The Politics Thread

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

mummy's point is well made though... (Lembit Opick (sp?) being the fly in that particular soup...)

Ha, ok, so I'll give you Lembit Opik... goodness me, his appearances on TV after losing his seat were cringworthy.

But seriously... in America it's not uncommon for the President and Commander-in-Chief to appear on Saturday Night Live.

When I lived in Holland, they had this bizarre TV programme on which the PM was put in a staged bar full of people to answer the public's questions and chat informally. On another occasion I was watching the Dutch national football team in a pre-Euro 2008 friendly, and was dumbfounded when they invited the PM into the studio to get his view, alongside the regular pundits.

In Australia, I regularly listen to the Hamish & Andy radio show (that's what funny radio sounds like, Moyles, you fat useless git) and they recently had Julia Gillard on there, who was a great sport.


But here, if a politician goes outside of the media that only political geeks (and I certainly count myself in their number) are interested in, then they are a limelight-seeking buffoon with no credibility.

[Lord Kangana]

I thought Opik had some balls considering the pisstake he knew he'd endure. Koudos to the man for taking it, well, you know. Most politicians would skulk off looking for the nearest bi-election.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I thought Opik had some balls considering the pisstake he knew he'd endure. Koudos to the man for taking it, well, you know. Most politicians would skulk off looking for the nearest bi-election.

Fair enough - didn't make easy viewing at times though!

Loved that moment on HIGNFY though, when someone said something along the lines of "You politicians are all the same" to which he threw his hands up in the air and said "I'm not a politician!".

[Worthy4England]

Good to see that old friend of the Tory party Azil Nadir thinks he's safe to move about, now he's spent 4 years in hiding 93-97, plus the whole term that Labour was in power.

Maybe he thinks it's much easier now his mates are back in power.

[TANGODANCER]

Good to see that old friend of the Tory party Azil Nadir thinks he's safe to move about, now he's spent 4 years in hiding 93-97, plus the whole term that Labour was in power.

Maybe he thinks it's much easier now his mates are back in power.

Seemed to spend his time moaning about people not accepting Ceylon/Sri Lanka as a proper country, in which case they would have had an extradition treaty and he'd have been back much sooner. Yeah.

[Hoboh]

Now, this would be interesting.....

Westminster sources claim that the former leader of the Liberal Democrats, Charles Kennedy, has been discussing defecting to the Labour Party, with four or five Liberal Democrat colleagues. The reports have been confirmed by three separate sources, including one close to Ed Miliband’s Labour leadership campaign. Kennedy, along with others are believed to be planning some announcement towards the end of the month of August – which would also coincide with ballot papers for the Labour leadership elections being sent out to party members. It is unclear whether there have been formal or informal contacts between the Kennedy and Miliband camps.

more here: http://bigthink.com/ideas/22913

So hold on breaking news!!!!!!!!!

Popped up Pete and his boozing buddies might go labour!!!

Found the right home then.

[Hoboh]

Now, this would be interesting.....

Westminster sources claim that the former leader of the Liberal Democrats, Charles Kennedy, has been discussing defecting to the Labour Party, with four or five Liberal Democrat colleagues. The reports have been confirmed by three separate sources, including one close to Ed Miliband’s Labour leadership campaign. Kennedy, along with others are believed to be planning some announcement towards the end of the month of August – which would also coincide with ballot papers for the Labour leadership elections being sent out to party members. It is unclear whether there have been formal or informal contacts between the Kennedy and Miliband camps.

more here: http://bigthink.com/ideas/22913

He's been on the piss again hasn't he?

Indeed

His opinions carry as much weight as that tramp who hangs about on pound shop boulevard in town

Cheeky t**t!!!!

[Hoboh]

A 23 year old knob who maims kids in a stolen car with no insurance or licence!!! Bastard should be shot!!!! And if any of you know the tool tell him I'd be more than happy to mow HIM down then pee on his corpse.

[CAPSLOCK]

Without getting into the detail of this case, my 15 year old daughter wouldn't be in a position to get wiped out by some dick at 3 am

[Worthy4England]

Looks like NHS direct is up for the chop. I don't know if people on here have ever used it, but certainly when our little fella was a baby, we used it a few times, and apparently, it handles 27,000 calls per day. A couple of occasions, we didn't clog up A&E when we might previously have done so, on one occasion, they advised us to go anyhow.

The cunning plan is to replace the nurse staffed service with "call advisors" rather than nurses. Guess A&E will get really busy again then, because quite frankly, I'm not going to talk anything health related with someone who probably has less medical training then me (Scouts First Aid Badge)

Doesn't sound like a well thought out, cut to me - it'll just move the problem elsewhere.

Whilst we're on the topic, we also have Ken Clarke's notion of cutting costs, by not locking folk up. Given that there's some expert opinion, that suggests "Community project based sentences have no evident effect on re-offence rates" and that it would just free the offender up to re-offend sooner (than if they were locked up and couldn't), I'm delighted that the cost of locking these people up will of course now transfer to people's insurance policies - as this is where the tab will now lie.

[Bruce Rioja]

Well that'll mean that there are more nurses available to treat them then, won't it?!

I'd love to know how many times the most fitting answer to a caller's question is "Use your fecking brains".

[thebish]

Well that'll mean that there are more nurses available to treat them then, won't it?!

I'd love to know how many times the most fitting answer to a caller's question is "Use your fecking brains".

you're making the rather naive (may I say) assumption that they won't simply be thrown on the dole - these nurses....

[Bruce Rioja]

Well that'll mean that there are more nurses available to treat them then, won't it?!

I'd love to know how many times the most fitting answer to a caller's question is "Use your fecking brains".

you're making the rather naive (may I say) assumption that they won't simply be thrown on the dole - these nurses....

I haven't assumed anything other than that they'll become available. So no, you may not say.

[thebish]

Well that'll mean that there are more nurses available to treat them then, won't it?!

I'd love to know how many times the most fitting answer to a caller's question is "Use your fecking brains".

you're making the rather naive (may I say) assumption that they won't simply be thrown on the dole - these nurses....

I haven't assumed anything other than that they'll become available. So no, you may not say.

oh but I may - since the nurses are not really "available" to treat anyone unless they are first employed - and an expansion of the NHS - in terms of employing more nurses than we currently have is not on Big Dave's agenda - quite the opposite, in fact...

I suspect this 111 service will be staffed by the equivalent of volunteer ex-st-John-Ambulance workers who will advise us to "rub it with vinegar and sleep on it"

[Bruce Rioja]

They'll be available for employment. I didn't say they'd get any, I didn't say they wouldn't - I said they'd be available. So no you may not say. It's you that appears to be making the assumption that they'll be thrown onto the dole. See, I'm not naive enough to say what'll happen to them one way or the other, I'll leave that to you. Please, do carry on.

[thebish]

They'll be available for employment. I didn't say they'd get any, I didn't say they wouldn't - I said they'd be available. So no you may not say. It's you that appears to be making the assumption that they'll be thrown onto the dole. See, I'm not naive enough to say what'll happen to them one way or the other, I'll leave that to you. Please, do carry on.

Tango's away and I'm pining!

but you didn't say "available for employment" - you said "available to treat them" - treat who? (if they are not employed?)

[Bruce Rioja]

They'll be available for employment. I didn't say they'd get any, I didn't say they wouldn't - I said they'd be available. So no you may not say. It's you that appears to be making the assumption that they'll be thrown onto the dole. See, I'm not naive enough to say what'll happen to them one way or the other, I'll leave that to you. Please, do carry on.

Tango's away and I'm pining!

but you didn't say "available for employment" - you said "available to treat them" - treat who? (if they are not employed?)

I know (to both).

[thebish]

the entirely sane and cuddly Liam Fox....

The 2010 relaunch of this EA game, set in a war-torn Afghanistan, has received calls for it to be banned from UK defence secretary Liam Fox.

In single player mode, gamers play as the US army trying to defeat the Taliban. However in multiplayer mode, gamers can choose to play as the Taliban instead.

Speaking to the Press Association, Fox said: "It's shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban... I am disgusted and angry. It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game."

am I reading this right??? It's OK to play a wargame as a US soldier and blow up, kill, maim, shoot, stab and obliterate as many Taliban fighters as make your Friday night go with a swing... but the moment you are allowed to play as a Taliban fighter - suddenly the game is utterly unacceptable and should be banned???

is this a good example of "smaller government" not interfering with every aspect of our lives - or was the whole "smaller government" just a load of bollox?

[Porrohman]

Looks like NHS direct is up for the chop. I don't know if people on here have ever used it, but certainly when our little fella was a baby, we used it a few times, and apparently, it handles 27,000 calls per day. A couple of occasions, we didn't clog up A&E when we might previously have done so, on one occasion, they advised us to go anyhow.

The cunning plan is to replace the nurse staffed service with "call advisors" rather than nurses. Guess A&E will get really busy again then, because quite frankly, I'm not going to talk anything health related with someone who probably has less medical training then me (Scouts First Aid Badge)

Doesn't sound like a well thought out, cut to me - it'll just move the problem elsewhere.

Whilst we're on the topic, we also have Ken Clarke's notion of cutting costs, by not locking folk up. Given that there's some expert opinion, that suggests "Community project based sentences have no evident effect on re-offence rates" and that it would just free the offender up to re-offend sooner (than if they were locked up and couldn't), I'm delighted that the cost of locking these people up will of course now transfer to people's insurance policies - as this is where the tab will now lie.

The goverment will probably use Atos who already do the DWP examinations and are on a nice earner to get people back into work even if your half dead and are used by Royal Mail,Prison service etc as occupational health,having dealt with them many times I can safely say they are fookin wank.

[Lord Kangana]

the entirely sane and cuddly Liam Fox....

The 2010 relaunch of this EA game, set in a war-torn Afghanistan, has received calls for it to be banned from UK defence secretary Liam Fox.

In single player mode, gamers play as the US army trying to defeat the Taliban. However in multiplayer mode, gamers can choose to play as the Taliban instead.

Speaking to the Press Association, Fox said: "It's shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban... I am disgusted and angry. It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game."

am I reading this right??? It's OK to play a wargame as a US soldier and blow up, kill, maim, shoot, stab and obliterate as many Taliban fighters as make your Friday night go with a swing... but the moment you are allowed to play as a Taliban fighter - suddenly the game is utterly unacceptable and should be banned???

is this a good example of "smaller government" not interfering with every aspect of our lives - or was the whole "smaller government" just a load of bollox?

They left out the word 'minded' from the middle, thats all.