|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 24 Oct 12:15
I see Pars' fan Ruth Davidson has picked up a nice little earner as an advisor to a communications company. £50k a year for 24 days' work is a bit better than the minimum wage although she'll have to go a bit to catch Boris Johnson. Doesn't he get £250k a year for writing a weekly article for the Sunday Telegraph?
Ruth will still have more time on her hands to follow her beloved Pars though I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: widtink
Date: Thu 24 Oct 13:07
From The Guardian dated October 2018...
Boris Johnson was re-employed by the Daily Telegraph on a salary of £275,000 a year for his weekly column, it has been revealed.
The Conservative MP and potential leadership candidate had to give up his newspaper job when he became foreign secretary in 2016, forfeiting the substantial second income.
However, the parliamentary register of members’ interests shows he was immediately rehired on the same rate after resigning this summer, with no attempt made by the Daily Telegraph – which has experienced years of job cuts and falling profits – to push down his salary.
Admin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 24 Oct 13:12
So Johnson had to resign this job when he was Foreign Secretary but it's OK for him to have it as Prime Minister?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Thu 24 Oct 15:19
Mps should be banned from getting paid for other work. Corrupt nonsense
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Thu 24 Oct 15:36
Agree with you to a point Andrew. Philippa Whitford is a specialist surgeon from what I understand and is required ro do x hours a month to keep her medical license valid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 24 Oct 15:59
Gosh £275,000 for writing lies
How much for writing the truth I wonder ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 24 Oct 17:44
The Daily Telegraph isn't interested in the truth, so nowt.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 24 Oct 18:34
Didn't Alex Salmond use to write for The Sun?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 24 Oct 18:50
Alex Salmond still has a tv show on Russia Today.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 24 Oct 19:01
Quote :-
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 24 Oct 18:34
Didn't Alex Salmond use to write for The Sun?
Cannot remember that towk but I have never bought the sun
He did court Murdoch for a while tho and if I remember right Murdoch supported Scotland for Independence
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 24 Oct 19:05
The CEO of Edinburgh Council was employed by a particular energy company getting paid more than double the wage of the average cooncil employee for a fortnight's work. Apparently she did this during her holiday time. What was odd was when said energy company became the supplier for the council.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 24 Oct 19:15
My boss was the former CEO of CEC and he's a really sound bloke with more integrity than I'll ever have, so they're not all shysters. He's a Par though, so I'm biased!
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Big T Par
Date: Thu 24 Oct 19:32
For all the teams to support, she supports us 😔😔
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Thu 24 Oct 19:49
Does telling Salmond to shove Indy up his kilt in 2014 disqualify one from being a Par?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 24 Oct 19:57
Quote :-
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Thu 24 Oct 19:49
Does telling Salmond to shove Indy up his kilt in 2014 disqualify one from being a Par?
No Mario but you might be cited in his sexual harassment case :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 24 Oct 21:24
Quote:
Wotsit, Thu 24 Oct 19:15
My boss was the former CEO of CEC and he's a really sound bloke with more integrity than I'll ever have, so they're not all shysters. He's a Par though, so I'm biased!
It can't have been him. It was a woman.
Link didn't work but here's the text from the Evening Snooze
CITY chief executive Sue Bruce has issued an unprecedented explanation of her decision to take up a second job with power giants SSE – in an attempt to deflect criticism from the growing controversy.
The £160k-a-year official wrote to each of the city’s elected politicians late yesterday, issuing a multi-pointed rebuttal of criticism levelled at her following the shock decision to take up a role on the board of SSE.
She was criticised by unions last month, who said she should focus on her job at the helm of the Capital’s local authority.
And this week we revealed how the plum role is set to be placed under the microscope at this month’s full council meeting, where Tories will demand second jobs can only be accepted if they are in the best interests of taxpayers.
But in a rebuke, Ms Bruce has defended taking the £50,000 role,insisting her commitment to the council “remains undiminished”.
Post Edited (Thu 24 Oct 21:32)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Thu 24 Oct 22:01
Dear. Dear.
What a sad bunch you are.
Just because she trimmed the sails of the Nats during her time in office and was the most respected Holyrood politician across the UK.
Sums up the politics of envy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBA
Date: Thu 24 Oct 22:07
Quote:
parbucks, Thu 24 Oct 22:01
was the most respected Holyrood politician across the UK
That's plenty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Thu 24 Oct 22:18
'Just because she never trimmed the sails of the Nats during her time in office and was MY most respected Holyrood politician.'
Quote corrected for you as she was hardly respected by anybody but the papers who tried to boost her up.Even her bosses ignored her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 24 Oct 22:30
She's still an MSP but is already feathering her nest. She seems to have got the message that the game's a bogey for the Tories in Scotland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 25 Oct 07:10
Quote:
parbucks, Thu 24 Oct 22:01
Dear. Dear.
What a sad bunch you are.
Just because she trimmed the sails of the Nats during her time in office and was the most respected Holyrood politician across the UK.
Sums up the politics of envy.
Firstly, I'm not one of the "Nats". Secondly, she wasn't particularly respected. She spoke well but flip-flopped on key issues and ultimately couldn't support the ridiculous decisions being made by the UK party. This is part of the reason she stood down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Fri 25 Oct 08:28
Quote:
parbucks, Thu 24 Oct 22:01
Dear. Dear.
What a sad bunch you are.
Just because she trimmed the sails of the Nats during her time in office and was the most respected Holyrood politician across the UK.
Sums up the politics of envy.
She was Tory scum like all the rest of the Tory scum and their scum supporters, dedicated to hurting the poor and in need of help.
Nothing to do with envy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 25 Oct 13:17
Rasta
You continue using intemperate language.
It just diminishes any point you are trying to make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Fri 25 Oct 13:38
Quote:
Rastapari, Fri 25 Oct 08:28
Quote:
parbucks, Thu 24 Oct 22:01
Dear. Dear.
What a sad bunch you are.
Just because she trimmed the sails of the Nats during her time in office and was the most respected Holyrood politician across the UK.
Sums up the politics of envy.
She was Tory scum like all the rest of the Tory scum and their scum supporters, dedicated to hurting the poor and in need of help.
Nothing to do with envy.
Fair points, well made
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 25 Oct 16:30
What do you imagine that people admire Davidson for Parbucks?
Surely not her support for the "Rape Clause"?
Edit: autocorrect changed Davidson to division. Rather fitting.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
Post Edited (Fri 25 Oct 16:31)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 25 Oct 17:09
Quote:
parbucks, Fri 25 Oct 13:17
Rasta
You continue using intemperate language.
It just diminishes any point you are trying to make.
No fan generally of Rasta. But his language is quite restrained and re- enforces his position.
Just because you clearly have opposing views does not make them any more valid. Regardless of how "nice" your language might be
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 25 Oct 19:56
Fair enough.
I do resent being called “scum” though which he has done twice.
No class I’m afraid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 25 Oct 20:23
I agree with some of Rasta's post but not the scum supporters bit
My old pal Fred was 89 on Tuesday sharp as a tack can debate any topic you want and has been a Tory supporter all his life ..... It was his choice and his beliefs ... He fought in the Korean war ... the forgotten war .... was blown up in his tank and was never right since .....he has a letter from the King/Emperor of South Korea proudly displayed on his wall thanking him for his sacrifice
I watched him being carried into an ambulance yesterday with perhaps days left to live and cried for him.. he was a Tory ..a hero ..but NEVER Scum Rasta
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 25 Oct 20:40
Thanks bpp.
We may disagree at times but it is never personal.
The world would be very boring and perhaps disfunctional if we all thought the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 25 Oct 21:09
pb
We all have our own thoughts and ideas and no one will ever change them in fact the very idea or attempt to change them makes us even more determine to adhere to them
You would have loved Fred he could quote the barnet formula per country/population he could tell you every tank that was built in his lifetime and their ability/weakness to withstand an attack with armour piercing shells every handgun that was built The history of the common market up until last week He liked Theresa May and was warming to Boris and who was I to try and tell him........ a great man that he was wrong ? Perhaps he was right and I am wrong there but for the grace of god go I
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 25 Oct 21:15
Quote:
Buspasspar, Fri 25 Oct 21:09
pb
We all have our own thoughts and ideas and no one will ever change them in fact the very idea or attempt to change them makes us even more determine to adhere to them I
That's a stupid comment. Your thoughts and ideas are your own. However, someone who never changes in the face of overwhelming evidence against their ideas are just idiots
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 25 Oct 21:16
bpp
Respect!
Post Edited (Fri 25 Oct 21:17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 25 Oct 21:17
Quote:
parbucks, Fri 25 Oct 19:56
Fair enough.
I do resent being called “scum” though which he has done twice.
No class I’m afraid.
Scum definition
If you refer to people as scum, you are expressing your feelings of dislike and disgust for them
Read that as you like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 25 Oct 21:29
Quote moviescot :-
Scum definition
If you refer to people as scum, you are expressing your feelings of dislike and disgust for them
Read that as you like.
Definition of scum :-
a worthless or contemptible person or group of people:
Quote moviescot :-
That's a stupid comment. Your thoughts and ideas are your own. However, someone who never changes in the face of overwhelming evidence against their ideas are just idiots
Are you sure you don't want to change your mind moviescot ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 25 Oct 21:32
Depends on your definition and source.
I think Rastas is more in the orbit of that in the Urban Dictionary given his comments.
“TOP DEFINITION
Scum
Scum is the epitome of a worthless, good-for-nothing human. They are at the bottom of the hierarchy of humans, even coming in below most fuckbois.”
He can correct me if I am wrong and I will readily apologise if I have misinterpreted him.
You seem to think this is ok Moviescot?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 25 Oct 22:48
Quote:
parbucks, Fri 25 Oct 21:32
Depends on your definition and source.
I think Rastas is more in the orbit of that in the Urban Dictionary given his comments.
“TOP DEFINITION
Scum
Scum is the epitome of a worthless, good-for-nothing human. They are at the bottom of the hierarchy of humans, even coming in below most fuckbois.”
He can correct me if I am wrong and I will readily apologise if I have misinterpreted him.
You seem to think this is ok Moviescot?
If that's the definition he is using then that is too far. I would use it in the context of my definition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 25 Oct 22:48
Quote:
Buspasspar, Fri 25 Oct 21:29
Quote moviescot :-
Scum definition
If you refer to people as scum, you are expressing your feelings of dislike and disgust for them
Read that as you like.
Definition of scum :-
a worthless or contemptible person or group of people:
Quote moviescot :-
That's a stupid comment. Your thoughts and ideas are your own. However, someone who never changes in the face of overwhelming evidence against their ideas are just idiots
Are you sure you don't want to change your mind moviescot ?
In what sense?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Sat 26 Oct 01:12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 26 Oct 07:51
Wow
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Sun 27 Oct 10:28
If your policy harms the weakest in society...and you vote for those policies knowing fine well the harm they cause to the weakest in society...what do you expect to be called?
Voting for billionaires to hide more tax...what do you expect to be called?
You are what you are...Tory scum, I make no apology for naming and shaming those who knowingly support the mistreatment of our weakest to help the wealthy tax dodge.
Horrible sociopaths and psychopaths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 11:58
Judging by your abusive rants there is only one identifiable sociopath on here.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 12:11
Another wow for Rasta's post. Just wow.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 12:37
Austerity had a devastating impact on the poorest and was done deliberately and for ideological reasons.
Same with the dismantling of the industrial base: devastating the poor for ideological reasons.
There are two examples from my lifetime, history is littered with them.
Rasta's restrained compared to some folk I've met who got caught in the scummy mess left by Tory ideology.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
Post Edited (Sun 27 Oct 12:37)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Sun 27 Oct 12:50
Quote:
parbucks, Sun 27 Oct 11:58
Judging by your abusive rants there is only one identifiable sociopath on here.....
Abusive?
You willingly join in breaking those who need our help.
Suck it up.
Tories eh, laughing and dancing when the screw the poor and needy....tears when called out about it.
Utter vermin.
Post Edited (Sun 27 Oct 12:57)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 13:34
You’ve reconfirmed my thoughts. Sad...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 13:56
I have to assume from parbucks' responses so far that he agrees with the sentiment of Rasta's posts since he seems to be concentrating all of his criticism on the tone.
You would address the content too if you disagreed, right parbucks? I'm pretty sure that it would be beneath you to use an attack on somebody's tone as an excuse to avoid discussing the content.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 13:57
I fear for Scotland if this is the level of political debate. When sections of society start getting labelled scum it tends to be a slippery slope thereafter. History is littered with examples of it.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 27 Oct 14:42
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Sun 27 Oct 13:57
I fear for Scotland if this is the level of political debate. When sections of society start getting labelled scum it tends to be a slippery slope thereafter. History is littered with examples of it.
Is that the start of the slippery slope, or does the decline start when those with power exploit the majority?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 15:09
No it starts with when swathes of the populace are labelled as scum.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 27 Oct 15:36
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Sun 27 Oct 15:09
No it starts with when swathes of the populace are labelled as scum.
Are you referring to the Tories' austerity programme?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 15:38
Do you also think that people who vote conservative are scum?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 27 Oct 15:45
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Sun 27 Oct 15:38
Do you also think that people who vote conservative are scum?
No, but I can understand why people are very frustrated that some people who vote for the Conservatives seem to be happy ignoring the impact that their policies have on some of the weakest in society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 15:48
That's a perfectly decent position to take.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 27 Oct 16:03
I have never understood why anyone unless they went to a private school and their ancestors bought and sold slaves or have an offshore tax haven would vote Tory
The right to buy policy of Thatcher/Heseltine sucked a few in as they now owned their cooncil house instead of renting so they should vote Tory
We all have our different beliefs and ideology's I know people who vote Tory one of my old pals votes Tory some on this forum vote Tory but they do not deserve to be called scum
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 16:35
What is so offensive about the word "scum"?
Rasta even provided examples to illustrate why he holds this position.
I have yet to see any real attempt at explaining why it is inherently wrong for him to do so.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 16:41
“You would address the content too if you disagreed, right parbucks? I'm pretty sure that it would be beneath you to use an attack on somebody's tone as an excuse to avoid discussing the content.”
Wotsit you seem to be a bit of an apologist for Rasta and his inflammatory remarks. I do object to his tone and consider his remarks so offensive and irrational that attempting to debate them would be a waste of my time.
Thank you for asking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 16:45
I'm often accused of being PC about language, but even I draw the line and have no problem whatsoever with criticising people for choices they have deliberately and consciously taken.
Seriously, what kind of free-speech thieving snowflake would object to that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 16:59
So Wotsit you have no objection, though perhaps not seeing as you voted for Brexit, that mp's who are campaigning to remain are routinely branded 'traitors' and 'enemy of the people'.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 17:17
Depends who's doing it and for what reason to be honest.
Say the Prime Minister does it at the dispatch box in a calculated way?
I'd probably be more critical of that than I would if Rasta did it here, in front of about a dozen punters, in an impassioned way. Not least because there are differences in the potential for negative social consequence.
I wouldn't stop the PM saying it, but it would make me less likely to vote for them and, since I'm unlikely to vote for Rasta to begin with, his sense of restraint is less important to me.
It's a bit like when Jerry Sadowitz laid into Jimmy Saville in the 1980s or when John Lydon did the same - I was supportive of them and the things they said, but I would be less supportive had the PM siad it in the same way.
Despite my team, I don't think of the world as black and white.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 17:22
Good so you don't believe then that just because someone votes Conservative that makes them scum because that would be a very black and white way of determining someone's character.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 17:34
I never said that I did.
I said that they were all responsible for some very scummy things.
I also said that I was surprised by the degree of vitriol directed at Rasta for what he said. It's not an uncommon viewpoint among those who have experienced the devastation of Tory scumminess.
To be fair, the Tories do create some jobs. I'm a homeless outreach worker and they are definitely creating plenty work for me and my colleagues. Pity they seem to want us to do it for free.
I'm an eye witness to the sharp end of the devastation, and that's not hyperbole, I have personally witnessed austerity policies devastate people's lives, with at least one avoidable death each week just amongst folk I personally worked with.
I previously worked with teenage school non-attenders, in their homes. Again, there were clear signs of lives and families devastated by austerity. The deaths were less regular but the needless suffering was no less.
People who voted for that need to take a look at themselves, and I'd sooner be directing my ire at them than at some dude who calls them scum for supporting scummy activities.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 17:48
Can't you be critical of government policies and and also be against inflammatory language? Anyway you don't believe that the way a person votes defines their entire identity so that'll do me. By the way the Lib Dems also implemented austerity. I don't believe that Lib Dem voters are scum either.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sun 27 Oct 17:49
Quote:
Wotsit, Sun 27 Oct 17:34
I never said that I did.
I said that they were all responsible for some very scummy things.
I also said that I was surprised by the degree of vitriol directed at Rasta for what he said. It's not an uncommon viewpoint among those who have experienced the devastation of Tory scumminess.
To be fair, the Tories do create some jobs. I'm a homeless outreach worker and they are definitely creating plenty work for me and my colleagues. Pity they seem to want us to do it for free.
I'm an eye witness to the sharp end of the devastation, and that's not hyperbole, I have personally witnessed austerity policies devastate people's lives, with at least one avoidable death each week just amongst folk I personally worked with.
I previously worked with teenage school non-attenders, in their homes. Again, there were clear signs of lives and families devastated by austerity. The deaths were less regular but the needless suffering was no less.
People who voted for that need to take a look at themselves, and I'd sooner be directing my ire at them than at some dude who calls them scum for supporting scummy activities.
Superb post, thanks for your prospective
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 18:10
I don't believe that Lib Dem voters are scum either.
I tend not to distinguish much between LibDems and Remainer Tories these days. They, too, need to have a look at themselves for the devastation they enacted.
What level of devastation would a person have to support for you to at least be neutral (as I am here) to the use of inflammatory language? What if Rasta had categorised those who supported Stalin's policies a scum? Would you have directed the same level of vitriol at him?
What if he had said that "people who still enjoy Garry Glitter's music are scum"?
He's still using one aspect of them to paint them as scum, but I'm pretty certain that there would have been nobody calling him out for it. Probably more agreement than anything, And rightly so; if people choose to continue to support Garry Glitter in any fashion then they are pretty scummy. Maybe not necessarily [i[]all scum but definitely exhibiting some pretty scumlike behaviours.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 18:44
In any fashion? Like watching a movie that prominently features a Glitter song? I wouldn't class people that have watched The Joker movie scum. While I certainly wouldn't listen to Glitter anymore (would struggle to name more than two of his songs) music but we are getting into the whole art or the artist debate.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 18:46
By the way you'll struggle to find any vitriol from me aimed at Rasta.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 27 Oct 19:05
You have an unenviable array of point avoiding tactics art your disposal right enough TOWK.
However to humour you once more:
I meant people who enjoy Glitter's music in a way which materially benefits Glitter, since that would be analogous to voting Tory rather than simply agreeing with a few policies (which wouldn't even be analogous to watching a film where Glitter's music is presented in, from what understand, an unflattering and contextually relevant fashion).
Back to this though - it has nothing to do with art or artists - it's about language and its calling out: when is it reasonable to do so.
By the way you'll struggle to find any vitriol from me aimed at Rasta.
Yeah, that was hyperbole on my part, I won't lie! So was the incessant repetition of certain key words but I won't apologise for that since it was just annoying. I will apologise for accusing you of vitriol though - fair's fair, it was unreasonable hyperbole.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Jbob
Date: Sun 27 Oct 19:10
Name calling- great stuff.
Bobs of the world unite
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 27 Oct 19:27
wotsit
you have my greatest respect for the work you are doing and I mean that... also you see the real suffering and pain caused by the austerity programme at grass roots level
This does not however grant you carte blanch or indeed your franchise for the use of the words scum scummy scumminess etc etc which has become your rather embarrassing mantra .....Is John Cleese writing your posts ? ...or indeed your defence of rasta who has not had any vitriol directed toward him or his.. quote :-restrained words .. unquote...but genuine reply's to his ambiguous posts
Calm doon Laddie
Now to answer the ops post ..... A horrible hoor :-)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
Post Edited (Sun 27 Oct 19:44)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 20:30
My problem is with the language used and in this case specifically the word scum. For me it's hugely provocative and insulting word. Maybe for others it's a tamer word. Of course its a free country and people can to a great extent say whatever they want. However I genuinely believe that if you were to ask most people to name an individual they regard as scum some names that would crop up are Huntley, Whiting, Madoff. You know people that have directly committed heinous acts and crimes. Yes maybe some politicians would be mentioned as well. I'm not sure many would put the old dear that lives at the end of the street, you know who I'm talking about, she picks up her grandbairn from the school on a Friday, bakes cakes for the church coffee morning, always smiles and says hello when she passes you, has a conservative outlook votes Tory, had done all her days. Yeah I don't think many would class her as scum for her political leanings. See there is no nuance in branding millions of people scum.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Sun 27 Oct 20:48
Of course scum usually rises to the top.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 27 Oct 20:50
Much tamer for me.....and even if it wasnt it.....what's in a word? Havent you ever heard "Sticks and stones will break my bones and send me to a privatised health service"?
Buspasspar.....you've kind of undermined your whole post with the close in my humble one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 27 Oct 20:51
Quote:
moviescot, Sun 27 Oct 20:48
Of course scum usually rises to the top.
And hampers the ability for that below it to prosper 😉
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Sun 27 Oct 21:12
Ref: Rastapari
Fri 25 Oct 08:2
<<< She was Tory scum like all the rest of the Tory scum and their scum supporters, dedicated to hurting the poor and [those] in need of help. >>>
If by 'supporters' you include voters, isn't this discrimination? Defining a section of society by a single shared feature. A bit like saying all supporters of a particular football club are scum. But it can't be true that the tea lady of said football club is as bad as the owner or BOD can it ? Similarly it can't be valid to claim that all those who vote for a particular political Party are as bad as the leaders of said Party.
People vote for a Party for many different reasons. No doubt some would wish to hurt the poor and those in need, but only some. Others are duped into believing, for example, that said Party is best at managing the economy, which is good for everyone, so it is said. Or, like my grandad, some vote for a particular Party all their lives, maybe because it was tradition - maybe because of where they lived.
I once worked as a carer for a poor lady who extolled to me the virtues of Mrs Thatcher. I said to my wife, "She votes for her oppressors." That poor woman wasn't scum. Honest. Nobody in their right mind could think that of her. People vote for all different reasons. Some Tory voters don't give a monkey's turd for anyone, but you'd be amazed to find that many Tory voters are just as good people - and I daresay some are even better - than you and I, Rasta.
It would be so easy if all the bastards voted for one Party and all the good folks for another, but they don't.
You don't really believe they do, do you?
Post Edited (Sun 27 Oct 22:13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Oct 21:19
Well you just summed up in one post what I struggled and failed to convey in half a dozen.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Sun 27 Oct 21:39
You have to feel for Rasta. His gullible swallowing of every nonce allegation blew up in his face. Back to the old anti Semitic holocaust quibblling one supposes.
As for cheeseball Wotsit, his self awarded halos for all that selfless good work he never ceases to bore us with have multiplied to the extent he needs two bedposts to hang them on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Sun 27 Oct 22:07
Ref: The One Who Knocks
Sun 27 Oct 13:57
<<< When sections of society start getting labelled scum it tends to be a slippery slope thereafter. >>>
A slippery slope to
discrimination, intolerance, demonising.
You're better than that, Rasta. We should all be better than that.
Post Edited (Sun 27 Oct 22:11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Mon 28 Oct 01:43
Nothing wrong with judging people based on their freely made choices.
If people choose to place themselves into a box then I may well come along and label that box.
What I don't feel that I have any right to do is to place people into boxes - they have to pick their own, or none.
Whichever rationale was used to get into the box is immaterial, once people start dying is when it's time to find a new box - the doors aren't locked.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Mon 28 Oct 04:57
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Mon 28 Oct 06:47
Quote:
Mario, Sun 27 Oct 21:39
You have to feel for Rasta. His gullible swallowing of every nonce allegation blew up in his face. Back to the old anti Semitic holocaust quibblling one supposes.
As for cheeseball Wotsit, his self awarded halos for all that selfless good work he never ceases to bore us with have multiplied to the extent he needs two bedposts to hang them on.
Trying too hard there chum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Mon 28 Oct 11:11
Ref: Wotsit
Mon 28 Oct 01:43
<<< Nothing wrong with judging people based on their freely made choices.
If people choose to place themselves into a box then I may well come along and label that box.
What I don't feel that I have any right to do is to place people into boxes - they have to pick their own, or none.
Whichever rationale was used to get into the box is immaterial, once people start dying is when it's time to find a new box - the doors aren't locked.>>>
Wotsit,
Your post boils down to this:
1. People have been dying because of austerity.
2. The Tories are the ones who imposed austerity.
3. Therefore anyone who votes Tory agrees with imposing austerity and causing deaths.
What can be wrong with that?
There's nothing wrong with being anti-austerity and not wanting people to die because of it. It's admirable that you feel that way.
But with your implication (Number 3 above,) you're making a classic mistake of logic that you believe justifies your extreme prejudice. Also, your boxes and labels seem to indicate you judge people very easily and have little idea of how complex people can be and how various can be their reasons for voting as they do.
Here's how it looks to me:
One PM (Cameron)
One Chancellor (Osborne)
21 other Cabinet Members
approx. 13 million Tory voters
Seems as if each Tory voter might be one 13 millionth responsible for austerity?
But wait, having voted, they played no part WHATSOEVER in the government's decision-making. That was ALL down to the PM and Cabinet, thinking and acting as they saw fit.
It's like a football club. During a match, one of the players kicks the lineswoman. Who is responsible? The player? Management? Everyone who supports the club? All equally scum?
I wonder if part of the reason you think as you do is because blaming the PM and Cabinet, though logical, seems futile, so you pick on the voters.
I'm not saying the voters are blameless. They're just not anywhere near as culpable. Some are bar stewards, some are gullible. For some, voting is the toss of a coin. I believe most have far more in common with you and I than you would think if it were based on how we vote.
BTW I'm a life-long Labour voter. Did anyone guess?
Post Edited (Mon 28 Oct 12:00)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 28 Oct 12:37
You would hope someone who votes for a particular party knows something about its policies from its election manifesto, party political broadcasts, televised debates, news, social media etc as well how that party has acted in the past. If the party sticks to that I don't see how a voter can wash his/her hands of the policies followed and say 'It wisnae me!'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Mon 28 Oct 12:38
The voters gave them their mandate.
Austerity would never have been imposed had people not voted for it.
It's not like it was hidden behind the Tories' backs - they made it the centrepoint of their campaign, they were deeply proud of it.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 28 Oct 12:57
The issue we have is that turkey's genuinely DO vote for Christmas. People on low incomes are fed drivel about foriegners taking their jobs, homes, benefits, GP appointments on a daily basis. So all it takes is a party to say they'll keep Johnny foriegner out and people will vote.
People don't read manifestos. They believe what they hear in the media. That doesn't mean they're stupid, it's what they're being told and they don't have time to do their own research .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Mon 28 Oct 13:02
Ref: wee eck
Mon 28 Oct 12:37
<<< You would hope someone who votes for a particular party knows something about its policies from its election manifesto, party political broadcasts, televised debates, news, social media etc as well how that party has acted in the past. If the party sticks to that I don't see how a voter can wash his/her hands of the policies followed and say 'It wisnae me!'. >>>
All supposition wee eck. And it doesn't alter the fact that a voter has almost nothing to do with choices made in Cabinet.
Post Edited (Mon 28 Oct 17:02)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Mon 28 Oct 13:03
Quote:
onandupthepars, Mon 28 Oct 13:02
Ref: wee eck
Mon 28 Oct 12:37
<<< You would hope someone who votes for a particular party knows something about its policies from its election manifesto, party political broadcasts, televised debates, news, social media etc as well how that party has acted in the past. If the party sticks to that I don't see how a voter can wash his/her hands of the policies followed and say 'It wisnae me!'. >>>
All supposition wee eck. And it doesn't alter the fact that a voter has almost nothing to do with choices made in Cabinet.
They do if they keep going back to said party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Mon 28 Oct 13:25
The decisions in question were taken at the ballot box oautp - the Tories quite proudly announced what they were going to do. There was no deception.
I doubt that anybody voted Tory being unaware of their policy here.
Some people may have voted Tory despite this of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 28 Oct 13:28
''All supposition wee eck. And it doesn't alter the fact that a voter has nothing to do with choices made in Cabinet.''
Was anyone surprised by the Tories' policies? They've always favoured the well-off at the expense of the poor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Mon 28 Oct 13:59
Ref: Rastapari
Mon 28 Oct 13:03
<<<They do if they keep going back to said party.>>>
there are two points there, you are saying:
1. 'They do' NOT 'have almost nothing to do with choices made in Cabinet.'
2. 'if they keep going back to said party.'
Why do they keep going back to said Party? They vote for a Party on a whole range of issues and, for example, propoganda reinforces what they were told before, that more austerity is necessary for the economy to recover.
Ref: Rastapari
Fri 25 Oct 08:28
<<< She was Tory scum like all the rest of the Tory scum and their scum supporters, dedicated to hurting the poor and [those] in need of help>>>
If you honestly think ALL Tory voters vote for the purpose of hurting the poor and those in need of help, just think about one exception. I gave an example previously of a poor woman who voted Tory , against her own interests as it seemed to me, because she was a fan of Mrs Thatcher's personality - nothing to do with policies. Other folk have given other examples of Tory voters who are exceptions to your rule. They are real people. It doesn't take much imagination to realise there must be many many more who don't fit your mould or wotsit's boxes and labels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Mon 28 Oct 14:13
That woman is culpable too.
"I didn't mean for all those people to get murdered, I just quite liked the murderer. Even after they told me about all the murders they were planning" doesn't cut it, sorry.
I suppose, however, that she's less culpable than the ones who only started to like the murderer after they found out about the murders.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Mon 28 Oct 14:20
No Wotsit, that woman was not very intelligent. She was impressed by Thatcher's personality and that's all she cared to know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Mon 28 Oct 14:32
Is personal responsibility proportionate to IQ now?
Because if it is I'm due a massive refund!
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Tue 29 Oct 06:38
So really all we've come up with is if you vote Tory you are scum or stupid?
Sounds about right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Tue 29 Oct 11:54
No what we've come up with is that you're either obsessed with being confrontational or you have a very selective way of looking at people. Which seems to bely those times when you have sincerely apologised for being an eejit. Everybody's one sometimes, including you and me, the Pope, Archbishop, Pars fans, Falkirk fans, Tory voters and Labour voters.
Post Edited (Tue 29 Oct 12:03)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 29 Oct 12:49
Getting back to the original subject, RD has confirmed she won't be taking up this job whilst she is an MSP. She should have thought harder about this when offered it. The lack of judgement shown by politicians is astonishing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Tue 29 Oct 18:30
It's simple...Tories harm those that life's already thrown bum deal to in order for the very rich to be richer.
If you are good with that then crack on and reconcile what you can.....I will always see that and the support of it...from those that purport to be the man in the street...as what it is...cruel and unnecessary...and befitting of every slur thrown in it's mirror shy face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Tue 29 Oct 20:01
Not as simple as that, Rasta. The way I see it there is no perfect party to vote for. Yes, the Tories have a tendency to feather their nests at the expense of the poor, but then Labour appear to have no plan, the Lib Dems plan appears to focus on being the remain party, the Brexit Party...The SNP are making questionable decisions and the Greens will neve be elected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Tue 29 Oct 23:04
Quote:
Rastapari, Tue 29 Oct 18:30
It's simple...Tories harm those that life's already thrown bum deal to in order for the very rich to be richer.
If you are good with that then crack on and reconcile what you can.....I will always see that and the support of it...from those that purport to be the man in the street...as what it is...cruel and unnecessary...and befitting of every slur thrown in it's mirror shy face.
A better post than your scum post (for which I had some sympathy). I must say I agree more or less wholeheartedly with your sentiment.
Post Edited (Tue 29 Oct 23:05)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 30 Oct 01:01
Ref: Rastapari
Tue 29 Oct 18:30
<<< It's simple...Tories harm those that life's already thrown bum deal to in order for the very rich to be richer.
If you are good with that then crack on and reconcile what you can.....I will always see that and the support of it...from those that purport to be the man in the street...as what it is...cruel and unnecessary...and befitting of every slur thrown in it's mirror shy face.>>>
Do you know any Tory voters at all?
How do they seem to you?
Do you think the examples on this thread, of Tory voters such as the woman I mentioned and Fred, mentioned by BussPar (Fri 25 Oct 21:09) fit the scum category?
There's also my grandad, a miner who voted Tory all his life - guess what? It was normal in his social circle. (BTW he wasn't wealthy. Never owned a house, not even a car. Left a few hundred quid when he died.)
Johnson and Rees-Mogg. Now there's scum.
Give abuse where abuse is due.
Post Edited (Wed 30 Oct 08:31)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Wed 30 Oct 08:13
And again the Tories trying to blame the fire fighters for Grenfel.....any Tories on here want to justify their choice?
What about those folk? What sympathy do they deserve?
I used to know a few Tories, now I don't, I will not be in the company of those who support the harming of the vulnerable for the benefit of billionaires.
They were to a man/woman....distasteful...selfish, greedy, everything you would expect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 30 Oct 09:00
I hope you're Ok today.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 30 Oct 09:13
Ref: Rastapari
Wed 30 Oct 08:13
The Tory voters you knew were 'distasteful...selfish, greedy.'
I know some folk like that. I see one in the mirror every day. Oh. he's a life-long Labour voter!
I don't think you should let your anger against certain individuals determine how you think of millions of others who happen to vote for the same political Party. I believe that's wrong-thinking - where you take what you think of a small group of people and generalise it to a much bigger group.
Post Edited (Wed 30 Oct 10:16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Wed 30 Oct 10:17
Meanwhile Mrs Murrell has been ensconced in Holyrood for yonks and her hubby has been the SNP heid office boy for 20 years.
Accrued a cool couple of million quid between them Helmet hairdo gets hers off the tax payer, and baldy hubby leeches the party members.
Tartan Tories eh...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 30 Oct 10:56
Sorry link disnae work
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
Post Edited (Wed 30 Oct 19:40)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Wed 30 Oct 12:27
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 30 Oct 12:46
Has the Scottish Labour Party's election campaign started already?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Wed 30 Oct 13:08
Quote:
Mario, Wed 30 Oct 10:17
Meanwhile Mrs Murrell has been ensconced in Holyrood for yonks and her hubby has been the SNP heid office boy for 20 years.
Accrued a cool couple of million quid between them Helmet hairdo gets hers off the tax payer, and baldy hubby leeches the party members.
Tartan Tories eh...
This is why nobody takes you seriously when all you resort to is childish name calling.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Wed 30 Oct 13:18
Quote:
Mario, Wed 30 Oct 10:17
Meanwhile Mrs Murrell has been ensconced in Holyrood for yonks and her hubby has been the SNP heid office boy for 20 years.
Accrued a cool couple of million quid between them Helmet hairdo gets hers off the tax payer, and baldy hubby leeches the party members.
Tartan Tories eh...
Ha ha ha, you come over as a bitter auld man, must be hard for you living in a foreign country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Wed 30 Oct 19:11
Even worse for you in the good old UK!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 30 Oct 19:37
Quote :-
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Wed 30 Oct 08:13
And again the Tories trying to blame the fire fighters for Grenfel.....any Tories on here want to justify their choice?
Rasta I don't think the report lays the blame at the firefighters the foot soldiers so to speak the guys who tried at the risk of their own life to save others as is always the case
This is a blame on the people who run the LFB the protocol the procedures and the system
The very night/day of the fire eyewitness reports concluded massive mis- information and confusion
Go back in the building... stay in the building .... help is on its way
Now add to that the cuts by T May and the fact the LFB did not even have the proper high rise equipment to tackle such a scenario then T May has even more blood on her hands
Should Dany Cotton resign?..... bloody right she should .... her lack of leadership/experience has cost many deaths and her lack of remorse and her deflection of important questions speak volumes ..... murder inquiry maybe ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Wed 30 Oct 21:47
She’s not resigning, she’s not getting sacked, she’s retiring early with a big fat pension
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 31 Oct 08:12
Quote:
Mario, Wed 30 Oct 21:47
She’s not resigning, she’s not getting sacked, she’s retiring early with a big fat pension
She's not the only one who's going to get a big fat pension Wee Nic comes to mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Thu 31 Oct 08:42
I think you'll find the Tory scum are absolutely trying to blame the for fighters.
Lower than snake pi5h.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Thu 31 Oct 10:19
Prove it..give us a link where any politician of any hue has blamed the firefighters on the ground.
The Fire Chief was criticised for lack of sensitivity for saying she saw no reason why she wouldn’t do exactly the same again. As a courtesy she got advance notice of the report and the scathing findings regarding her actions, or lack of them.
Soon as she sees that she cuts and runs. At least 5 years earlier than expected and with a £2m pension pot.
Nick nonce cops did much the same
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Thu 31 Oct 10:25
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Thu 31 Oct 10:37
Give us a quote then..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Thu 31 Oct 10:41
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Thu 31 Oct 10:57
That’s not a quote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 31 Oct 11:25
Quote:
Mario, Wed 30 Oct 21:47
She’s not resigning, she’s not getting sacked, she’s retiring early with a big fat pension
That she paid for, 16% of her wages over 30 years?
Bit like all the Dockyard guys packing in just now, all walking out with their golden wheelbarrows full of cash!
Post Edited (Thu 31 Oct 11:26)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 31 Oct 13:23
If buildings were built to the proper standards then disasters like this would not happen.
Strange that after 9/11 firefighters are treated as heroes, here in UK they are crucified, maybe if a few of them had died it might have been different!!
Follow the money trail and the causes, if BJ hadn't sold off the fire stations to his property developer pals there might have been adequate personnel to carry out evacuation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 31 Oct 17:43
Is it reasonable to communicate using only petty insults then expect rigour and substance from others?
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Fri 1 Nov 07:06
Poor Mario hasn't got over being outed as Tam's pocket pal...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 1 Nov 08:50
Pocket pal? Careful that sounds like name calling. I'll expect all those who had a pop at Mario will be equally appalled.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
Post Edited (Fri 01 Nov 11:19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Fri 1 Nov 09:25
Erased.
Post Edited (Sat 02 Nov 17:00)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Sat 2 Nov 08:06
Oh, someone's triggered😂
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Sat 2 Nov 09:41
Oooh someone’s 🎣
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Sat 2 Nov 16:57
🏳️
Mine’s gone
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sun 17 Nov 17:25
Ruth's in the news again. From 'The Herald' :-
''RUTH Davidson has been signed up to appear on ITV’s General Election night coverage – for an “unprecedented” sum of money.
Broadcast sources claim the former Scottish Conservatives leader had been approached by the BBC to join their election night programming only to discover she had already agreed to appear on the independent network’s main UK-wide coverage.
A source said the payment on offer was “unprecedented” for such a stint, while politicians say it is "highly unusual" for a serving elected member to be paid at all.''
|
|
|
|
|
|
