctly his duties under the [unwritten] consititution to remain in No. 10 as PM until the Conservatives, with maybe the Lib Dems, decide what course their claim on leading the country will take. If the current talks fail, then it is still the right of Gordon Brown to seek an alliance / coalition with other parties as PM, even though that seems most unlikely.
For once then Gordon Brown is taking exactly the right course of action ;) ;)
It is only the gutter media, like SKY and the tabloids, that suggest anything else.
Thank God for the BBC!! 8-) 8-) 8-)
-
Note those sceptics of the value of BBC political coverage that all the very many programmes I have been watching on my favourite, unbiased, channels the BBC 1, 2 and 80, News Channel, it has been made very clear that Gordon Brown is acting very statesman like.
He is following correctly his duties under the [unwritten] consititution to remain in No. 10 as PM until the Conservatives, with maybe the Lib Dems, decide what course their claim on leading the country will take. If the current talks fail, then it is still the right of Gordon Brown to seek an alliance / coalition with other parties as PM, even though that seems most unlikely.
For once then Gordon Brown is taking exactly the right course of action ;) ;)
It is only the gutter media, like SKY and the tabloids, that suggest anything else.
Thank God for the BBC!! 8-) 8-) 8-)
I am not entirely sure the BBC has been unbiased for the past few years. And they have become sensationalist like Sky/Daily Trash/The Scum etc etc
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
-
So does no one think a Lib Dem / Conservitive coalition would be a welcome change for the country.......If they agree to changes to there manifestos with the conservitave stamp with a little Lib Dem moderation (Immagration being mine) would be a positive boost to the economy and the general state itself !
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
And for the point of GB being an un-elected leader....Do you get a vote on who is going to be in charge of the company....When your boss retires ??
-
So does no one think a Lib Dem / Conservitive coalition would be a welcome change for the country.......If they agree to changes to there manifestos with the conservitave stamp with a little Lib Dem moderation (Immagration being mine) would be a positive boost to the economy and the general state itself !
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
And for the point of GB being an un-elected leader....Do you get a vote on who is going to be in charge of the company....When your boss retires ??
I'd rather a Lib/Con coalition than a Tory majority, but even if they can agree to a coalition, I wouldn't give it much more than 6months before another election is needed - whilst DC and NC may agree to put the country first, I don't think their parties will see it like that and why would the tories give the libs proportional represention? they'd never get back in!!! ;D
And you're right about GB - he's not the president, he's the leader of a party we chose to lead, so all this nonsense about him being unelected is just that - I don't remember anyone outside the tories asking if we wanted John Major or any other party leader for that matter ::)
-
If I were Nick Clegg, I'd only agree to a coalition if Vince Cable was Chancellor. Show Gideon the door. :y ;D
-
If I were Nick Clegg, I'd only agree to a coalition if Vince Cable was Chancellor. Show Gideon the door. :y ;D
I think he wants to do that anyway ;D
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
So, to repeat, are you seriously suggesting we forget the fact we are a democracy and the populations within the constituencies that are currently Lib Dem, due to them obtaining the most votes, should be discounted, with the nations [unwritten] Constitution being ignored???? :o :o :o :o :o :o Also what about all the other parties Parliamentary seats?
I rather believe you would end up with a revolution, with the wishes of so many people being discarded and one party being in a situation to do what they like. We already have with the Westminster system a situation where the ruling Party, the Government, being able to pass the vast majority (about 98%) of all the new Bills proposed by them.
Whatever you are suggesting frankly is not practicable or desirable in a truly democratic system ;) ;)
In addition and crucially of course, with the two horse race you are suggesting, we could still end up with none obtaining an absolute majority!!! ::) ::) ::)
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
Brown doesn't come out smelling of roses, but I remember "Black Wednesday" in the early 90's when a tory government took us to the brink of financial ruin - thats why the tories couldnt get near government in the last 13 years :o
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
agreed :y
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
agreed :y
But Cem, it is what a large number of people in our democracy want!! ::) ::) ::) That cannot and must not be ignored! ;) ;)
-
Black Wednesday was pocket change compared to the amounts of money we are in trouble for now.
Anyway I have come to the conclusion that this democracy lark just isnt going to work. We have the Limpdem activists hoping they can hold the country to ransom, when they are nothing more than a bunch of old hippies who dropped too much acid in the 60,s and can no longer think straight.
We have a PM in No 10 who if he had any dignity and wasnt completely deluded would by now have announced that he will resign, but will stay for a few more days to allow the transition to a new govt (that would be statesmanlike)
And we have the Tories who have sold their souls to "progressivism" only to find out that hardly anyone has noticed so they neednt have bothered.
I think the answer is a benevolent dictatorship run by .......................................ME. :y ;D ;D ;D
-
Black Wednesday was pocket change compared to the amounts of money we are in trouble for now.
Anyway I have come to the conclusion that this democracy lark just isnt going to work. We have the Limpdem activists hoping they can hold the country to ransom, when they are nothing more than a bunch of old hippies who dropped too much acid in the 60,s and can no longer think straight.
We have a PM in No 10 who if he had any dignity and wasnt completely deluded would by now have announced that he will resign, but will stay for a few more days to allow the transition to a new govt (that would be statesmanlike)
And we have the Tories who have sold their souls to "progressivism" only to find out that hardly anyone has noticed so they neednt have bothered.
I think the answer is a benevolent dictatorship run by .......................................ME. :y ;D ;D ;D
No, definately not Albs!! :P :P :P
That job is MINE, and you can forget about any elections, as my first task is to ban them in the interests of National Socialism, a much easier system to manage!! ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
I feel like one of those Dr No moments coming on!! :o :o :D :D ;)
-
Black Wednesday was pocket change compared to the amounts of money we are in trouble for now.
Anyway I have come to the conclusion that this democracy lark just isnt going to work. We have the Limpdem activists hoping they can hold the country to ransom, when they are nothing more than a bunch of old hippies who dropped too much acid in the 60,s and can no longer think straight.
We have a PM in No 10 who if he had any dignity and wasnt completely deluded would by now have announced that he will resign, but will stay for a few more days to allow the transition to a new govt (that would be statesmanlike)
And we have the Tories who have sold their souls to "progressivism" only to find out that hardly anyone has noticed so they neednt have bothered.
I think the answer is a benevolent dictatorship run by .......................................ME. :y ;D ;D ;D
No, definately not Albs!! :P :P :P
That job is MINE, and you can forget about any elections, as my first task is to ban them in the interests of National Socialism, a much easier system to manage!! ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
I feel like one of those Dr No moments coming on!! :o :o :D :D ;)
:y now we're talking :y
-
I agree about the elections, cause too many arguments. Better off without them. :y ;D
I think Clegg should have been careful what he wished for. He is in an unenviable position tbh.
His party activists are a complete disgrace. I have heard many of then interviewed in the last few days and every one of them said that PR is the single most important issue. They dont seem interested in the fact that this country is not very far away from where Greece is, and if we dont get a stable govt. quickly we will be there. The markets will go into freefall and the pound will fall of a cliff. The only thing that matters is that they get the voting system which suits them,
.On the other hand if Clegg goes into coalition with Labour (with or without Brown) with the help of some oddballs to make up the numbers , the economy will fall apart, and the coalition would quickly follow it. And the country would almost certainly hold Clegg responsible and punish him acordingly.
As a footnote about Brown the statesman, did you know that he tapped up the UUP (probably the most right wing party in British politics) about the possibility of support in a coalition - over a week before the election took place. :o ::)
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
So...Is GB responsible for the rest of Europe descending into financial chaos ?? Or is it more about peoples obssesion with borrowing and the fact that the financial instutions make huge money out of lending to people who can't afford to repay it ? Or as they now realise it they have actually run out of people to lend to !
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
-
I agree about the elections, cause too many arguments. Better off without them. :y ;D
I think Clegg should have been careful what he wished for. He is in an unenviable position tbh.
His party activists are a complete disgrace. I have heard many of then interviewed in the last few days and every one of them said that PR is the single most important issue. They dont seem interested in the fact that this country is not very far away from where Greece is, and if we dont get a stable govt. quickly we will be there. The markets will go into freefall and the pound will fall of a cliff. The only thing that matters is that they get the voting system which suits them,
.On the other hand if Clegg goes into coalition with Labour (with or without Brown) with the help of some oddballs to make up the numbers , the economy will fall apart, and the coalition would quickly follow it. And the country would almost certainly hold Clegg responsible and punish him acordingly.
As a footnote about Brown the statesman, did you know that he tapped up the UUP (probably the most right wing party in British politics) about the possibility of support in a coalition - over a week before the election took place. :o ::)
Tories should just sit back and watch the labour/lib dem coalition collapse into chaos,wait for a new election to be called and walk into power :y
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
So...Is GB responsible for the rest of Europe descending into financial chaos ?? Or is it more about peoples obssesion with borrowing and the fact that the financial instutions make huge money out of lending to people who can't afford to repay it ? Or as they now realise it they have actually run out of people to lend to !
The reason they are in that position is that they (as countries) have been spending a lot of money that they havent earned, now the chickens are coming home to roost.
The two reasons we arent quite there are 1) we didnt join the Euro, so still have some control over interest rates etc.
2) we have one of the biggest financial centres in the world , which despite its recent problems, has started to recover reasonably well, which in turn generates a relatively high degree of confidence in our economy.
This helps to a degree mask the fact that our govt has been among the very worst in the world of spending money that the country hasnt earned. ;)
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
So...Is GB responsible for the rest of Europe descending into financial chaos ?? Or is it more about peoples obssesion with borrowing and the fact that the financial instutions make huge money out of lending to people who can't afford to repay it ? Or as they now realise it they have actually run out of people to lend to !
The reason they are in that position is that they (as countries) have been spending a lot of money that they havent earned, now the chickens are coming home to roost.
The two reasons we arent quite there are 1) we didnt join the Euro, so still have some control over interest rates etc.
2) we have one of the biggest financial centres in the world , which despite its recent problems, has started to recover reasonably well, which in turn generates a relatively high degree of confidence in our economy.
This helps to a degree mask the fact that our govt has been among the very worst in the world of spending money that the country hasnt earned. ;)
Most of the population of the western world are responsible for doing that...... spending what we haven't got !! from top to bottom credit is destroying us all !!
-
Black Wednesday was pocket change compared to the amounts of money we are in trouble for now.
Anyway I have come to the conclusion that this democracy lark just isnt going to work. We have the Limpdem activists hoping they can hold the country to ransom, when they are nothing more than a bunch of old hippies who dropped too much acid in the 60,s and can no longer think straight.
We have a PM in No 10 who if he had any dignity and wasnt completely deluded would by now have announced that he will resign, but will stay for a few more days to allow the transition to a new govt (that would be statesmanlike)
And we have the Tories who have sold their souls to "progressivism" only to find out that hardly anyone has noticed so they neednt have bothered.
I think the answer is a benevolent dictatorship run by .......................................ME. :y ;D ;D ;D
nah..somebody see the light ;D :y :y :y
obviously wont work.. as seen in million examples..
and last week friday I spent considerable effort to tell why it wont work and politician hands are already tied up with so many..
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
agreed :y
But Cem, it is what a large number of people in our democracy want!! ::) ::) ::) That cannot and must not be ignored! ;) ;)
Lizzie, for the sake of those people must be.. :-/
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
So...Is GB responsible for the rest of Europe descending into financial chaos ?? Or is it more about peoples obssesion with borrowing and the fact that the financial instutions make huge money out of lending to people who can't afford to repay it ? Or as they now realise it they have actually run out of people to lend to !
The reason they are in that position is that they (as countries) have been spending a lot of money that they havent earned, now the chickens are coming home to roost.The two reasons we arent quite there are 1) we didnt join the Euro, so still have some control over interest rates etc.
2) we have one of the biggest financial centres in the world , which despite its recent problems, has started to recover reasonably well, which in turn generates a relatively high degree of confidence in our economy.
This helps to a degree mask the fact that our govt has been among the very worst in the world of spending money that the country hasnt earned. ;)
:y :y
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
agreed :y
But Cem, it is what a large number of people in our democracy want!! ::) ::) ::) That cannot and must not be ignored! ;) ;)
Lizzie, for the sake of those people must be.. :-/
You surprise me Cem! :o :o
Yesterday we remembered when 65 years ago VE Day was celebrated after the most wasteful war in history had taken place to rid the planet of a powerful anti-democratic organisation.
Is that not enough to remind us all of NEVER allowing that situation to reoccur again of a nation dismantling its democratic systems to allow one party to rule?? :o :o :o
I think it is time to highlight how the Lib-Dems, as much as I want to forget it as a Conservative supporter, attracted votes across the country totalling 6, 828, 000 , against Labour's 8,604,000, and the Conservatives 10,707,000!! But they only ended up with 57 seats, 258 and 306 respectively! ::) ::)
No wonder the Lib Dems want PR! ::) ::) :P :P
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
agreed :y
But Cem, it is what a large number of people in our democracy want!! ::) ::) ::) That cannot and must not be ignored! ;) ;)
Lizzie, for the sake of those people must be.. :-/
You surprise me Cem! :o :o
Yesterday we remembered when 65 years ago VE Day was celebrated after the most wasteful war in history had taken place to rid the planet of a powerful anti-democratic organisation.
Is that not enough to remind us all of NEVER allowing that situation to reoccur again of a nation dismantling its democratic systems to allow one party to rule?? :o :o :o
I think it is time to highlight how the Lib-Dems, as much as I want to forget it as a Conservative supporter, attracted votes across the country totalling 6, 828, 000 , against Labour's 8,604,000, and the Conservatives 10,707,000!! But they only ended up with 57 seats, 258 and 306 respectively! ::) ::)
No wonder the Lib Dems want PR! ::) ::) :P :P
Nice one Lizzie ;D :y
I wish to answer your statement in detail (which I hope I can after) ,
but for now I can say, the kind of management what I wish , of course it is not something like that was build by Nazis..
I believe human kind can build much better civilization management techniques.. fair , clean and quick..
and one point which needs mentioning , looking the actual number of votes and the corresponding seats in house of commons there is also another problem.. :-/
-
This problem is caused by the constituency boundaries being all wrong, and every time they are changed the changes seem to favour Labour even more (what a surprise).
The most obvious exanple beingthat something like 85% of the UK population live in England, but England doesnt have anything like 85% of the seats in parliemant.
Time for an English Parliament perhaps ? with the full parliemant only voting on issues which affect the whole of the UK? :-/
-
We should re-run the election without all the lib dem nonsense-straight fight between labour and conservatives,it's the only way we are going to get a definate result
So ignore the wishes of those who voted Lib Dem and forget they won 57 seats?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ :o :o
57 seats? what use is that ? only good for holding other parties to ransom ,we'll end up like israel,government held hostage by extremist odd balls dictating policy
agreed :y
But Cem, it is what a large number of people in our democracy want!! ::) ::) ::) That cannot and must not be ignored! ;) ;)
Lizzie, for the sake of those people must be.. :-/
You surprise me Cem! :o :o
Yesterday we remembered when 65 years ago VE Day was celebrated after the most wasteful war in history had taken place to rid the planet of a powerful anti-democratic organisation.
Is that not enough to remind us all of NEVER allowing that situation to reoccur again of a nation dismantling its democratic systems to allow one party to rule?? :o :o :o
I think it is time to highlight how the Lib-Dems, as much as I want to forget it as a Conservative supporter, attracted votes across the country totalling 6, 828, 000 , against Labour's 8,604,000, and the Conservatives 10,707,000!! But they only ended up with 57 seats, 258 and 306 respectively! ::) ::)
No wonder the Lib Dems want PR! ::) ::) :P :P
Nice one Lizzie ;D :y
I wish to answer your statement in detail (which I hope I can after) ,
but for now I can say, the kind of management what I wish , of course it is not something like that was build by Nazis..
I believe human kind can build much better civilization management techniques.. fair , clean and quick..
and one point which needs mentioning , looking the actual number of votes and the corresponding seats in house of commons there is also another problem.. :-/
Thanks Cem :y
But that is the problem; the line between a full democracy and a one party dictatorship is always very fine.
Throughout history philosophers have expressed their well thought beliefs on how any nation should be ruled. Plato had envisaged a meritocracy , where Philosopher Kings would decide on the worth of the nations citizens, in bands of bronze, silver, or gold, and how they should perform in their society, with powers limited to their rank. Hobbes envisaged of course one supreme ruler who would stop individual man continually "warring against man", as that was a mans natural trait, by governing tightly in what would seem to be a dictatorship. Nietzsche considered a society of "supermen" to rule and protect the weak, which of course the Nazis corrupted to form the base of their political system. Marx believed in a society of equals, all benefiting fairly from their labours, whilst being able to exercise their creativity.
Locke though fully supported the belief of the God given right of men to exercise complete freedom, providing they harmed no one and they applied themselves to a social contract with the rest of society. Mills however,considered a utilitarian society, where everything is the for the greatest good for the greatest number, but individual liberty is protected, whilst working with all society.
Two cut a very long story short, the philosophy of Mills in particular, but also Locke, has shaped political thinking in the 20th century to form a liberal society which certainly includes in the 21st century more of Locke's form of regulatory protection to stop individuals in hurting themselves.
The society of the UK has been built on these beliefs, with the idea of a free represenative democracy deciding who should rule on behalf of the people, to advance their political wishes. By natural progression we have now arrived at a situation whereby a multi-party political system is being voted for by the people wishing for many varied policies, but in a tradition two party reality, that reflects more of the political landscape of 1910, when the Conservatives or Liberals where the driving forces to be voted for. Simple, straightforward, but in many ways it resulted in whole sections of society not being faithfully represented, such as women and the working class!! :'( :'(
So Cem the BIG question is..........does society in the UK now want to revert to a simple political system limited to just two parties, and trust they can represent the views of the majority, and without slipping into the early stages of a dictatorship?? :-/ :-/
How this could be achieved, with the desires of the individual people expecting their liberty to express particular political aspirations, is the next BIG question? :-/ :-/
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
So...Is GB responsible for the rest of Europe descending into financial chaos ?? Or is it more about peoples obssesion with borrowing and the fact that the financial instutions make huge money out of lending to people who can't afford to repay it ? Or as they now realise it they have actually run out of people to lend to !
The reason they are in that position is that they (as countries) have been spending a lot of money that they havent earned, now the chickens are coming home to roost.
The two reasons we arent quite there are 1) we didnt join the Euro, so still have some control over interest rates etc.
2) we have one of the biggest financial centres in the world , which despite its recent problems, has started to recover reasonably well, which in turn generates a relatively high degree of confidence in our economy.
This helps to a degree mask the fact that our govt has been among the very worst in the world of spending money that the country hasnt earned. ;)
Most of the population of the western world are responsible for doing that...... spending what we haven't got !! from top to bottom credit is destroying us all !!
And when our PM keeps telling us that he has abolished boom and bust, there is no good reason not to. ;)
-
Maybe the answer is that we should have to take two tests before we can vote. The first test would be a test of intelligence to establish we are capable of understanding the issues.The second test would be a test of political awareness, to discourage people voting in ignorance or being too easily swayed by x-factor type campaigning.
Having left wing tendencies would of course automatically disqualify you on both counts. :y ;D ;D ;D
-
Maybe the answer is that we should have to take two tests before we can vote. The first test would be a test of intelligence to establish we are capable of understanding the issues.#The second test would be a test of political awareness, to discourage people voting in ignorance or being too easily swayed by x-factor type campaigning.
Having left wing tendencies would of course automatically disqualify you on both counts. :y ;D ;D ;D
Very much along the lines of the beliefs of Plato then 8-) 8-) :D ;)
-
Maybe the answer is that we should have to take two tests before we can vote. The first test would be a test of intelligence to establish we are capable of understanding the issues.#The second test would be a test of political awareness, to discourage people voting in ignorance or being too easily swayed by x-factor type campaigning.
Having left wing tendencies would of course automatically disqualify you on both counts. :y ;D ;D ;D
Very much along the lines of the beliefs of Plato then 8-) 8-) :D ;)
I thought he just drove touring cars and presented 5th Gear ;D ;D
-
Maybe the answer is that we should have to take two tests before we can vote. The first test would be a test of intelligence to establish we are capable of understanding the issues.#The second test would be a test of political awareness, to discourage people voting in ignorance or being too easily swayed by x-factor type campaigning.
Having left wing tendencies would of course automatically disqualify you on both counts. :y ;D ;D ;D
Very much along the lines of the beliefs of Plato then 8-) 8-) :D ;)
I thought he just drove touring cars and presented 5th Gear ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :y
-
As for GB causing the financial crises.....Was he in charge of the rest of the world aswell ?? I don't think so :-X
Was he the Chancellor during the boom economy of first 10yrs of New Labour? A time when New Labour decided they would destroy what remained of UK manufacturing, instead basing our economic success heavily on the finacial sector, which was further deregulated during this time?
Was he the chancellor that has WASTED 10's, if not 100's of billions of pounds on the permenently broken NHS, and on the (poor) education of our future?
Was he the chancellor that continued to BORROW during the good/boom years, rather than paying off a little of the existing debts? Did he think the bust years would never come? (he publically said 'this is the end of boom and bust economy').
I'm just the thicko from the local comprehensive, but even I understand basic fiscal management.
So, yes, I do believe he is personally responsible (with others) for the depth of the trouble that the UK is now in >:(
Brown doesn't come out smelling of roses, but I remember "Black Wednesday" in the early 90's when a tory government took us to the brink of financial ruin - thats why the tories couldnt get near government in the last 13 years :o
Nail. Head. Precisely.
*ANY* party in power for that length of time has lost touch, and run low on ideas. Hence we have stupid laws being suggested currently - any accident involving a car and a push bike is the car driver's fault without question, remember that one still being put before the house? What about the one where I have to ensure my old, decrepid, sleepy cat is regularly woken for 'mental stimulation'. What planet are these morons from?
As others have said, Black Wed is small changed compared to this. Even if you shut down the NHS and the entire education system, that *STILL* would not cover the annual deficit :o
-
:y ;D ;D ;D..............maybe he also dislikes lefty thinking as much as we do. :-/ :y :D ;D
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
can we leave a door, so the Malts can escape down here ;D ;D
-
Maybe the answer is that we should have to take two tests before we can vote. The first test would be a test of intelligence to establish we are capable of understanding the issues.The second test would be a test of political awareness, to discourage people voting in ignorance or being too easily swayed by x-factor type campaigning.
Having left wing tendencies would of course automatically disqualify you on both counts. :y ;D ;D ;D
and Sun readers? 8-)
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
can we leave a door, so the Malts can escape down here ;D ;D
[/highlight]
Sounds like a fair compromise, no point cutting off your nose to spite your face. :y ;D ;D
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
can we leave a door, so the Malts can escape down here ;D ;D
we'll send what's left after we celebrate completion of the wall.....hic :y
-
Maybe the answer is that we should have to take two tests before we can vote. The first test would be a test of intelligence to establish we are capable of understanding the issues.The second test would be a test of political awareness, to discourage people voting in ignorance or being too easily swayed by x-factor type campaigning.
Having left wing tendencies would of course automatically disqualify you on both counts. :y ;D ;D ;D
and Sun readers? 8-)
Disqualified on both counts ,plus a fine for poor choice in reading material. :y :D ;D ;D
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
can we leave a door, so the Malts can escape down here ;D ;D
we'll send what's left after we celebrate completion of the wall.....hic :y
But if the wall was built you couldnt afford to buy it, you would have to sell it to England - cheap. :P ;) ;D
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
can we leave a door, so the Malts can escape down here ;D ;D
we'll send what's left after we celebrate completion of the wall.....hic :y
I had a couple of nightcaps last night (after a couple of beers). Didn't get up til 9:30 this morning :o :-[
-
That might give a big clue to why the scottish economy would be in trouble ,left to its own devices.
No-one gets up until 9.30 due to the malt effect. ::) ;D ;D
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
can we leave a door, so the Malts can escape down here ;D ;D
we'll send what's left after we celebrate completion of the wall.....hic :y
But if the wall was built you couldnt afford to buy it, you would have to sell it to England - cheap. :P ;) ;D
If the wall is rebuit then the lines in the sea extent as far east/west as required.
That means the oil revenue is ours, not yours.
Between the oil, the scotch, and the golf, reckon their would be enough to keep making it..... ;)
ps - you know that the largest gin mill in Europe is, apparently, on my doorstep?
And the bottling plant for every bottle of legally supped vodka mix in the UK? ;)
-
Is there much oil left ? they said it was almost gone about 20 years ago. I think if I lived in Scotland I would want to rebuild the wall, build more distilleries and have one huge lock in at the worlds biggest pub.It might not last forever but it would be a hell of a party while it lasted. :y ;D ;D
A whiskey distillery opened in Norfolk last year. They flew some expert tasters down from Scotland and gave them blind samples and they rated the Norfolk whiskey very highly. ::) :o ;D
-
Is there much oil left ? they said it was almost gone about 20 years ago. I think if I lived in Scotland I would want to rebuild the wall, build more distilleries and have one huge lock in at the worlds biggest pub.It might not last forever but it would be a hell of a party while it lasted. :y ;D ;D
A whiskey distillery opened in Norfolk last year. They flew some expert tasters down from Scotland and gave them blind samples and they rated the Norfolk whiskey very highly. ::) :o ;D
yeah, but we'll say anything for a free drink ;D ;D
-
and Sun readers? 8-)
Thats got to be the greatest oxymoron ever!
-
tis the pictures that count :o
-
Is there much oil left ? they said it was almost gone about 20 years ago. I think if I lived in Scotland I would want to rebuild the wall, build more distilleries and have one huge lock in at the worlds biggest pub.It might not last forever but it would be a hell of a party while it lasted. :y ;D ;D
A whiskey distillery opened in Norfolk last year. They flew some expert tasters down from Scotland and gave them blind samples and they rated the Norfolk whiskey very highly. ::) :o ;D
from memory there is plenty oil left - it's economically unviable to extract unless the market price is over a $100 dollars a barrel
-
Listening to the Scotnats today on the news. >:( >:( >:( >:(...........they are desperate to get involved in a Labour/Libdem coalition for the single purpose of blackmailing them into sending lots (more) money north of the border, despite the fact that the country doesnt have the money.Its enough to make you want to rebuild Hadrians wall. ;D ::)
Tell you what Albs, not a bad idea - I'll start setting out and mixing the mortar and we'll go halfers on the bricks? ;D ;D ;D
can we leave a door, so the Malts can escape down here ;D ;D
we'll send what's left after we celebrate completion of the wall.....hic :y
But if the wall was built you couldnt afford to buy it, you would have to sell it to England - cheap. :P ;) ;D
If the wall is rebuit then the lines in the sea extent as far east/west as required.
That means the oil revenue is ours, not yours.
Between the oil, the scotch, and the golf, reckon their would be enough to keep making it..... ;)
ps - you know that the largest gin mill in Europe is, apparently, on my doorstep?
And the bottling plant for every bottle of legally supped vodka mix in the UK? ;)
So all the things that the various governments persuade us not to buy (by heavily taxing). See, you Scots are bad for our wealth :P ;D
-
Maybe the answer is that we should have to take two tests before we can vote. The first test would be a test of intelligence to establish we are capable of understanding the issues.The second test would be a test of political awareness, to discourage people voting in ignorance or being too easily swayed by x-factor type campaigning.Having left wing tendencies would of course automatically disqualify you on both counts. :y ;D ;D ;D
I agree with the highlighted part .. definitely required..and may be more.. :y
-
Note those sceptics of the value of BBC political coverage that all the very many programmes I have been watching on my favourite, unbiased, channels the BBC 1, 2 and 80, News Channel, it has been made very clear that Gordon Brown is acting very statesman like.
He is following correctly his duties under the [unwritten] consititution to remain in No. 10 as PM until the Conservatives, with maybe the Lib Dems, decide what course their claim on leading the country will take. If the current talks fail, then it is still the right of Gordon Brown to seek an alliance / coalition with other parties as PM, even though that seems most unlikely.
For once then Gordon Brown is taking exactly the right course of action ;) ;)
It is only the gutter media, like SKY and the tabloids, that suggest anything else.
Thank God for the BBC!! 8-) 8-) 8-)
Lizzie! believe me, that the BBC is not the BBC we all knew and loved many years ago. They, in my opinion are just as biased as any of the so called "gutter media". See my other rant on the BBC. >:(
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1270749731
-
from Lizzie
"Thanks Cem
But that is the problem; the line between a full democracy and a one party dictatorship is always very fine. Throughout history philosophers have expressed their well thought beliefs on how any nation should be ruled. Plato had envisaged a meritocracy , where Philosopher Kings would decide on the worth of the nations citizens, in bands of bronze, silver, or gold, and how they should perform in their society, with powers limited to their rank.
Hobbes envisaged of course one supreme ruler who would stop individual man continually "warring against man", as that was a mans natural trait, by governing tightly in what would seem to be a dictatorship. Nietzsche considered a society of "supermen" to rule and protect the weak, which of course the Nazis corrupted to form the base of their political system.
Marx believed in a society of equals, all benefiting fairly from their labours, whilst being able to exercise their creativity.
Locke though fully supported the belief of the God given right of men to exercise complete freedom, providing they harmed no one and they applied themselves to a social contract with the rest of society. Mills however, considered a utilitarian society, where everything is the for the greatest good for the greatest number, but individual liberty is protected, whilst working with all society.
Two cut a very long story short, the philosophy of Mills in particular, but also Locke, has shaped political thinking in the 20th century to form a liberal society which certainly includes in the 21st century more of Locke's form of regulatory protection to stop individuals in hurting themselves.
The society of the UK has been built on these beliefs, with the idea of a free represenative democracy deciding who should rule on behalf of the people, to advance their political wishes. By natural progression we have now arrived at a situation whereby a multi-party political system is being voted for by the people wishing for many varied policies, but in a tradition
two party reality, that reflects more of the political landscape of 1910, when the Conservatives or Liberals where the driving forces to be voted for.
Simple, straightforward, but in many ways it resulted in whole sections of society not being faithfully represented, such as women and the working class!!
So Cem the BIG question is..........does society in the UK now want to revert
to a simple political system limited to just two parties, and trust they can represent the views of the majority, and without slipping into the early
stages of a dictatorship??
How this could be achieved, with the desires of the individual people expecting their liberty to express particular political aspirations, is the next BIG question?"
Lizzie, living in this century and having witnessed many events in different countries, about democracies I can say that its far from being ideal.. :(
Briefly the level of democracy is an equilibrium point between the internal powers of classes and external powers in relation with that nation/country..
Any theory/statement/application/trial regarding these power vectors and equation will likely fail..
Considering the power of rich classes its something natural that we, middle classes can balance that equation mostly on the looser side..
No matter who you vote, what parties involve in election, which candidates they assign these power vectors will find its way through and take its commanding seat.. Now, blaming the driver(s) coming one after another may relax you somehow but in reality wont change the fact that the real driver remains untouched and doesnt change that frequently.. :-/