Is it wrong of me to say that I still don't give a shit and still won't vote for any of the self aggrandising arseholes who put themselves up for election whether it be for Ingerlund, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
Whoever wins won't give a toss about me and will do nothing to change my situation and as a result I really can't give a rats arse about any of it.
Politics - complete bollocks.
It's all me, me, me that phrase isn't it? Don't worry I'm sure all the major political parties will have items in their manifestos to specifically improve the lot of JWADDICK.
Perhaps you could do something yourself to improve your situation rather than rely upon others?
If there isn't going to be another independence vote for a 'generation or even a lifetime' then why would even the most rabid Scottish Nationalist bother voting for them?
Perhaps we could replace Salmond with Farge?
Salmond and the rest of the SNP have made it abundantly clear since last Friday that, despite various safeguards included in the Edinburgh Agreement to stop this issue from being a 'neverendum', they will never drop the issue of independence and are making preparations to include another independence referendum as their key policy pledge in their next Scottish Parliament election manifesto. It is also likely they will use Scottish ill-feeling towards how Westminster acted during the referendum that has just passed to try and legitimise holding another referendum without a legal instrument in Westminster authorising a second referendum to be held.
The SNP will, otherwise, continue as a left-of-centre force within Scotland and continue to lobby Westminster to devolve further powers to Scotland or to give Scotland further autonomy. According to them they are the largest party in Scotland, I don't see many of those members jumping ship just because independence is off the table for time-being (indeed, most people probably thought the referendum was a lost cause before they even got one and so will be galvanised by how strong their support surged during the campaign).
Scotland is generally a left-of-centre country and the Conservatives and Lib-Dems will face being pariahs in that country for quite some time I imagine. That leaves two left-of-centre parties, Labour and SNP, to be the two parties fighting for the majority of seats both in Westminster and Holyrood. More and more Scots are waking up to realise that Labour, both in Scotland and across the UK, are a busted flush, and I imagine Labour will suffer in Scotland in both 2015 and the next Scottish Parliament elections.
If there isn't going to be another independence vote for a 'generation or even a lifetime' then why would even the most rabid Scottish Nationalist bother voting for them?
Perhaps we could replace Salmond with Farge?
That leaves two left-of-centre parties, Labour and SNP, to be the two parties fighting for the majority of seats both in Westminster and Holyrood.
As stated last night the SNP are coming out with the comical line that the party accepts the stated will of the people but as individuals they won't change their own opinion on the cause they have been fighting for all their adult lives. So they do not respect article 30 in the slightest and are lining up for cries of Westminster betrayal and another vote if devo max isn't granted by the end of the month! I would game them and give them all the powers and see how popular they are when they can't balance the books without service cuts and/or tax rises. Why would anyone agree to another vote when they don't respect this one? The issue is closed unless of course Salmond resorts to protest and that doesn't go anywhere... Cameron may think he was being decisive but he has failed to look at how his statement will look next month let alone the next election. And he clearly has no ambition to expand on the tories solitary seat in Scotland.
I know it is popular belief that politicians don't honour their pledges to the electorate but to come out within hours of the vote placing caveats on promises without consulting anyone is not good. Milliband doesn't excite many but he does come across as strategic and honourable - perhaps he or some other political opponent will expose Cameron next May. Salmond and Farage have painted a narrow nationalist agenda and as posted before its up to the mainstream parties to take up the challenge and put out some positive policies. Stirring up a Pandora's box of changes to the constitutional reform constructed on the back of a fag packet and playing to the UKIP tune is not a positive policy and no good will come of it.
If you had just voted no on the last referendum vote I can imagine you'd be pretty fukd off being told that you have to do it again as you got it wrong last time you meant and Shouldve voted yes
Any vote in the very foreseeable future on yes or no will not be tolerated
Is it wrong of me to say that I still don't give a shit and still won't vote for any of the self aggrandising arseholes who put themselves up for election whether it be for Ingerlund, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
Whoever wins wont give a toss about me and will do nothing to change my situation and as a result I really can't give a rats arse about any of it.
Politics - complete bollocks.
So how does anything get done/changed then without the force of arms or oppression?
Personally I have voted in every election since I turned 18 including council elections. I have never yet voted for a candidate who won. It won't stop me voting because if I opt out, I will have let them do things which are not in my name and taken no responsibility for trying to do something about it.
The right to vote has been hard won, it is coveted by people across the world who do not have that right. Imagine if the oppressed people of the world could throw off their oppressors by the exercise of their right of self - determination?
We are very lucky to live in a democracy - but it's not perfect. You have a right to engage or nor engage but don't belittle the process - if you hate what they stand for take the argument to them? It's your right but in a democracy it's also yours (and everyone elses) duty to hold politicians to account.
Is it wrong of me to say that I still don't give a shit and still won't vote for any of the self aggrandising arseholes who put themselves up for election whether it be for Ingerlund, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
Whoever wins won't give a toss about me and will do nothing to change my situation and as a result I really can't give a rats arse about any of it.
Politics - complete bollocks.
I assume you will still attend the polling station to spoil your ballot, right?
If there isn't going to be another independence vote for a 'generation or even a lifetime' then why would even the most rabid Scottish Nationalist bother voting for them?
Perhaps we could replace Salmond with Farge?
That leaves two left-of-centre parties, Labour and SNP, to be the two parties fighting for the majority of seats both in Westminster and Holyrood.
Like two bald headed men fighting over a comb.
And that raises another interesting point. The overhead shot from the debate at the House of Commons yesterday clearly showed that a large majority of MPs are male, old and folically challenged. Yet the leaders of the main parties (and indeed, UKIP) all have a fairly full head of hair. Are bald men unacceptable as PM? Why? Do we NOT get the best man (or woman) for the job because media, presentation, etc require a hirsute Prime Minister? So we just get the hairiest, not the best? If that really is the primary criterion, then watch out everyone else, Boris is coming! (With Michael Fabricant as Chancellor presumably.)
If there isn't going to be another independence vote for a 'generation or even a lifetime' then why would even the most rabid Scottish Nationalist bother voting for them?
Perhaps we could replace Salmond with Farge?
That leaves two left-of-centre parties, Labour and SNP, to be the two parties fighting for the majority of seats both in Westminster and Holyrood.
Like two bald headed men fighting over a comb.
And that raises another interesting point. The overhead shot from the debate at the House of Commons yesterday clearly showed that a large majority of MPs are male, old and folically challenged. Yet the leaders of the main parties (and indeed, UKIP) all have a fairly full head of hair. Are bald men unacceptable as PM? Why? Do we NOT get the best man (or woman) for the job because media, presentation, etc require a hirsute Prime Minister? So we just get the hairiest, not the best? If that really is the primary criterion, then watch out everyone else, Boris is coming! (With Michael Fabricant as Chancellor presumably.)
It's an interesting point. Studies have shown that bald men are perceived as more powerful or influential but that those with a full head of hair are more attractive. So as we move more and more towards US style "personality politics" a party choosing a candidate for leadership has a dilemma. Do they go for the bald but businesslike look of...er...William Hague...or one with more conventional "good looks" with a broader appeal.
Yet another reason the Labour party cocked up massively by choosing the wrong brother and something Ed Miliband himself has recognised. He is seriously in need of a makeover and I'm surprised no one at Labour's central office hasn't got hold of him!
The days of Michael Foot turning up in a donkey jacket are long gone and it shouldn't make any difference at all of course. But humans are not always rational people and there will be many people who make judgements based on whether the leader has an appearance they approve of.
Expect to see Chuka Umanna on our screens quite a lot over the winter as I'm told he ticks a lot of female voters boxes...
Is it wrong of me to say that I still don't give a shit and still won't vote for any of the self aggrandising arseholes who put themselves up for election whether it be for Ingerlund, Scotland, Wales or Ireland.
Whoever wins won't give a toss about me and will do nothing to change my situation and as a result I really can't give a rats arse about any of it.
Politics - complete bollocks.
It's all me, me, me that phrase isn't it? Don't worry I'm sure all the major political parties will have items in their manifestos to specifically improve the lot of JWADDICK.
Perhaps you could do something yourself to improve your situation rather than rely upon others?
Your point is very valid, but for the most part politics in recent years (decades) has seemed to be all about what MPs and those around them can do for themselves, so it does lead to disillusionment with the whole shebang...
The hairy/bald leader debate is most prominent in Russia, where they've alternated since the revolution.
Lenin- bald Stalin - full head of hair Krushchev - bald Brezhnev - full head of hair Andropov - folically challenged Chernenko - full head of hair Gorbachev - bald Yeltsin - full head of hair Putin - folically challenged Medvedev - full head of hair Putin - folically challenged
So bet your mortgage on the next Russian President being hirsuite.
The hairy/bald leader debate is most prominent in Russia, where they've alternated since the revolution.
Lenin- bald Stalin - full head of hair Krushchev - bald Brezhnev - full head of hair Andropov - folically challenged Chernenko - full head of hair Gorbachev - bald Yeltsin - full head of hair Putin - folically challenged Medvedev - full head of hair Putin - folically challenged
So bet your mortgage on the next Russian President being hirsuite.
That is interesting. I'm putting my money on Putin with a syrup!
I'm not sure the Catalans have thought this through.
A league consisting of Barcelona, Barcelona B and a couple of other minnows doesn't seem to have exceptional appeal.
Barcelona would likely do what Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham do in the PL/Football League, in the event Catalan secedes. No doubt the Spanish football authorities need Barcelona more than Barcelona need them - indeed if Spain kicked Barcelona out of its football system, I'm sure France or Italy would welcome them and the revenue/prestige they'll bring.
I'm not sure the Catalans have thought this through.
A league consisting of Barcelona, Barcelona B and a couple of other minnows doesn't seem to have exceptional appeal.
Barcelona would likely do what Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham do in the PL/Football League, in the event Catalan secedes. No doubt the Spanish football authorities need Barcelona more than Barcelona need them - indeed if Spain kicked Barcelona out of its football system, I'm sure France or Italy would welcome them and the revenue/prestige they'll bring.
That couldn't happen, but they could stay in the Spanish league as you say.
I'm not sure the Catalans have thought this through.
A league consisting of Barcelona, Barcelona B and a couple of other minnows doesn't seem to have exceptional appeal.
Barcelona would likely do what Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham do in the PL/Football League, in the event Catalan secedes. No doubt the Spanish football authorities need Barcelona more than Barcelona need them - indeed if Spain kicked Barcelona out of its football system, I'm sure France or Italy would welcome them and the revenue/prestige they'll bring.
That couldn't happen, but they could stay in the Spanish league as you say.
Why not? Surely the FA's can chose to accept/decline who they want?
I'm not sure the Catalans have thought this through.
A league consisting of Barcelona, Barcelona B and a couple of other minnows doesn't seem to have exceptional appeal.
Barcelona would likely do what Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham do in the PL/Football League, in the event Catalan secedes. No doubt the Spanish football authorities need Barcelona more than Barcelona need them - indeed if Spain kicked Barcelona out of its football system, I'm sure France or Italy would welcome them and the revenue/prestige they'll bring.
That couldn't happen, but they could stay in the Spanish league as you say.
Is there any reason/precedent it couldn't happen? I imagine it wouldn't happen, which is an entirely different issue. Also, since Barca has both UEFA and FIFA in its back pocket I imagine if they wanted to they would.
I don't know. The Spanish government were getting ready to block Scottish membership of the EC had the Yes vote won, and they like to harbour a grudge. If the Catalans managed by some miracle to wrangle Independence from Spain, the Spanish would cheerfully boicott their products and block their football teams. Barcelona would find another league to play in, but the teams in the second tier (Girona, Sabadell and Llagostera) would find their football level drastically reduced, though they might end up like the Welsh clubs, playing Champions league football at it's early stages.
I'm not sure the Catalans have thought this through.
A league consisting of Barcelona, Barcelona B and a couple of other minnows doesn't seem to have exceptional appeal.
Barcelona would likely do what Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham do in the PL/Football League, in the event Catalan secedes. No doubt the Spanish football authorities need Barcelona more than Barcelona need them - indeed if Spain kicked Barcelona out of its football system, I'm sure France or Italy would welcome them and the revenue/prestige they'll bring.
That couldn't happen, but they could stay in the Spanish league as you say.
Is there any reason/precedent it couldn't happen? I imagine it wouldn't happen, which is an entirely different issue. Also, since Barca has both UEFA and FIFA in its back pocket I imagine if they wanted to they would.
I believe UEFA have already indicated that Celtic and Rangers would not be allowed to join the English league when that idea reared it's ugly head a few years back. It would also make a nonsense of their European competitions.
The clubs already playing in foreign leagues, such as those you mention, Berwick, Monaco etc have been granted a kind of "grandfather" right to continue playing where they are, which is why I believe Catalan clubs could remain in a Spanish league. When English clubs played in and won the Welsh cup, they were never permitted to compete in the cup winners cup.
It does not take much imagination to work out the can of worms it would open up should such willy nilly choosing of which league a club wants to play in take place.
So, on the very day that the Labour Party announce that they have had themselves sectioned for the foreseeable, and rebranded as the Real Raving Looney Party, Nicola is out there highlighting Labour's irrelevance in Scotland and proposing another independence referendum. I think some are seeing the tide turning even further her way. On the same day, I received in the post a letter from Scottish Widows with whom I hold some investments. They have plans. They are, subject to High Court approval, putting all their life policies in one company currently called Clerical Medical. CM will be renamed Scottish Widows. Why is this interesting? Because although the HQ will remain in Scotland, the bit that holds the investments will have its registered office in London not Edinburgh. It seems the more astute in the financial sector are already making plans to mitigate the effect of a Scottish breakaway on their business. Watch this space it could be a bumpy ride.
Back on planet earth, I was talking to a Scottish friend (a real one, who was born, brought up and lives in Scotland), and he was delighted with Corbyn's selection. He suggested it gives the Labour party in Scotland a fighting chance of challenging the SNP and the "can't take no for an answer" William Wallace (Mel Gibson version) brigade.
Is that the doing stuff over and over again thing while expecting different results thing?
Anyway, there's a simple test to find out if someone is genuinely insane or merely malingering (as per the legal definition). You ask them what colour is grass. If they answer wibble, wibble, my head is hurting, politicians in Westminster have stolen Scottish grass or something similar they are malingering. It seems it is generally accepted by psychiatrists that mad people do know the answer is green*.
*Even in Kentucky, where the racehorses chomp away on the blue grass so much that it stays short and never gets tall enough to develop its blue tinge.
Cameron enabled this with the way he handled the aftermath of the referendum. Scots, or many of them, we're/are incensed with him and the Tories and feel no need to wait. So they won't.
Comments
Perhaps you could do something yourself to improve your situation rather than rely upon others?
The SNP will, otherwise, continue as a left-of-centre force within Scotland and continue to lobby Westminster to devolve further powers to Scotland or to give Scotland further autonomy. According to them they are the largest party in Scotland, I don't see many of those members jumping ship just because independence is off the table for time-being (indeed, most people probably thought the referendum was a lost cause before they even got one and so will be galvanised by how strong their support surged during the campaign).
Scotland is generally a left-of-centre country and the Conservatives and Lib-Dems will face being pariahs in that country for quite some time I imagine. That leaves two left-of-centre parties, Labour and SNP, to be the two parties fighting for the majority of seats both in Westminster and Holyrood. More and more Scots are waking up to realise that Labour, both in Scotland and across the UK, are a busted flush, and I imagine Labour will suffer in Scotland in both 2015 and the next Scottish Parliament elections.
So they do not respect article 30 in the slightest and are lining up for cries of Westminster betrayal and another vote if devo max isn't granted by the end of the month!
I would game them and give them all the powers and see how popular they are when they can't balance the books without service cuts and/or tax rises.
Why would anyone agree to another vote when they don't respect this one? The issue is closed unless of course Salmond resorts to protest and that doesn't go anywhere...
Cameron may think he was being decisive but he has failed to look at how his statement will look next month let alone the next election. And he clearly has no ambition to expand on the tories solitary seat in Scotland.
I know it is popular belief that politicians don't honour their pledges to the electorate but to come out within hours of the vote placing caveats on promises without consulting anyone is not good.
Milliband doesn't excite many but he does come across as strategic and honourable - perhaps he or some other political opponent will expose Cameron next May. Salmond and Farage have painted a narrow nationalist agenda and as posted before its up to the mainstream parties to take up the challenge and put out some positive policies.
Stirring up a Pandora's box of changes to the constitutional reform constructed on the back of a fag packet and playing to the UKIP tune is not a positive policy and no good will come of it.
Any vote in the very foreseeable future on yes or no will not be tolerated
Personally I have voted in every election since I turned 18 including council elections. I have never yet voted for a candidate who won. It won't stop me voting because if I opt out, I will have let them do things which are not in my name and taken no responsibility for trying to do something about it.
The right to vote has been hard won, it is coveted by people across the world who do not have that right. Imagine if the oppressed people of the world could throw off their oppressors by the exercise of their right of self - determination?
We are very lucky to live in a democracy - but it's not perfect. You have a right to engage or nor engage but don't belittle the process - if you hate what they stand for take the argument to them? It's your right but in a democracy it's also yours (and everyone elses) duty to hold politicians to account.
Are bald men unacceptable as PM? Why? Do we NOT get the best man (or woman) for the job because media, presentation, etc require a hirsute Prime Minister? So we just get the hairiest, not the best?
If that really is the primary criterion, then watch out everyone else, Boris is coming! (With Michael Fabricant as Chancellor presumably.)
Yet another reason the Labour party cocked up massively by choosing the wrong brother and something Ed Miliband himself has recognised. He is seriously in need of a makeover and I'm surprised no one at Labour's central office hasn't got hold of him!
The days of Michael Foot turning up in a donkey jacket are long gone and it shouldn't make any difference at all of course. But humans are not always rational people and there will be many people who make judgements based on whether the leader has an appearance they approve of.
Expect to see Chuka Umanna on our screens quite a lot over the winter as I'm told he ticks a lot of female voters boxes...
Lenin- bald
Stalin - full head of hair
Krushchev - bald
Brezhnev - full head of hair
Andropov - folically challenged
Chernenko - full head of hair
Gorbachev - bald
Yeltsin - full head of hair
Putin - folically challenged
Medvedev - full head of hair
Putin - folically challenged
So bet your mortgage on the next Russian President being hirsuite.
I'm not sure the Catalans have thought this through.
A league consisting of Barcelona, Barcelona B and a couple of other minnows doesn't seem to have exceptional appeal.
The clubs already playing in foreign leagues, such as those you mention, Berwick, Monaco etc have been granted a kind of "grandfather" right to continue playing where they are, which is why I believe Catalan clubs could remain in a Spanish league. When English clubs played in and won the Welsh cup, they were never permitted to compete in the cup winners cup.
It does not take much imagination to work out the can of worms it would open up should such willy nilly choosing of which league a club wants to play in take place.
I think some are seeing the tide turning even further her way. On the same day, I received in the post a letter from Scottish Widows with whom I hold some investments. They have plans. They are, subject to High Court approval, putting all their life policies in one company currently called Clerical Medical. CM will be renamed Scottish Widows.
Why is this interesting?
Because although the HQ will remain in Scotland, the bit that holds the investments will have its registered office in London not Edinburgh.
It seems the more astute in the financial sector are already making plans to mitigate the effect of a Scottish breakaway on their business.
Watch this space it could be a bumpy ride.
Like selling off social housing?
Anyway, there's a simple test to find out if someone is genuinely insane or merely malingering (as per the legal definition).
You ask them what colour is grass. If they answer wibble, wibble, my head is hurting, politicians in Westminster have stolen Scottish grass or something similar they are malingering. It seems it is generally accepted by psychiatrists that mad people do know the answer is green*.
*Even in Kentucky, where the racehorses chomp away on the blue grass so much that it stays short and never gets tall enough to develop its blue tinge.
Bonkers.
So they won't.