Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 06 Jun '09 12:55
    What do you think about the latest resignations? and Gordon Browns leadership

    Is there a healthy adjustment going on? Are our liberties slipping, or are people more aware of them?


    Personally there seems to be shift and i think its for the good. I respect Gordon brown he has good ideas on the best way forward, the G20 sumit was a success. but he lacks a democratic mandate. And the govt seem quite week in dissaray at present.

    Also people seem to be moving away from the big parties. I'll vote green at the next election. i don't agree with them 100% but want more of this discussion. If there is a good liberal party. they could get my vote. It looks like we'll be in a coalition of some sort...

    The media has not helped. although we have good papers n TV they have been focusing to much on politicians private lives an not enough on there poliices. I don't care about Jacquie Smiths expenses much. But her polices are quite controversial and need proper discussion. they should be on the front pages , the papers are doing the job criticizing them.

    Also think the EU elections need better publicity & coverage...


    will stop ranting, just my view please post
  2. 06 Jun '09 14:35
    Originally posted by Black Star Uchess
    What do you think about the latest resignations? and Gordon Browns leadership

    Is there a healthy adjustment going on? Are our liberties slipping, or are people more aware of them?


    Personally there seems to be shift and i think its for the good. I respect Gordon brown he has good ideas on the best way forward, the G20 sumit was a success. ...[text shortened]... ons need better publicity & coverage...


    will stop ranting, just my view please post
    Britain doesn't want democracy, thats a fact.

    Gordon Brown will not get out of no10, he will stay there for the next year so that he and his colleagues (Mr.Darling for example, who is proven to be a liar, but won't resign or be removed) can suck some more money out of the treasure.

    Are our liberties slipping, or are people more aware of them?

    what are these liberties you speak of? there isn't even a constitution stating liberties.

    not enough on there poliices

    Thats because they don't have policies, they're the same but with different colors and names.
  3. Subscriber deriver69
    Keeps
    06 Jun '09 17:12
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Britain doesn't want democracy, thats a fact.

    Not sure how many british would agree with that. I did wonder though if we would be better off scrapping elections and instead having a representative chosen at random from each area a bit like the way a jury is selected. (It could be done in a more exciting manner, maybe on tv hosted by Dale Winton).

    It might be cheaper, more democratic and get rid of that nasty beast the career politician.
  4. 06 Jun '09 17:18
    Originally posted by deriver69
    Not sure how many british would agree with that. I did wonder though if we would be better off scrapping elections and instead having a representative chosen at random from each area a bit like the way a jury is selected. (It could be done in a more exciting manner, maybe on tv hosted by Dale Winton).

    It might be cheaper, more democratic and get rid of that nasty beast the career politician.
    If the British wanted democracy they'd get rid of the present system.

    Where is all the anger over the MPs' expenses?
  5. 06 Jun '09 19:34 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by generalissimo[/i]
    Britain doesn't want democracy, thats a fact.

    Gordon Brown will not get out of no10, he will stay there for the next year so that he and his colleagues (Mr.Darling for example, who is proven to be a liar, but won't resign or be removed) can suck some more money out of the treasure.

    Are our liberties slipping, or are people more aware of them?[ ats because they don't have policies, they're the same but with different colors and names.[/b]
    with respect i think you are wrong here..

    I see england and the US as quite similar with 2 big parties. although we are like Europe to in that historically we have had 3 parties the liberals are just weak right now. all 3 are .

    but the US does 2 party politics better in that there is a constitution of rights. you say 'what rights do i speak off'. to be able to walk home without being stopped and searched or ,, freedom of information especially that held on you. . countries where this slip become bad places to live.

    labour and conservatives alone don't have the polices to reflect peoples view anymore we need more ideas in the system,
  6. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    07 Jun '09 01:02 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Where is all the anger over the MPs' expenses?
    If you were following the news you wouldn't ask such silly questions.

    what are these liberties you speak of? there isn't even a constitution stating liberties.

    I can never understand why you choose to parade your political illiteracy in the way you do.
  7. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    07 Jun '09 01:21
    Originally posted by Black Star Uchess
    What do you think about the latest resignations? and Gordon Browns leadership

    Is there a healthy adjustment going on? Are our liberties slipping, or are people more aware of them?


    Personally there seems to be shift and i think its for the good. I respect Gordon brown he has good ideas on the best way forward, the G20 sumit was a success. ...[text shortened]... ons need better publicity & coverage...


    will stop ranting, just my view please post
    From my safe distance from the motherland, I must say that this is one of the most enthralling episodes in post war British political history. In terms of what the British people want or what they are willing to tolerate, the 12 years of Labour seem to have been of more benefit to more people than Thatcher's 12 years, the utterly back of a fag packet nature of this calculation notwithstanding! But so many factors are in play now, it is intriguing. Here's what The Economist said in its latest edition:

    Why not have an election now? That, after all, is what polls show voters want. But two factors argue against an immediate election. The first is that the Tories are probably not as ready for government as they claim. The bigger reason, though, is that an election campaign now would be dominated by discussion of second homes, moats and duck houses—not subjects which should determine the shape of a five-year parliament.

    The British people are understandably furious with their rulers. Bad MPs need to be got rid of: some of the worst ones have already said they will stand down. Party leaders—and Mr Brown in particular—should be quicker to push out the fiddlers. Parliament’s rules need to be changed, but there is an independent review headed by Sir Christopher Kelly looking into that, which is due to report in October. It could surely be chivvied into producing its thoughts sooner. The scandal has led to broader talk of constitutional reform—a good idea in itself but an election fought around hastily cooked-up ideas in the current climate could be disastrous.

    And yet with all this talk of the timing of the election, one cannot escape the firm conviction that, whatever its timing may be, the next British Government will be a Conservative one. This lends all this staggering around, clutching mortal woulds, lurching from headline to headline, a kind of otherworldliness. In fact, 1992-1997 comes readily to mind. But that resulted in the election of Blair, in a swirl of almost unprecedented popularity. The next election, amidst the gloom and debris of a world financial crisis, is not going to be 1997esque. Nothing like it. One looks on agog, quite frankly.
  8. 07 Jun '09 16:04
    Originally posted by FMF
    If you were following the news you wouldn't ask such silly questions.

    [b]what are these liberties you speak of? there isn't even a constitution stating liberties.


    I can never understand why you choose to parade your political illiteracy in the way you do.[/b]
    If you were following the news you wouldn't ask such silly questions.

    Oh, yes, I forgot about the riots, and people demanding the PM to step down, oh wait, they didn't do that.

    I can never understand why you choose to parade your political illiteracy in the way you do.

    Where is the British constitution Queen of hypocrisy?
  9. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    07 Jun '09 16:08
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Where is the British constitution [...]?
    Are you completely politically illiterate?

    I could give you some web links to stuff about British history, if you want.

    I've alerted the Moderator about your Queen of Hypocrisy thing.
  10. 07 Jun '09 16:41
    Originally posted by FMF
    Are you completely politically illiterate?

    I could give you some web links to stuff about British history, if you want.

    I've alerted the Moderator about your Queen of Hypocrisy thing.
    I've alerted the Moderator about your Queen of Hypocrisy thing.

    Is this Mr./Mrs. serious FMF or Mr./Mrs. fooling FMF speaking?

    I could give you some web links to stuff about British history, if you want.

    No, I'd rather have the constitution you are talking about.
  11. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    07 Jun '09 16:55
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    I'd rather have the constitution you are talking about.
    Look it up. The foundations of British democracy and civil rights are very interesting. The fact that you don't know about it does not make for very compelling posts on your part. But go ahead, by all means. It's a free country.
  12. 07 Jun '09 16:57
    Originally posted by FMF
    Look it up. The foundations of British democracy and civil rights are very interesting. The fact that you don't know about it does not make for very compelling posts on your part. But go ahead, by all means. It's a free country.
    "foundations" is not a physical constitution.

    The fact that you don't know about it does not make for very compelling posts on your part.

    Untrue, I do know about it.
  13. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    07 Jun '09 17:01
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Untrue, I do know about it.
    So what's with this "I don't know anything - it's the Land of Lunacy - you're the Queen of Hypocrisy with a "litte" brain" - imbecile act?

    What are people supposed to make of you, generalissimo?

    Are you satirizing dimwittedness, or what?
  14. 08 Jun '09 09:26
    Originally posted by FMF
    So what's with this "I don't know anything - it's the Land of Lunacy - you're the Queen of Hypocrisy with a "litte" brain" - imbecile act?

    What are people supposed to make of you, generalissimo?

    Are you satirizing dimwittedness, or what?
    What are people supposed to make of you,

    I asked you the same question a while ago, why don't you aswer me first?