Goonersworld

UFGN wrote:PRISS I will read your post later, but I want to raise some specific issues. Please google the cases, its not hard to find them

Please address them directly in your answer

1 A young boy aged about 11, with a toy gun in a park. Shot dead immediately by a cop with live bullets. No effort whatsoever made to warn him or use non lethal force

2 A gay couple turned away from a restaurant by the manager, because they dont serve fags. To the best of my knowledge, no legal redress

3 A man sacked by child welfare services because hes gay

4 A Noahs Arc exhibition paid for with public money, advertising that they dont employ gays

5 Baptist Church areseholes screaming in the face of the families of dead soldiers, provoking them and threatening to sue them if they retaliate

Im not interested in you shrugging your shoulders and coming out with generalisations. HOW EXACTLY IS YOUR CONSTITUTION WORKING OUT FOR THE CITIZENS IN THOSE EXAMPLES?

And how EXACTLY is what I said about your constitution in my post above inacurate, given those examples?

UFGN wrote:

UFGN wrote:PRISS I will read your post later, but I want to raise some specific issues. Please google the cases, its not hard to find them

Please address them directly in your answer

1 A young boy aged about 11, with a toy gun in a park. Shot dead immediately by a cop with live bullets. No effort whatsoever made to warn him or use non lethal force

2 A gay couple turned away from a restaurant by the manager, because they dont serve fags. To the best of my knowledge, no legal redress

3 A man sacked by child welfare services because hes gay

4 A Noahs Arc exhibition paid for with public money, advertising that they dont employ gays

5 Baptist Church areseholes screaming in the face of the families of dead soldiers, provoking them and threatening to sue them if they retaliate

Im not interested in you shrugging your shoulders and coming out with generalisations. HOW EXACTLY IS YOUR CONSTITUTION WORKING OUT FOR THE CITIZENS IN THOSE EXAMPLES?

And how EXACTLY is what I said about your constitution in my post above inacurate, given those examples?

Firstly you need to provide a link for most of your poorly sourced cases. Hard to respond specifically to vague and certainly incidents that you pose with loaded language and one side of the story . But the point you are missing is that there are Constitutional protections for all of these folks. Including the Westboro clowns (there were perhaps 20 of them total) who I might well kick where their nuts should be...but they too have rights to be honored. Only a very self centered myopic would think that tyranny of any minority no matter how disgusting by the majority is acceptable. Or that the world has its share of idiots who do not always follow law that has been deemed Constitutional.

The key to defeating such bigots is to ignore them, laugh at them, make them feel foolish by exposing their foolishness. And tip number one, refuse to play into their hands by refusing to be offended. If a gay man considers being called a fag an insult it works. If that same man takes pride in what he is then it should be embraced and the tables turned.

Sir Keir Starmer elected new Leader of the Labour Party.

Phil71 wrote:Sir Keir Starmer elected new Leader of the Labour Party.

Poor fecker! He looks soo out of place amongst that bunch of weirdos.

He reminds me of the mortgage broker we used when we bought our house.

Angela Rayner could prove a good choice as deputy, particularly with her union and social care background. I guess it depends on how the media and Murdochs view them.

Cracking first week in the job though.

He comes across as scripted and fake. Like a slimey salesman.

Starmer is one of the leading lawyers in the country. He is exactly what we need to forensically question and criticise Bullshiter Boris.

Good luck at PMQs Johnson, you wont be able to bluster past KS.

Phil71 wrote:Sir Keir Starmer elected new Leader of the Labour Party.

Captain of the charge of the light brigade

UFGN wrote:Starmer is one of the leading lawyers in the country. He is exactly what we need to forensically question and criticise Bullshiter Boris.

Good luck at PMQs Johnson, you wont be able to bluster past KS.

Boris has achieved more in his short tenure and got things done more than any politician in the last decade.

Whether you like what he's doing or not is not the point, the point is everything he promised his voters ........... he's now doing / done.

Which makes a fkin change for a politician.

You can w*nk over Starmer all you like, but unless he makes major changes to that scrap heap of a party Labour has become under Corbyn then he won't hold my interest, Labour needs gutting and reinventing into a more effective opposition with sound policies.

In due time it will sink in just how bad Corbyns labour was, that they failed to have any chance against a fractured infighting Tory party with that EU mole (Theresa May) for a leader, the tories were ripping themselves apart and still Labour was nothing more than a side show.

Starmer has a lot of work to do.

UFGN wrote:Starmer is one of the leading lawyers in the country. He is exactly what we need to forensically question and criticise Bullshiter Boris.

Good luck at PMQs Johnson, you wont be able to bluster past KS.

I hear #10 have ordered a bigger fridge since Starmer's appointment.

DiamondGooner wrote:

UFGN wrote:Starmer is one of the leading lawyers in the country. He is exactly what we need to forensically question and criticise Bullshiter Boris.

Good luck at PMQs Johnson, you wont be able to bluster past KS.

Boris has achieved more in his short tenure and got things done more than any politician in the last decade.

Whether you like what he's doing or not is not the point, the point is everything he promised his voters ........... he's now doing / done.

Which makes a fkin change for a politician.

You can w*nk over Starmer all you like, but unless he makes major changes to that scrap heap of a party Labour has become under Corbyn then he won't hold my interest, Labour needs gutting and reinventing into a more effective opposition with sound policies.

In due time it will sink in just how bad Corbyns labour was, that they failed to have any chance against a fractured infighting Tory party with that EU mole (Theresa May) for a leader, the tories were ripping themselves apart and still Labour was nothing more than a side show.

Starmer has a lot of work to do.

What a stupid thing to say. Of course it matters that what Johnson has done is not what I want. It is the mark of an absolute moron to admire a politician just because they do what they say they will. If what they are doing isn't what I want to happen, of course I want them to fail. You sound like a Trump automaton.

Starmer will scrutinise Johnson. So sorry if that annoys you.

What a stupid thing to say. Of course it matters that what Johnson has done is not what I want. It is the mark of an absolute moron to admire a politician just because they do what they say they will. If what they are doing isn't what I want to happen, of course I want them to fail. You sound like a Trump automaton.

What you are ignoring is that Boris won in a landslide and thus having implemented what he said he would do that does make a huge difference for the majority of Britons. Trump the same in America. The difference is that Boris is indeed a life long politician while Trump was not. That on its face places Boris well up there on the scale of politicians.

As for wanting someone in leadership to fail is really quite bizarre to me. The reality is that there are competing ideas as to make the country in question better for all. Everyone should be able to set aside their concrete tribal thinking and at least hope the person or party elected will succeed because the nation will too. That does not mean simplistically being a f***ing turnip, it means offering up better solutions, working to make the policies on offer better and obviously winning over the electorate by offering those policies for them to take a gander. Demonization...childish really. Civil and respectful disagreement on policy...what democracy is really about.

Could you name a "Trump automaton" for me? Exclude me please, because it is not true. I employ logic and never have hitched my wagon to any politician, but rather to ideals as I suspect you do as well. (The ideals part! )

As I have had several friends comment, imagine the UK being led by Corbyn now. The nation saw him coming and ran the other way.

GunnerRobert wrote:I do disagree that Boris has done anything at all right now. We haven't left the EU yet, we haven't concluded a trade deal with anyone yet, the only thing we've done is committed to leave in an year, which he will delay for sure because of this Corona virus thing. Not a natural supporter of the Conservatives or Brexit, but I try to be neutral and he hasn't done anything left.

I don't blame him for the Corona thing, but again, I can't give any credit there either, because the UK reacted as badly as everyone else did, so again, no credit to be given, nor any blame since everyone flopped at the pandemic test and none stood up to China when it could have been stopped.

So yeah, I may be a Labour voter and a bit biased, but as a neutral, Boris has neither done good or bad yet, because he's only said he'll do stuff and done absolutely nothing yet.

Actually he got the EU to drop the backstop at least.

double post

Pat Rice in Short Shorts wrote:

What a stupid thing to say. Of course it matters that what Johnson has done is not what I want. It is the mark of an absolute moron to admire a politician just because they do what they say they will. If what they are doing isn't what I want to happen, of course I want them to fail. You sound like a Trump automaton.

What you are ignoring is that Boris won in a landslide and thus having implemented what he said he would do that does make a huge difference for the majority of Britons. Trump the same in America. The difference is that Boris is indeed a life long politician while Trump was not. That on its face places Boris well up there on the scale of politicians.

As for wanting someone in leadership to fail is really quite bizarre to me. The reality is that there are competing ideas as to make the country in question better for all. Everyone should be able to set aside their concrete tribal thinking and at least hope the person or party elected will succeed because the nation will too. That does not mean simplistically being a f***ing turnip, it means offering up better solutions, working to make the policies on offer better and obviously winning over the electorate by offering those policies for them to take a gander. Demonization...childish really. Civil and respectful disagreement on policy...what democracy is really about.

Could you name a "Trump automaton" for me? Exclude me please, because it is not true. I employ logic and never have hitched my wagon to any politician, but rather to ideals as I suspect you do as well. (The ideals part! )

As I have had several friends comment, imagine the UK being led by Corbyn now. The nation saw him coming and ran the other way.

Imagine the UK being run by Corbyn now? OK, im imagining him spending shitloads of money, just like Boris is, and all the right wingers crying their eyes out over how irresponsible he was being.

By the way, Boris didn't win a landslide at all. He won 300K more votes than last time, and a majority of 80 is pretty normal.

Trump was not backed by a majority of Americans at all, so your statement there is false.