Cameron: PM has lost Scotland and is putting the UK at risk
 |
| MAKING ATTACK: David Cameron |
Gordon Brown has "lost Scotland" and is putting the United Kingdom at risk, David Cameron asserted yesterday in the wake of the row over Wendy Alexander and her call for an early referendum on independence.
At a lunch with Westminster journalists, the Conservative leader spoke about his astonishment of the events last week when Ms Alexander, leader of Labour in the Scottish Parliament, made her call but was not backed on the specific policy by the Prime Minister, who made clear that the Calman Commission - looking at the powers of the Scottish Parliament - should report first.
Mr Cameron said: "It's extraordinary. The one thing I thought about Gordon Brown was that he really understood Scottish Labour, he really understood Scotland and he really cared about the Union. He's now lost Scotland, is losing the Scottish Labour Party and is putting the Union at risk. It's an extraordinary set of circumstances."
The Tory leader also spoke about how he would like to standardise all Westminster parliamentary constituencies, making them all the same size in terms of how many voters they had.
He said: "The one reform I would really like to make is I would like to see constituencies of an equal size right across the country. On the whole, Conservative seats are bigger than Labour seats (which) is unfair. I would like to see a simple system: the same vote, the same value right across the country so that all constituencies are the same size. That would make a big difference."
For Scotland, while such a move would not reduce the number of its MPs - currently 59 - it could lead to some seats, which have sparse populations in the west and north of the country like Na h-Eileanan an Iar, being cobbled together with other rural seats.
Elsewhere in his answers to journalists, Mr Cameron made clear he felt his party was now winning the "great battle of ideas" against Labour.
While he stressed he was not complacent, he made clear these were "exciting" times for the Tories, who had been buoyed by the results of May 1 in England, Wales and in the London mayoral contest.
"You win an election when people genuinely sense the tide of ideas is flowing in your favour.
"We are beginning to win the great battle of ideas in the way the Conservatives won it at the end of the 1970s. That is why I hope that when it comes to 2010 or whenever it is, we will be able to say not just that we won the election but that we deserved to win it," he said.
Stressing that he wanted the Conservative party to be "properly prepared for government" with well worked-out ideas, Mr Cameron went on: "I do not want the Conservative party to think it can slide to victory on the back of an unpopular and unsuccessful government. I do not want the next Conservative party to be a sort of brief interlude while Labour gets its act together.
"I have ambitions and passions every bit as clear as Margaret Thatcher did in wanting to mend Britain's economy in what I would like the next Conservative government to do in terms of mending Britain's broken society," he added.
The Conservative leader dismissed charges that he lacked substance and had no policies. He told journalists that he had clear ideas on welfare, education and strengthening families but would not be bullied into unveiling a budget "in anyone else's timetable other than my own".
He insisted: "We are seeing a Conservative party that is setting the agenda," adding that his party would use "Conservative means" to achieve "progressive" ends, echoing a word often used by Mr Brown's predecessor Tony Blair.
Mr Cameron said the problems suffered by the PM were of his own making and claimed they showed how Mr Brown believed politics was all about "calculation" and finding the dividing line.
He also dismissed Labour attacks against "Tory toffs" on the stump in the Crewe and Nantwich by-election, branding them backward-looking and divisive.
The Tory leader was in the Cheshire constituency on Monday and is expected to go there at least twice more before polling day.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 9:51pm Tue 13 May 08
[bold]Red Wendy: Labour Temple of Doom[/bold]
[quote]"...Values of social justice, of redistribution of wealth, of equal opportunity for all...."
".....Conference....
...the fightback’s begun, together - let's get to work...."
[bold]Wendy Alexander[/bold]
Scottish Labour Conference
March 2008[/quote]
Less than 2 months on from the 'Fight back'
[quote]"....Why he pretends to be in agreement with his out-of-control Holyrood leader is beyond the ken of most observers. She deserves nothing.
Wendy Alexander, as this column said yesterday, is a liability to both the Labour Party and, more importantly, the cause of the Union........"
[bold]Alan Cochrane[/bold]
Telegraph May 2008[/quote]
[quote]
"...The whole exercise has only confirmed that Labour in Scotland simply cannot go their own way, at least under Alexander."
[bold]Ian Macwhirter[/bold]
Sunday Herald May 2008[/quote]
[quote]"...Another friend of Labour's Holyrood leader said of Brown's advisers: "They just don't give a f*** about Scotland. All they care about is the next general election."
Alexander's leadership, far from leading to the promised "reform, renewal and reconnection", appears to have reaped division, disaster and disconnection."
[bold]Paul Hutcheon[/bold]
Sunday Herald May 2008[/quote]
[quote]"...For ministers and senior party figures, offering up prayers that Alexander will walk before being pushed, there is only one question: if Wendy goes and has to be replaced ... how could anyone do a worse job?"
[bold]James Cusick[/bold]
Sunday Herald May 2008[/quote]
[quote]"....Alexander's MSPs were beginning to rebel. One said: "Labour voters deserve better than this. Those who kept with us through recent difficulties don't deserve this. Wendy needs to examine herself to see what contribution she is making."
[quote]Eddie Barnes[/quote]
Scotsman May 2008[/quote]
Red Wendy: Labour Temple of Doom
"...Values of social justice, of redistribution of wealth, of equal opportunity for all...."
".....Conference....
...the fightback’s begun, together - let's get to work...."
Wendy Alexander
Scottish Labour Conference
March 2008
Less than 2 months on from the 'Fight back'
"....Why he pretends to be in agreement with his out-of-control Holyrood leader is beyond the ken of most observers. She deserves nothing.
Wendy Alexander, as this column said yesterday, is a liability to both the Labour Party and, more importantly, the cause of the Union........"
Alan Cochrane
Telegraph May 2008
"...The whole exercise has only confirmed that Labour in Scotland simply cannot go their own way, at least under Alexander."
Ian Macwhirter
Sunday Herald May 2008
"...Another friend of Labour's Holyrood leader said of Brown's advisers: "They just don't give a f*** about Scotland. All they care about is the next general election."
Alexander's leadership, far from leading to the promised "reform, renewal and reconnection", appears to have reaped division, disaster and disconnection."
Paul Hutcheon
Sunday Herald May 2008
"...For ministers and senior party figures, offering up prayers that Alexander will walk before being pushed, there is only one question: if Wendy goes and has to be replaced ... how could anyone do a worse job?"
James Cusick
Sunday Herald May 2008
"....Alexander's MSPs were beginning to rebel. One said: "Labour voters deserve better than this. Those who kept with us through recent difficulties don't deserve this. Wendy needs to examine herself to see what contribution she is making."
Eddie Barnes
Scotsman May 2008
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 9:54pm Tue 13 May 08
[bold]Capability Brown: Raider of the Lost Ark[/bold]
Capability Brown, the man who said there were no losers in his Budget
[italic]Now forced to admit there were millions of losers[/italic]
Capability Brown, the man who said he wouldn't rewrite his Budget
[italic]Now 'ghost' rewriting the Budget he gave in 2007[/italic]
Capability Brown, who said that in-year payments were impossible
[italic]Now doing a full U- Turn under political pressure into making in-year payments[/italic]
The additional 'help' is for one year only, a [bold]TORY TAX BRIBE[/bold] that still leaves [bold]1.1 Million[/bold] of the Lowest paid workers worse off with the other [bold]4.1 Million[/bold] of the Lower decile paying the same tax whilst [bold]those on £18500-£40000 pay less with some up to £500 better off[/bold] as a result of this unprecedented budget fix.
This is borrowed money, unsustainable beyond this tax year.
A one-off payment, a one-off solution to tax rises that hit [bold]EVERY[/bold] year
No one is fooled about why the Chancellor is making this statement today
Panicking in the face of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election
Can anyone take Capability Brown seriously anymore after this as yet unsorted fiasco, the utter incompetence, faux socialist ideals and pandering to the middle classes is a lesson on what Labour have become.
[quote]".....I don't recall all the sermons my father preached Sunday after Sunday.
But I will never forget these words he left me with:
"we must be givers as well as getters".
Put something back.
And by doing so make a difference.
And this is my moral compass.
This is who I am.
I am a conviction politician.
[bold]Capability Brown[/bold]
Crowned Prime Minister without Election
Labour Conference 2007[/quote]
Capability Brown: Raider of the Lost Ark
Capability Brown, the man who said there were no losers in his Budget
Now forced to admit there were millions of losers
Capability Brown, the man who said he wouldn't rewrite his Budget
Now 'ghost' rewriting the Budget he gave in 2007
Capability Brown, who said that in-year payments were impossible
Now doing a full U- Turn under political pressure into making in-year payments
The additional 'help' is for one year only, a
TORY TAX BRIBE that still leaves
1.1 Million of the Lowest paid workers worse off with the other
4.1 Million of the Lower decile paying the same tax whilst
those on £18500-£40000 pay less with some up to £500 better off as a result of this unprecedented budget fix.
This is borrowed money, unsustainable beyond this tax year.
A one-off payment, a one-off solution to tax rises that hit
EVERY year
No one is fooled about why the Chancellor is making this statement today
Panicking in the face of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election
Can anyone take Capability Brown seriously anymore after this as yet unsorted fiasco, the utter incompetence, faux socialist ideals and pandering to the middle classes is a lesson on what Labour have become.
".....I don't recall all the sermons my father preached Sunday after Sunday.
But I will never forget these words he left me with:
"we must be givers as well as getters".
Put something back.
And by doing so make a difference.
And this is my moral compass.
This is who I am.
I am a conviction politician.
Capability Brown
Crowned Prime Minister without Election
Labour Conference 2007
Posted by: Charles McGrory, Glasgow on 9:57pm Tue 13 May 08
Clearly LeBroon is about to be fired by the London Establishment for his incompetence in the endangering their self-serving Union; I see Mr DeCameroon is not about to suggest proportional representation for Westminster’s UK, which would taste too much of real democracy. Cameroon’s idea of “progressive” ends is to march proudly back to the past.
If Brown has lost Scotland, it is irreversible; Cameroon Tories will not win Scotland back.
Clearly LeBroon is about to be fired by the London Establishment for his incompetence in the endangering their self-serving Union; I see Mr DeCameroon is not about to suggest proportional representation for Westminster’s UK, which would taste too much of real democracy. Cameroon’s idea of “progressive” ends is to march proudly back to the past.
If Brown has lost Scotland, it is irreversible; Cameroon Tories will not win Scotland back.
Posted by: Jwil, Lanarkshire on 10:10pm Tue 13 May 08
Still no opportunity to comment on the continuing Wendy problems. The Labour party putting the screws on the Herald to stop comments?
Still no opportunity to comment on the continuing Wendy problems. The Labour party putting the screws on the Herald to stop comments?
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 10:13pm Tue 13 May 08
Wait and see Scottish Labour screaming for a [bold]YES[/bold] vote in the referendum once the Tories come to power in Westminster.
Wait and see Scottish Labour screaming for a
YES vote in the referendum once the Tories come to power in Westminster.
Posted by: Astonished, Inverclyde on 10:16pm Tue 13 May 08
"Scottish Labour back to square one on referendum Bill "
and "MEPs in plea to retain ‘Scots voice in EU’ " - no comments are allowed. The comments are, by far, much more entertaining,educati
onal and unbiased than the articles themselves. It is unacceptable to prevent freedom of speech - Even when labour threatens you.
I firmly believe that Brown is a cowardly, tantrum throwing bully and the only way to deal with such people is to stand up to them.
I promised never again to buy the Herald as long as they kept their pro-labour bias after a leader article( yes ,I think it was you ,Alf). I have not bought the Herald for over a year now. I used to buy the Herald everyday.
I remember when you had proper journalists who were fearless in their writing : Jack Mclean, Murray Ritchie, Harry Reid, John MacLeod and Ron Ferguson to name a few. I have never agreed with everything they wrote but they tried to present a balanced report or explained clearly that a report was their personal opinion. They aleways provided evidence to support their opinions.
For too long the Herald has been presenting lies as the truth. It is no longer acceptable.
Alf - You have managed to stop me reading online.
"Scottish Labour back to square one on referendum Bill "
and "MEPs in plea to retain ‘Scots voice in EU’ " - no comments are allowed. The comments are, by far, much more entertaining,educati
onal and unbiased than the articles themselves. It is unacceptable to prevent freedom of speech - Even when labour threatens you.
I firmly believe that Brown is a cowardly, tantrum throwing bully and the only way to deal with such people is to stand up to them.
I promised never again to buy the Herald as long as they kept their pro-labour bias after a leader article( yes ,I think it was you ,Alf). I have not bought the Herald for over a year now. I used to buy the Herald everyday.
I remember when you had proper journalists who were fearless in their writing : Jack Mclean, Murray Ritchie, Harry Reid, John MacLeod and Ron Ferguson to name a few. I have never agreed with everything they wrote but they tried to present a balanced report or explained clearly that a report was their personal opinion. They aleways provided evidence to support their opinions.
For too long the Herald has been presenting lies as the truth. It is no longer acceptable.
Alf - You have managed to stop me reading online.
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 10:18pm Tue 13 May 08
[bold]Astonished, Inverclyde on 10:16pm today[/bold]
Agreed, the censorship of comment without even a simple notice explaining why is unacceptable is the Herald wishes to retain readers and participants on these forums.
A notice explaining the reasons is the very least that we expect.
Astonished, Inverclyde on 10:16pm today
Agreed, the censorship of comment without even a simple notice explaining why is unacceptable is the Herald wishes to retain readers and participants on these forums.
A notice explaining the reasons is the very least that we expect.
Posted by: Karin, glasgae. on 10:30pm Tue 13 May 08
wardog any comments that are favourable to the snp are banned. I suggest that people comment on wether or not they are buying the printed version of the paper.
I am not until the comments are restored i was going to buy it today until i got up this morning and the comments were removed i suggest all nationalists say wether they are buying the print version or not based on wether comments are allowed or articles are biased.
Based on the articles i would actually buy it but i am not because of the censorship.
wardog any comments that are favourable to the snp are banned. I suggest that people comment on wether or not they are buying the printed version of the paper.
I am not until the comments are restored i was going to buy it today until i got up this morning and the comments were removed i suggest all nationalists say wether they are buying the print version or not based on wether comments are allowed or articles are biased.
Based on the articles i would actually buy it but i am not because of the censorship.
Posted by: Mrs I P Knightly, Scotland on 10:33pm Tue 13 May 08
I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?
I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?
Posted by: Paulo, Seditionist Free Cambuslang on 10:35pm Tue 13 May 08
Sadly I have to agree.
Wendy has to go..We have to challenge the natsi's on the issues
but the country is in danger of being broken up over the unpopularity of a few politicians.
What Louis XIV, Napoleon, Jacobites, The Kaiser, Mussolini, Hitler, Tojo et al could not defeat will be ripped apart by Alec Salmond.
It makes me physically sick.
This country does not deserve to perish from the earth. Do the decent
thing Wendy...**** off now.
Sadly I have to agree.
Wendy has to go..We have to challenge the natsi's on the issues
but the country is in danger of being broken up over the unpopularity of a few politicians.
What Louis XIV, Napoleon, Jacobites, The Kaiser, Mussolini, Hitler, Tojo et al could not defeat will be ripped apart by Alec Salmond.
It makes me physically sick.
This country does not deserve to perish from the earth. Do the decent
thing Wendy...**** off now.
Posted by: Free Thinker, North Lanarkshire on 10:39pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Jwil[/bold] wrote:
Still no opportunity to comment on the continuing Wendy problems. The Labour party putting the screws on the Herald to stop comments?[/quote]
... and you've just highlighted some very lucid connections...
... the Establishment web is enormous as it is unsympathetic … seemingly unconnected departments, organisations and corporations across many borders are all very well connected indeed.
Jwil wrote:
Still no opportunity to comment on the continuing Wendy problems. The Labour party putting the screws on the Herald to stop comments?
... and you've just highlighted some very lucid connections...
... the Establishment web is enormous as it is unsympathetic … seemingly unconnected departments, organisations and corporations across many borders are all very well connected indeed.
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 10:40pm Tue 13 May 08
Really David, the Union is at risk because of Brown and Scottish Labour. How bloody arrogant of you. The union is at risk because Labour is now seen as no different from Tory, and neither give a F*** for Scotland (to quote a Labour MSP), but are only interested in a General Election win. The union is a risk because Scotland now has a Government concerned solely with Scotland - and the people like it.
Really David, the Union is at risk because of Brown and Scottish Labour. How bloody arrogant of you. The union is at risk because Labour is now seen as no different from Tory, and neither give a F*** for Scotland (to quote a Labour MSP), but are only interested in a General Election win. The union is a risk because Scotland now has a Government concerned solely with Scotland - and the people like it.
Posted by: soloman, Stirling on 10:46pm Tue 13 May 08
Has Mr Cameron just noticed that Mr Brown has lost Scotland?
Has Mr Cameron just noticed that Mr Brown has lost Scotland?
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 10:50pm Tue 13 May 08
Brilliant!
Have a listen to this.......
Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning.
[italic]www.bbc.co.uk/medias
elector/check/player
/nol/newsid_7390000/
newsid_7399400?redir
ect=7399474.stm&news
=1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n
bwm=1&bbwm=1[/italic]
Brilliant!
Have a listen to this.......
Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning.
www.bbc.co.uk/medias
elector/check/player
/nol/newsid_7390000/
newsid_7399400?redir
ect=7399474.stm&news
=1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n
bwm=1&bbwm=1 Posted by: Free Thinker, North Lanarkshire on 10:52pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Paulo[/bold] wrote:
Sadly I have to agree. Wendy has to go..We have to challenge the natsi's on the issues but the country is in danger of being broken up over the unpopularity of a few politicians. What Louis XIV, Napoleon, Jacobites, The Kaiser, Mussolini, Hitler, Tojo et al could not defeat will be ripped apart by Alec Salmond. It makes me physically sick. This country does not deserve to perish from the earth. Do the decent thing Wendy...**** off now.[/quote] Not in any order... where does that leave William Wallace, Robert de Bruce? Or William from Normandy? Mary of Guise or Eric the Red? Or Brutus of Troy? William of Nassau Orange? Amongst others whom all successfully battled with… eh… ‘blighty’.
Incidentally The Kaiser is related to the current Royals, Saxe Coburg Gothe (Windsor’s)
"... History is the lie that most commonly agree upon ..."
Napoleon Bonaparte
Paulo wrote:
Sadly I have to agree. Wendy has to go..We have to challenge the natsi's on the issues but the country is in danger of being broken up over the unpopularity of a few politicians. What Louis XIV, Napoleon, Jacobites, The Kaiser, Mussolini, Hitler, Tojo et al could not defeat will be ripped apart by Alec Salmond. It makes me physically sick. This country does not deserve to perish from the earth. Do the decent thing Wendy...**** off now.
Not in any order... where does that leave William Wallace, Robert de Bruce? Or William from Normandy? Mary of Guise or Eric the Red? Or Brutus of Troy? William of Nassau Orange? Amongst others whom all successfully battled with… eh… ‘blighty’.
Incidentally The Kaiser is related to the current Royals, Saxe Coburg Gothe (Windsor’s)
"... History is the lie that most commonly agree upon ..."
Napoleon Bonaparte
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 10:52pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Wardog[/bold] wrote:
Brilliant!
Have a listen to this.......
Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning.
[italic]www.bbc.co.uk/medias
elector/check/player
/nol/newsid_7390000/
newsid_7399400?redir
ect=7399474.stm&news
=1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n
bwm=1&bbwm=1[/italic] [/quote] Brilliant!
Have a listen to this.......
Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning.
Click on the 'To Listen' Button Top left
[bold]http://news.bbc.co.u
k/1/hi/scotland/7399
011.stm[/bold]
[italic]Better Link[/italic]
Wardog wrote:
Brilliant!
Have a listen to this.......
Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning.
www.bbc.co.uk/medias
elector/check/player
/nol/newsid_7390000/
newsid_7399400?redir
ect=7399474.stm&news
=1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n
bwm=1&bbwm=1
Brilliant!
Have a listen to this.......
Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning.
Click on the 'To Listen' Button Top left
http://news.bbc.co.u
k/1/hi/scotland/7399
011.stm
Better Link Posted by: Free Thinker, North Lanarkshire on 10:56pm Tue 13 May 08
... oh... and Hitler was funded by ... The Bank of England. Fact!
... oh... and Hitler was funded by ... The Bank of England. Fact!
Posted by: ron Oliver, edinburgh on 11:02pm Tue 13 May 08
i have voted for the SNP since the Hamilton by-epevtion. i do not recall having worn any SS, Wermacht, Kreigsmarin or Luftwaffe uniform. however, my father, uncles and others did fight against facism. then again they were fighting aginst National Socialism, which is the other side of the fascist coin from Communism.
however, living as he does in Cambuslang no doubt he will be supporting the West of Scotland Liebour party- the party that gave incompetence and corruption a bad name.
i have voted for the SNP since the Hamilton by-epevtion. i do not recall having worn any SS, Wermacht, Kreigsmarin or Luftwaffe uniform. however, my father, uncles and others did fight against facism. then again they were fighting aginst National Socialism, which is the other side of the fascist coin from Communism.
however, living as he does in Cambuslang no doubt he will be supporting the West of Scotland Liebour party- the party that gave incompetence and corruption a bad name.
Posted by: DougtheDug on 11:08pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]He's now lost Scotland[/bold] , is losing the Scottish Labour Party and is putting the Union at risk.[/quote] What an extraordinary statement from the Leader of the opposition.
Here's a man whose party are on the up against Brown's Labour Government and he's complaining that Brown has lost votes in Scotland.
In Scotland it has been easy to understand Labour, the Lib-Dems and the Tories as unionist factions rather than separate parties. In fact the only barrier to a full coalition has been the influence of the English leaders and the different political landscape in England.
Now it's coming into focus in England as well. With Brown well down in the polls the Conservatives are unhappy that Labour have lost electoral ground north of the border and it's not beyond belief that Cameron's next move may be to try and help Labour in Scotland.
He's now lost Scotland , is losing the Scottish Labour Party and is putting the Union at risk.
What an extraordinary statement from the Leader of the opposition.
Here's a man whose party are on the up against Brown's Labour Government and he's complaining that Brown has lost votes in Scotland.
In Scotland it has been easy to understand Labour, the Lib-Dems and the Tories as unionist factions rather than separate parties. In fact the only barrier to a full coalition has been the influence of the English leaders and the different political landscape in England.
Now it's coming into focus in England as well. With Brown well down in the polls the Conservatives are unhappy that Labour have lost electoral ground north of the border and it's not beyond belief that Cameron's next move may be to try and help Labour in Scotland.
Posted by: Grassy Knollington on 11:17pm Tue 13 May 08
Very good point DougtheDug. If Cameron is "unhappy" that Labour have lost ground in Scotland, what's the obvious solution?
Help them make ground back. It will literally be the SNP vs The Unionists both sides of the border.
Very good point DougtheDug. If Cameron is "unhappy" that Labour have lost ground in Scotland, what's the obvious solution?
Help them make ground back. It will literally be the SNP vs The Unionists both sides of the border.
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 11:35pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote]"Scottish Labour back to square one on referendum Bill "
and "MEPs in plea to retain ‘Scots voice in EU’ " - no comments are allowed.[/quote]Grrrrrr. That was the story I logged on to comment on, and to read the comments.
I think I'll away to my bed now.
"Scottish Labour back to square one on referendum Bill "
and "MEPs in plea to retain ‘Scots voice in EU’ " - no comments are allowed.
Grrrrrr. That was the story I logged on to comment on, and to read the comments.
I think I'll away to my bed now.
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 11:36pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Wardog[/bold] wrote:
Wait and see Scottish Labour screaming for a [bold]YES[/bold] vote in the referendum once the Tories come to power in Westminster. [/quote] Wow! There's a happy dream to be going on with.
Wardog wrote:
Wait and see Scottish Labour screaming for a YES vote in the referendum once the Tories come to power in Westminster.
Wow! There's a happy dream to be going on with.
Posted by: Curley Bill, the southwest on 11:37pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote]We are beginning to win the great battle of ideas in the way the Conservatives won it at the end of the 1970s.[/quote]
[quote]"I have ambitions and passions every bit as clear as Margaret Thatcher[/quote]
[quote]He insisted: "We are seeing a Conservative party that is setting the agenda," adding that his party would use "Conservative means" to achieve "progressive" ends, echoing a word often used by Mr Brown's predecessor Tony Blair.[/quote]
I submit that these statements by Cameron are every bit as frightening as Broon's 'anything it takes' threat.
Remember the 'burnt-earth' policies of Thatcherism?
Scotland is less than the muck on their shoe to these people.
Only an idiot would think that Cameron won't win the next General Election.
And only an idiot would consider voting for anyone but the SNP.
We are beginning to win the great battle of ideas in the way the Conservatives won it at the end of the 1970s.
"I have ambitions and passions every bit as clear as Margaret Thatcher
He insisted: "We are seeing a Conservative party that is setting the agenda," adding that his party would use "Conservative means" to achieve "progressive" ends, echoing a word often used by Mr Brown's predecessor Tony Blair.
I submit that these statements by Cameron are every bit as frightening as Broon's 'anything it takes' threat.
Remember the 'burnt-earth' policies of Thatcherism?
Scotland is less than the muck on their shoe to these people.
Only an idiot would think that Cameron won't win the next General Election.
And only an idiot would consider voting for anyone but the SNP.
Posted by: Jimbo on 11:38pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Mrs I P Knightly[/bold] wrote:
I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?[/quote] Hi IPK,
I don't think even Labour in Scotland or Westminster know what their position is today.
The one good thing that has come out of all this is that Labour in Scotland has managed to get the whole country talking about the referendum and independence.
Now we really do have a national conversation courtesy of the very people who are against it.
Mrs I P Knightly wrote:
I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?
Hi IPK,
I don't think even Labour in Scotland or Westminster know what their position is today.
The one good thing that has come out of all this is that Labour in Scotland has managed to get the whole country talking about the referendum and independence.
Now we really do have a national conversation courtesy of the very people who are against it.
Posted by: Vivas, Embra on 11:38pm Tue 13 May 08
This papers transparent editorial policy now seems to be to allow comment on all stories concerning Brown and his UK decline, but to prevent comment on stories specifically concerning Alexander.
To proect Alexander ... but to allow Brown to be ripped apart.
Which when you think about it is exactly the same as Wendys own current policy. That is, aim all the kicks at the dead dog at Westminster and see if the wounded SLAB animal up here can get just enough respite to survive.
[bold]Shame on you Herald, shame on you.[/bold] Your covering of Wendys considerable erse is a shabby excercise and the ongoing removal of comment on Wendy stories won't save her, believe me...
This papers transparent editorial policy now seems to be to allow comment on all stories concerning Brown and his UK decline, but to prevent comment on stories specifically concerning Alexander.
To proect Alexander ... but to allow Brown to be ripped apart.
Which when you think about it is exactly the same as Wendys own current policy. That is, aim all the kicks at the dead dog at Westminster and see if the wounded SLAB animal up here can get just enough respite to survive.
Shame on you Herald, shame on you. Your covering of Wendys considerable erse is a shabby excercise and the ongoing removal of comment on Wendy stories won't save her, believe me...
Posted by: Jimbo on 11:38pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Mrs I P Knightly[/bold] wrote:
I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?[/quote] Hi IPK,
I don't think even Labour in Scotland or Westminster know what their position is today.
The one good thing that has come out of all this is that Labour in Scotland has managed to get the whole country talking about the referendum and independence.
Now we really do have a national conversation courtesy of the very people who are against it.
Mrs I P Knightly wrote:
I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?
Hi IPK,
I don't think even Labour in Scotland or Westminster know what their position is today.
The one good thing that has come out of all this is that Labour in Scotland has managed to get the whole country talking about the referendum and independence.
Now we really do have a national conversation courtesy of the very people who are against it.
Posted by: Jimbo on 11:39pm Tue 13 May 08
Sorry for the double post. Screen froze, don't know why.
Sorry for the double post. Screen froze, don't know why.
Posted by: Kadok, West End on 11:40pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Gordon Brown forces Wendy Alexander Scottish independence climbdown.[/bold]
Wendy Alexander has bowed to Gordon Brown’s wishes and back-tracked on her promise not to vote down SNP plans for an independence referendum.
Although she still claims to back a referendum, her aides said she would only support the Bill in the unlikely scenario that she is happy with its wording and timing.
The humiliating climb-down means Labour’s official position is almost indistinguishable from 11 days ago — before Ms Alexander reversed her opposition to a referendum and called for Mr Salmond to “bring it on”.[/quote]
This as reported in the Telegrapph.
Labour do not support the right of the Scottish people to decide. They will find some pathetic excuse to vote against and then try and blame the SNP.
This is guaranteed.
What will also be patheic is that the Herald and the Scotsman will find some excuse to back Labour. This is also guaranteed.
Look forward to oblivion in 2011 Labour Party and the Glasgow Herald.
Look forward to a referendum in 2012 and independence. There will not be a referendum in 2010.
Gordon Brown forces Wendy Alexander Scottish independence climbdown.
Wendy Alexander has bowed to Gordon Brown’s wishes and back-tracked on her promise not to vote down SNP plans for an independence referendum.
Although she still claims to back a referendum, her aides said she would only support the Bill in the unlikely scenario that she is happy with its wording and timing.
The humiliating climb-down means Labour’s official position is almost indistinguishable from 11 days ago — before Ms Alexander reversed her opposition to a referendum and called for Mr Salmond to “bring it on”.
This as reported in the Telegrapph.
Labour do not support the right of the Scottish people to decide. They will find some pathetic excuse to vote against and then try and blame the SNP.
This is guaranteed.
What will also be patheic is that the Herald and the Scotsman will find some excuse to back Labour. This is also guaranteed.
Look forward to oblivion in 2011 Labour Party and the Glasgow Herald.
Look forward to a referendum in 2012 and independence. There will not be a referendum in 2010.
Posted by: Steve A, glasgow on 11:40pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Free Thinker[/bold] wrote:
... oh... and Hitler was funded by ... The Bank of England. Fact![/quote] Was it the rothschilds?
Free Thinker wrote:
... oh... and Hitler was funded by ... The Bank of England. Fact!
Was it the rothschilds?
Posted by: Mrs I P Knightly, Scotland on 11:43pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Jimbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Mrs I P Knightly[/bold] wrote: I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?[/quote] Hi IPK, I don't think even Labour in Scotland or Westminster know what their position is today. The one good thing that has come out of all this is that Labour in Scotland has managed to get the whole country talking about the referendum and independence. Now we really do have a national conversation courtesy of the very people who are against it.[/quote] very good point - I hadn't thought about it that way
Jimbo wrote:
Mrs I P Knightly wrote: I am now getting dizzy trying to work out what Labour's position is today. What is going to be tomorrow?, next week?, next month?
Hi IPK, I don't think even Labour in Scotland or Westminster know what their position is today. The one good thing that has come out of all this is that Labour in Scotland has managed to get the whole country talking about the referendum and independence. Now we really do have a national conversation courtesy of the very people who are against it.
very good point - I hadn't thought about it that way
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 11:54pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Karin[/bold] wrote:
wardog any comments that are favourable to the snp are banned. I suggest that people comment on wether or not they are buying the printed version of the paper. I am not until the comments are restored i was going to buy it today until i got up this morning and the comments were removed i suggest all nationalists say wether they are buying the print version or not based on wether comments are allowed or articles are biased. Based on the articles i would actually buy it but i am not because of the censorship. [/quote] I'm still buying it. For now.
When I moved to England in 1982 I tried to get the [italic]Herald[/italic] delivered, but in the end I had to give up because I was getting six newspapers once a week. And with the postage it was costing a fortune. I cancelled and re-started several times.
I had a short spell of defecting to the [italic]Scotsman[/italic] in the middle of that, after the Monklands by-election. I was one of the canvassers there, and if there was one thing we were well told, it was that anyone even mentioning or hinting at any sectarian influence on voting would have their head screwed off and stuffed down their windpipes (or something like that). And in all truth, nobody in the SNP seems to care if you're Catholic, Protestant, Seventh-Day Adventist or Buddhist.
The day after the election the [italic]Herald[/italic] ran an editorial (or was it a leader, can't remember now), lambasting the SNP for "playing the sectarian card". This was a barefaced lie. Nevertheless, it got the paper a coveted mention at the end of [italic]Newsnight[/italic] (which didn't split in those days). Word on the streets was that the [italic]Herald[/italic] had been told that if they printed a really controversial headline, they'd get that [italic]Newsnight[/italic] spot.
I was livid, cancelled my subscription and started the [italic]Scotsman[/italic], which was being relatively even-handed at the time. But that didn't really last, and the delivery problems were severe, and I ended up reading the [italic]Herald[/italic] online from about 1997.
However, a year or two later the web site format was changed from something pretty readable (not unlike the present format) to a ghastly layout with a tiny box of badly-formatted news in the middle of a very wide frame of garish adverts. I stopped reading. I hadn't even realised that the online format had been fixed, never mind that comments were allowed, until very recently.
When I was moving back to Scotland one of my criteria for buying a house was that it had to be on a newspaper round, so that I could have my [italic]Herald[/italic] to read over breakfast. I ended up in a small-ish village with a newsagent who deserves support. I still like to read my [italic]Herald[/italic] over breakfast, after almost 25 years of deprivation. And I don't want to disadvantage the newsagent.
But you know, the jacket is on a very shaky nail.
Karin wrote:
wardog any comments that are favourable to the snp are banned. I suggest that people comment on wether or not they are buying the printed version of the paper. I am not until the comments are restored i was going to buy it today until i got up this morning and the comments were removed i suggest all nationalists say wether they are buying the print version or not based on wether comments are allowed or articles are biased. Based on the articles i would actually buy it but i am not because of the censorship.
I'm still buying it. For now.
When I moved to England in 1982 I tried to get the
Herald delivered, but in the end I had to give up because I was getting six newspapers once a week. And with the postage it was costing a fortune. I cancelled and re-started several times.
I had a short spell of defecting to the
Scotsman in the middle of that, after the Monklands by-election. I was one of the canvassers there, and if there was one thing we were well told, it was that anyone even mentioning or hinting at any sectarian influence on voting would have their head screwed off and stuffed down their windpipes (or something like that). And in all truth, nobody in the SNP seems to care if you're Catholic, Protestant, Seventh-Day Adventist or Buddhist.
The day after the election the
Herald ran an editorial (or was it a leader, can't remember now), lambasting the SNP for "playing the sectarian card". This was a barefaced lie. Nevertheless, it got the paper a coveted mention at the end of
Newsnight (which didn't split in those days). Word on the streets was that the
Herald had been told that if they printed a really controversial headline, they'd get that
Newsnight spot.
I was livid, cancelled my subscription and started the
Scotsman, which was being relatively even-handed at the time. But that didn't really last, and the delivery problems were severe, and I ended up reading the
Herald online from about 1997.
However, a year or two later the web site format was changed from something pretty readable (not unlike the present format) to a ghastly layout with a tiny box of badly-formatted news in the middle of a very wide frame of garish adverts. I stopped reading. I hadn't even realised that the online format had been fixed, never mind that comments were allowed, until very recently.
When I was moving back to Scotland one of my criteria for buying a house was that it had to be on a newspaper round, so that I could have my
Herald to read over breakfast. I ended up in a small-ish village with a newsagent who deserves support. I still like to read my
Herald over breakfast, after almost 25 years of deprivation. And I don't want to disadvantage the newsagent.
But you know, the jacket is on a very shaky nail.
Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 11:56pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Vivas[/bold] wrote:
This papers transparent editorial policy now seems to be to allow comment on all stories concerning Brown and his UK decline, but to prevent comment on stories specifically concerning Alexander. To proect Alexander ... but to allow Brown to be ripped apart. Which when you think about it is exactly the same as Wendys own current policy. That is, aim all the kicks at the dead dog at Westminster and see if the wounded SLAB animal up here can get just enough respite to survive. [bold]Shame on you Herald, shame on you.[/bold] Your covering of Wendys considerable erse is a shabby excercise and the ongoing removal of comment on Wendy stories won't save her, believe me...[/quote] Yes, this is curious. I was led to believe (by Alex Porter?) last year that Broon had a hotline to Alf Young and daily guided the Herald on the Holyrood election. What is going on?
Is it the Glesca West End mafia hingin thegither?
For all it matters, they'll all hang seperately in the end.
Vivas wrote:
This papers transparent editorial policy now seems to be to allow comment on all stories concerning Brown and his UK decline, but to prevent comment on stories specifically concerning Alexander. To proect Alexander ... but to allow Brown to be ripped apart. Which when you think about it is exactly the same as Wendys own current policy. That is, aim all the kicks at the dead dog at Westminster and see if the wounded SLAB animal up here can get just enough respite to survive. Shame on you Herald, shame on you. Your covering of Wendys considerable erse is a shabby excercise and the ongoing removal of comment on Wendy stories won't save her, believe me...
Yes, this is curious. I was led to believe (by Alex Porter?) last year that Broon had a hotline to Alf Young and daily guided the Herald on the Holyrood election. What is going on?
Is it the Glesca West End mafia hingin thegither?
For all it matters, they'll all hang seperately in the end.
Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 12:03am Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Wardog[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Wardog[/bold] wrote: Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. [italic]www.bbc.co.uk/medias elector/check/player /nol/newsid_7390000/ newsid_7399400?redir ect=7399474.stm&news =1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n bwm=1&bbwm=1[/italic] [/quote] Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. Click on the 'To Listen' Button Top left [bold]http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/scotland/7399 011.stm[/bold] [italic]Better Link[/italic] [/quote] The only thing that Chisholm failed to do was say the Cathy Jamieson line ....."[italic]very, very, very, very clear[/italic] ". He only manages one "very" at a time. Hilarious stuff!
Chisholm is another ditherer. Recall his stance with the Iraq war when his secretary (Ithink) went out there pre-invasion as a "human shield protester. he is a weak man, very weak.
Wardog wrote:
Wardog wrote: Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. www.bbc.co.uk/medias elector/check/player /nol/newsid_7390000/ newsid_7399400?redir ect=7399474.stm&news =1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n bwm=1&bbwm=1
Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. Click on the 'To Listen' Button Top left http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/scotland/7399 011.stm Better Link
The only thing that Chisholm failed to do was say the Cathy Jamieson line ....."
very, very, very, very clear ". He only manages one "very" at a time. Hilarious stuff!
Chisholm is another ditherer. Recall his stance with the Iraq war when his secretary (Ithink) went out there pre-invasion as a "human shield protester. he is a weak man, very weak.
Posted by: Vivas, Embra on 12:05am Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Duns Scotus[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Vivas[/bold] wrote:
This papers transparent editorial policy now seems to be to allow comment on all stories concerning Brown and his UK decline, but to prevent comment on stories specifically concerning Alexander. To proect Alexander ... but to allow Brown to be ripped apart. Which when you think about it is exactly the same as Wendys own current policy. That is, aim all the kicks at the dead dog at Westminster and see if the wounded SLAB animal up here can get just enough respite to survive. [bold]Shame on you Herald, shame on you.[/bold] Your covering of Wendys considerable erse is a shabby excercise and the ongoing removal of comment on Wendy stories won't save her, believe me...[/quote] Yes, this is curious. I was led to believe (by Alex Porter?) last year that Broon had a hotline to Alf Young and daily guided the Herald on the Holyrood election. What is going on?
Is it the Glesca West End mafia hingin thegither?
For all it matters, they'll all hang seperately in the end.[/quote] Plenty lamp-posts in my street, I just need to buy the rope.
I can just imagine The Herald high-heid yins, Wendy, Kirtsy Wark etc etc all having a high old time of it , laughing and joking, in the cool wine bars and restaurants.
Now I've made myself angry....I'm just away to ebay to check on the price of good solid rope :-))
Duns Scotus wrote:
Vivas wrote:
This papers transparent editorial policy now seems to be to allow comment on all stories concerning Brown and his UK decline, but to prevent comment on stories specifically concerning Alexander. To proect Alexander ... but to allow Brown to be ripped apart. Which when you think about it is exactly the same as Wendys own current policy. That is, aim all the kicks at the dead dog at Westminster and see if the wounded SLAB animal up here can get just enough respite to survive. Shame on you Herald, shame on you. Your covering of Wendys considerable erse is a shabby excercise and the ongoing removal of comment on Wendy stories won't save her, believe me...
Yes, this is curious. I was led to believe (by Alex Porter?) last year that Broon had a hotline to Alf Young and daily guided the Herald on the Holyrood election. What is going on?
Is it the Glesca West End mafia hingin thegither?
For all it matters, they'll all hang seperately in the end.
Plenty lamp-posts in my street, I just need to buy the rope.
I can just imagine The Herald high-heid yins, Wendy, Kirtsy Wark etc etc all having a high old time of it , laughing and joking, in the cool wine bars and restaurants.
Now I've made myself angry....I'm just away to ebay to check on the price of good solid rope :-))
Posted by: Jwil, Lanarkshire on 12:07am Wed 14 May 08
One of the most significant things about the referendum fiasco is that suddenly Scotland has been brought into the into the consciousness of the general public in England. Like, we are here! We are not happy. Changes are needed!
The strange thing about the censorship of postings is that the Scotsman seems more relaxed about this than the Herald. A few months ago it was the other way round.
One of the most significant things about the referendum fiasco is that suddenly Scotland has been brought into the into the consciousness of the general public in England. Like, we are here! We are not happy. Changes are needed!
The strange thing about the censorship of postings is that the Scotsman seems more relaxed about this than the Herald. A few months ago it was the other way round.
Posted by: frank mcbride, lusitania on 12:08am Wed 14 May 08
Wardog.
You are right the 2010 Referendum will be a roaring success.
Wardog.
You are right the 2010 Referendum will be a roaring success.
Posted by: Old Tam, Glasgow on 12:09am Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Wardog[/bold] wrote:
Wait and see Scottish Labour screaming for a [bold]YES[/bold] vote in the referendum once the Tories come to power in Westminster. [/quote] I hope so Wardog. However we must now prepare for a referendum campaign which will occur under a tory government - what will Cameron's pitch be ? I can think of several spoilers that he may deploy. Labour will be in turmoil and the Libdems confused as ever. Shoulders to the wheel.
Wardog wrote:
Wait and see Scottish Labour screaming for a YES vote in the referendum once the Tories come to power in Westminster.
I hope so Wardog. However we must now prepare for a referendum campaign which will occur under a tory government - what will Cameron's pitch be ? I can think of several spoilers that he may deploy. Labour will be in turmoil and the Libdems confused as ever. Shoulders to the wheel.
Posted by: Old Tam, Glasgow on 12:14am Wed 14 May 08
My comment on Wendy got dropped and all I did was suggest that she was the cleverest woman in Scotland, with a different answer for each of the 7 days in a week.
My comment on Wendy got dropped and all I did was suggest that she was the cleverest woman in Scotland, with a different answer for each of the 7 days in a week.
Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 12:17am Wed 14 May 08
Currently Wendy Alexander stories provoke hundreds of comments which means hundreds of hits which means a boost to The Herald's advertising rates ... but the heid bummers don't seem to see that. A case of emotion blocking out logic.
Check this link to The Times which is a serious warning to Messrs Fraser & Young:
[quote]"Grim news for Scotsman and The Herald"
"Advertising revenues are falling"
tinyurl.com/5y5smb[/quote]
Currently Wendy Alexander stories provoke hundreds of comments which means hundreds of hits which means a boost to The Herald's advertising rates ... but the heid bummers don't seem to see that. A case of emotion blocking out logic.
Check this link to The Times which is a serious warning to Messrs Fraser & Young:
"Grim news for Scotsman and The Herald"
"Advertising revenues are falling"
tinyurl.com/5y5smb
Posted by: Vivas, Embra on 12:23am Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Duns Scotus[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Wardog[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Wardog[/bold] wrote: Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. [italic]www.bbc.co.uk/medias elector/check/player /nol/newsid_7390000/ newsid_7399400?redir ect=7399474.stm&news =1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n bwm=1&bbwm=1[/italic] [/quote] Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. Click on the 'To Listen' Button Top left [bold]http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/scotland/7399 011.stm[/bold] [italic]Better Link[/italic] [/quote] The only thing that Chisholm failed to do was say the Cathy Jamieson line ....."[italic]very, very, very, very clear[/italic] ". He only manages one "very" at a time. Hilarious stuff!
Chisholm is another ditherer. Recall his stance with the Iraq war when his secretary (Ithink) went out there pre-invasion as a "human shield protester. he is a weak man, very weak.[/quote] Chisolm is my MP (din't get my vote).. I think he is well meaning at heart but as you say, he is a very weak and pliable man.
He would have gained some smidgeon of respect from me in his non-interview if he'd just had the simple common sense to say "yes, it's possible that we might vote against a bill if we don't like it". His constant evasion and inability to articulate his position was quite pitiful. Doesn't he know that he's being used, because none of Wendys immediate group have the ba's to speak out for her ? Where the hell is Jackie Baiilie in all of this ? Chisolm on the other hand must think he'll get a pat on the head for all this obfuscation and maybe a move up the pecking order in Wendys cabal. WRONG. Wendy will throw him away like a rag-doll once he's done his work as a human shield for his (ahem) "leader".
I can only imagine that Wendy must have used her womanly wiles to convince him into his humiliating defence of her ... has she promised him a knee-trembler at the back of the Holyrood bike-shed ? You'll never get it Malcom.... Wendy goes back on[bold] everything[/bold] she offers, knee-tremblers included you sad gullible fool !
Duns Scotus wrote:
Wardog wrote:
Wardog wrote: Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. www.bbc.co.uk/medias elector/check/player /nol/newsid_7390000/ newsid_7399400?redir ect=7399474.stm&news =1&nbram=1&bbram=1&n bwm=1&bbwm=1
Brilliant! Have a listen to this....... Malcolm Chisholm defending th indefensible..... sounds like Glen Campbell has found a new set of googlies in his line of questioning. Click on the 'To Listen' Button Top left http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/scotland/7399 011.stm Better Link
The only thing that Chisholm failed to do was say the Cathy Jamieson line ....."very, very, very, very clear ". He only manages one "very" at a time. Hilarious stuff!
Chisholm is another ditherer. Recall his stance with the Iraq war when his secretary (Ithink) went out there pre-invasion as a "human shield protester. he is a weak man, very weak.
Chisolm is my MP (din't get my vote).. I think he is well meaning at heart but as you say, he is a very weak and pliable man.
He would have gained some smidgeon of respect from me in his non-interview if he'd just had the simple common sense to say "yes, it's possible that we might vote against a bill if we don't like it". His constant evasion and inability to articulate his position was quite pitiful. Doesn't he know that he's being used, because none of Wendys immediate group have the ba's to speak out for her ? Where the hell is Jackie Baiilie in all of this ? Chisolm on the other hand must think he'll get a pat on the head for all this obfuscation and maybe a move up the pecking order in Wendys cabal. WRONG. Wendy will throw him away like a rag-doll once he's done his work as a human shield for his (ahem) "leader".
I can only imagine that Wendy must have used her womanly wiles to convince him into his humiliating defence of her ... has she promised him a knee-trembler at the back of the Holyrood bike-shed ? You'll never get it Malcom.... Wendy goes back on
everything she offers, knee-tremblers included you sad gullible fool !
Posted by: McGinty, The North on 12:31am Wed 14 May 08
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 10:40pm Tue 13 May 08
'Really David, the Union is at risk because of Brown and Scottish Labour. How bloody arrogant of you'
I'd go further, the union is at risk because people like you, David, have never to my knowledge, publicly acknowledged the pox-up that your predecessors made or distanced yourself from them. There are no words that go far enough to describe the dastardliness of the what was set in motion by their hands. Gordon Gekkos are not in the past, they are alive, rampant and worse than ever. Your friends screwed Scotland, screwed the North of England and the South is going to get screwed. This is why people vote for SNP and not because of their virtues or merits. God have mercy on us all.
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 10:40pm Tue 13 May 08
'Really David, the Union is at risk because of Brown and Scottish Labour. How bloody arrogant of you'
I'd go further, the union is at risk because people like you, David, have never to my knowledge, publicly acknowledged the pox-up that your predecessors made or distanced yourself from them. There are no words that go far enough to describe the dastardliness of the what was set in motion by their hands. Gordon Gekkos are not in the past, they are alive, rampant and worse than ever. Your friends screwed Scotland, screwed the North of England and the South is going to get screwed. This is why people vote for SNP and not because of their virtues or merits. God have mercy on us all.
Posted by: RussianExpat, Moscow on 12:32am Wed 14 May 08
Cameron stated:
"I have ambitions and passions every bit as clear as Margaret Thatcher did '
Great, happy times ahead!
Cameron stated:
"I have ambitions and passions every bit as clear as Margaret Thatcher did '
Great, happy times ahead!
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 12:37am Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]frank mcbride[/bold] wrote:
Wardog.
You are right the 2010 Referendum will be a roaring success.[/quote]
What was very interesting on Newsnicht was both Ian Macwhirter and the 'Professor of Referendums' in the package were both concluding that the question currently being proposed in draft form by the SNP is almost certainly the only form of question which can be asked.
Malcolm Chisholm can complain about wanting to add the phrase 'Leaving the Union' - but this is very ill-defined.
[bold]Independence or an Independent State[/bold] as will be defined by the National Conversation will suffice and having simply the following should be entirely 'fair' (to use his words)
[quote]
I AGREE that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state. [bold]X[/bold]
or
I DO NOT AGREE that the Scottish Government should negotiate a
settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state
[/quote]
It's these words that have created the panic in the breastie o wee courin timorous beastie alexander.....
Mr Chisholm's arguing about the use of the phrase 'independent state' is farcically, angels dancing on pinhead stuff.....
That is where Labour currently are.
What is also now entirely non-sensical, is that they now appear to be entirely ruling out a two question referendum which could include the recommendations of the calman commission.
Although I suspect that this will change once he reports, the pressure will be on Labour to react to his recommendations and simply refusing to test them against public opinion will simply lead them into another crisis moment this November when his initial findings are published.
Oh dear Wendy, another fine mess you've created for yersel.....
(cue Laurel & Hardy Themetune with Baille & Wendy in Silhouette)
frank mcbride wrote:
Wardog.
You are right the 2010 Referendum will be a roaring success.
What was very interesting on Newsnicht was both Ian Macwhirter and the 'Professor of Referendums' in the package were both concluding that the question currently being proposed in draft form by the SNP is almost certainly the only form of question which can be asked.
Malcolm Chisholm can complain about wanting to add the phrase 'Leaving the Union' - but this is very ill-defined.
Independence or an Independent State as will be defined by the National Conversation will suffice and having simply the following should be entirely 'fair' (to use his words)
I AGREE that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state. X
or
I DO NOT AGREE that the Scottish Government should negotiate a
settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state
It's these words that have created the panic in the breastie o wee courin timorous beastie alexander.....
Mr Chisholm's arguing about the use of the phrase 'independent state' is farcically, angels dancing on pinhead stuff.....
That is where Labour currently are.
What is also now entirely non-sensical, is that they now appear to be entirely ruling out a two question referendum which could include the recommendations of the calman commission.
Although I suspect that this will change once he reports, the pressure will be on Labour to react to his recommendations and simply refusing to test them against public opinion will simply lead them into another crisis moment this November when his initial findings are published.
Oh dear Wendy, another fine mess you've created for yersel.....
(cue Laurel & Hardy Themetune with Baille & Wendy in Silhouette)
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 12:39am Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]RussianExpat[/bold] wrote:
Cameron stated:
"I have ambitions and passions every bit as clear as Margaret Thatcher did '
Great, happy times ahead![/quote]
Aye, this quote should be the SNP's referendum campaign slogan.
We're on our way, bring it on indeed!
RussianExpat wrote:
Cameron stated:
"I have ambitions and passions every bit as clear as Margaret Thatcher did '
Great, happy times ahead!
Aye, this quote should be the SNP's referendum campaign slogan.
We're on our way, bring it on indeed!
Posted by: Jwil, Lanarkshire on 12:48am Wed 14 May 08
Malcolm Chisolm was suffering from constipation (of the literal type).
He kept repeating himself ad infinitum I can't see that he was helping Labour's cause any, and I think he was probably embarassed. He probably has never been in that situation before. Wendy seems intent in dragging all her colleagues down with her.
Malcolm Chisolm was suffering from constipation (of the literal type).
He kept repeating himself ad infinitum I can't see that he was helping Labour's cause any, and I think he was probably embarassed. He probably has never been in that situation before. Wendy seems intent in dragging all her colleagues down with her.
Posted by: Vivas, Embra on 1:02am Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Jwil[/bold] wrote:
Malcolm Chisolm was suffering from constipation (of the literal type).
He kept repeating himself ad infinitum I can't see that he was helping Labour's cause any, and I think he was probably embarassed. He probably has never been in that situation before. Wendy seems intent in dragging all her colleagues down with her.
[/quote] Funng thing is, that it's the sisterhood that are hiding behind Wendy just now (if you can imagine Baiilie being able to hide behind anything smaller than a double-decker bus that is...)
It's the men who are going out to bat for her and looking like erses. Chislom several times now, and Ian Grey last week.
I was being flippant and probably more than a little sexist in other posts about how she might be promising the SLAB boys all kinds of favours "if they just do this little thing for her by going on Newsnight" :-)) Seriously though, I do wonder if she is manipulating stupid SLAB man to go on TV and say stupid things. Her pals certainly aren't willing to do it and I just have this image of Baillie watching Newsnight tonight and spiting out pizza slices and jammy donuts in her hilarity at Chisolm taking the fall on all their behalfs.
Women say men keep their brains in their trousers. I don't know where Chisolm and Grey keep theirs but it's certainly not between their ears.
Jwil wrote:
Malcolm Chisolm was suffering from constipation (of the literal type).
He kept repeating himself ad infinitum I can't see that he was helping Labour's cause any, and I think he was probably embarassed. He probably has never been in that situation before. Wendy seems intent in dragging all her colleagues down with her.
Funng thing is, that it's the sisterhood that are hiding behind Wendy just now (if you can imagine Baiilie being able to hide behind anything smaller than a double-decker bus that is...)
It's the men who are going out to bat for her and looking like erses. Chislom several times now, and Ian Grey last week.
I was being flippant and probably more than a little sexist in other posts about how she might be promising the SLAB boys all kinds of favours "if they just do this little thing for her by going on Newsnight" :-)) Seriously though, I do wonder if she is manipulating stupid SLAB man to go on TV and say stupid things. Her pals certainly aren't willing to do it and I just have this image of Baillie watching Newsnight tonight and spiting out pizza slices and jammy donuts in her hilarity at Chisolm taking the fall on all their behalfs.
Women say men keep their brains in their trousers. I don't know where Chisolm and Grey keep theirs but it's certainly not between their ears.
Posted by: ditchgazza on 1:04am Wed 14 May 08
How noble of Cameron to suddenly show an interest in the possibility of Scotland breaking the shackles that's holding the country in penury.
Yet tomorrow he'll be back in the Shires telling his faithfull how awfully they are being treated in having to subsidise these fifthy, repugnant subsidy junky jocks.
How noble of Cameron to suddenly show an interest in the possibility of Scotland breaking the shackles that's holding the country in penury.
Yet tomorrow he'll be back in the Shires telling his faithfull how awfully they are being treated in having to subsidise these fifthy, repugnant subsidy junky jocks.
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 1:04am Wed 14 May 08
I think Malcolm Chisholm has now been made [bold]Constitutional Gruppenführer[/bold] , whilst Jackie Bailie is currently 'on operation' - off faslane and in silent running mode.....
How many spokespeople can Neu Liebor (7th Scottish Panzar Division) go through before they run out of cannon fodder for the frotnline..... oh dear, they already have.....
[bold]NO-ONE[/bold] from Labour's Eagle s Nest was available to go on tonight's Newsnicht, Ian Macwhirter and Brweer made mince meat of this farce.
The walls are shakaing and crumbling with the meedja clambering to speak to her and yet Wendy is sticking it out in her bunker, oblivious to the real world outside......
I think Malcolm Chisholm has now been made
Constitutional Gruppenführer , whilst Jackie Bailie is currently 'on operation' - off faslane and in silent running mode.....
How many spokespeople can Neu Liebor (7th Scottish Panzar Division) go through before they run out of cannon fodder for the frotnline..... oh dear, they already have.....
NO-ONE from Labour's Eagle s Nest was available to go on tonight's Newsnicht, Ian Macwhirter and Brweer made mince meat of this farce.
The walls are shakaing and crumbling with the meedja clambering to speak to her and yet Wendy is sticking it out in her
Politics
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (169)
