Don't you just love the SNP......

[Spoon]

So that's that then, or do you keep having a vote on something until you get the result you want?

Maybe it's like having rumpy pumpy with the missus, you keep asking until finally she says Yes.........

 

[Midwest]

Maybe it's like having rumpy pumpy with the missus, you keep asking until finally she says Yes.........

If that was the case, Scotland would never have independence!

 

[Octopus]

Yes of course, its only the Scots who dare raise their voices - or perhaps it's just another case of selective deafness.

Now you are being stupid or should I say Scottish!

in reality the Welsh and NI governments are more constructive.........

 

[malcolmsanford]

Nope, none whatsoever - I'm married to one.

Hmmm that seems to be a rather disparaging remark there Sean old son. That is a rather formal pronoun to use...........perhaps you may need to talk over this issue with someone

I'm listening..............

 

[sean_ork]

Now you are being stupid or should I say Scottish!

in reality the Welsh and NI governments are more constructive.........

I realise all you are doing now is trying to keep a thread that peaked a good while back alive with such comments, try not prolong the agony to long.

 

[Octopus]

I realise all you are doing now is trying to keep a thread that peaked a good while back alive with such comments, try not prolong the agony to long.

er no. Really busy at the moment so only get a real chance to chip in when I get home.......

So are you in favour of the UK scrapping the barnet formula?

 

[sean_ork]

groan .....

 

[malcolmsanford]

I realise all you are doing now is trying to keep a thread that peaked a good while back alive with such comments, try not prolong the agony to long

And by answering you lessening the agony..........you do seem to be a paradox..........wow I never had to google that either

 

[Octopus]

groan .....

So you are in favour of scrapping the barnett formula then.....

 

[sean_ork]

A note to whoever decided to delete one of my recent posts.

I gave the same answer to two different questions, this wasn't an accidental duplication.

 

[GMES]

A note to whoever decided to delete one of my recent posts.

I gave the same answer to two different questions, this wasn't an accidental duplication.

That would be me being a Member of staff, My name is clearly visible on the Deletion.
You repeated word for word the same reply, next time maybe use the multi qoute function.

 

[sean_ork]

That would be me being a Member of staff, My name is clearly visible on the Deletion.
You repeated word for word the same reply, next time maybe use the multi qoute function.

Your name was only evident when, after blocking a number of pop-up messages (which I assume would also have shown your name) I noticed a PM.

By which time I'd already posted my comment - my now deleted comment could also have been posted in response to #114.

I'll give your multi quote suggestion a go in an hour or two, as long as Murdoch is aware that the lack of an instant response from me isnt a sign that I'm in agreement with him.

:tounge_smile:

 

[Dcf]

Jeez!im feeling the better together love tonight.
as a supporter of no particular party it seems to me that uk politics is in a bit of a bind.
the conservative governments have never been fond of the man in the street.
it took a strong opposition which was traditionally labour to keep them in check.
labour are weaker than ever with no policies of any substance and a leader who inspires no confidence.
the lib dems are not even in sight.
that leaves the snp .
they at least try to agitate the government and give them a hard time
this is what an opposition should do ,but the media are making it out to be a Scotland vs England issue at every turn.
when the work started on the new forth crossing all the media talk was of salmonds vanity project blah blah.
when the existing forth bridge was closed to traffic over Xmas as it needed urgent repairs it was all talk of the snp cutting the budget, they knew it was dodgy and why is the new one not ready!
you can't win.

 

[janner43]

It's clear by now that those who follow an emotional rationale are neither fact based nor do they have a broad view. They are blinkered and myopic.

Rather than bring out more numbers, I think it might be illuminating to hear from an outsider. Someone with clear views who is neither English or Scottish.

Let's hear what Sir Bob Geldof has to say...

Geldof believes separation goes against the grain of the age we live in.
He said: “The logic of the 21st century and immediate future is towards co-operation, consensus and compromise, as opposed to the past and the murderous 20th century which was defined by competition. Why retreat into the past? Why regress to an imagined national idyll? It won’t happen.

“What interest does the world have in Scotland or England unilaterally? The nation state is dead. The 21st century is about interdependence.”

Geldof understands national pride , but has a warning when politicians start using it for their own ends.

He said: “It’s a very healthy sense to understand who you are as a people and your place in this world. That’s a normal human instinct. We have a word for it – it’s called patriotism. But when it’s manipulated into the base metal of politics, which is nationalism – when political people on both sides of the argument do that – you have to be very wary. You really must think through these things.

“Nationalism is a very dangerous political animal. I know this – I’m Irish. It’s a cheap political trick which twists the understanding of who we are.

“I completely understand the emotional impulse towards independence. But always consider independence in inverted commas because what the f*** does it mean?

“We are entirely dependent on one another. None of us, in our private lives or our political constructs, are ever independent.

“We are all sovereign unto ourselves but we’re dependent on one another"

He is aware there are people with Irish roots thinking of voting Yes in the belief it might help lead to a United Ireland. But he urges them to reconsider.

He said: “There’s going to be an independent Scotland and a united Ireland and it will all be great?

“What will be great about it? Please explain that to me. Do you have any less pride in being Scottish or Irish than you will have next week? Seriously?

“It’s the manipulation of that pride and spurious arguments like that which drives me nuts.”

Geldof admires Alex Salmond as one of the most talented politicians in the country, but dislikes his sloganising.

He said, ‘Our time is now’ – what the f*** does that mean? The time is any time.”

And Geldof believes the best future for Scotland, in the modern world, is to remain in the UK.

He said: “It’s only together, with a single shared sense of purpose, that we get to do things in the 21st century. There’s plenty to be done. Let’s get on and do it together."

 

[YoungScud]

It's clear by now that those who follow an emotional rationale are neither fact based nor do they have a broad view. They are blinkered and myopic.

Rather than bring out more numbers, I think it might be illuminating to hear from an outsider. Someone with clear views who is neither English or Scottish.

Let's hear what Sir Bob Geldof has to say...

Geldof believes separation goes against the grain of the age we live in.
He said: “The logic of the 21st century and immediate future is towards co-operation, consensus and compromise, as opposed to the past and the murderous 20th century which was defined by competition. Why retreat into the past? Why regress to an imagined national idyll? It won’t happen.

“What interest does the world have in Scotland or England unilaterally? The nation state is dead. The 21st century is about interdependence.”

Geldof understands national pride , but has a warning when politicians start using it for their own ends.

He said: “It’s a very healthy sense to understand who you are as a people and your place in this world. That’s a normal human instinct. We have a word for it – it’s called patriotism. But when it’s manipulated into the base metal of politics, which is nationalism – when political people on both sides of the argument do that – you have to be very wary. You really must think through these things.

“Nationalism is a very dangerous political animal. I know this – I’m Irish. It’s a cheap political trick which twists the understanding of who we are.

“I completely understand the emotional impulse towards independence. But always consider independence in inverted commas because what the f*** does it mean?

“We are entirely dependent on one another. None of us, in our private lives or our political constructs, are ever independent.

“We are all sovereign unto ourselves but we’re dependent on one another"

He is aware there are people with Irish roots thinking of voting Yes in the belief it might help lead to a United Ireland. But he urges them to reconsider.

He said: “There’s going to be an independent Scotland and a united Ireland and it will all be great?

“What will be great about it? Please explain that to me. Do you have any less pride in being Scottish or Irish than you will have next week? Seriously?

“It’s the manipulation of that pride and spurious arguments like that which drives me nuts.”

Geldof admires Alex Salmond as one of the most talented politicians in the country, but dislikes his sloganising.

He said, ‘Our time is now’ – what the f*** does that mean? The time is any time.”

And Geldof believes the best future for Scotland, in the modern world, is to remain in the UK.

He said: “It’s only together, with a single shared sense of purpose, that we get to do things in the 21st century. There’s plenty to be done. Let’s get on and do it together."

Here's the problem I have with that. Geldof, as anyone knows, is never short of an opinion, and loves to voice it. What he implies, deliberately or otherwise, as do some fooolish people here and elsewhere, is that to want independence, to espouse civic nationalism, is a thoughtless act, that the entire populace simply goes along with what they're told by politicians, while he, the sage on, knows better. Well, I consider myself a reasonably intelligent man, and one perfectly capable of independent thought. I don't feel I need to run to Geldof, nor to Cameron, nor indeed to Nicola Sturgeon to be given my opinions. My drift towards support of independence has been a long, tortuous journey, not oen I arrived at easily. It was born, not only from an unease about the nature of UK politics, but of a lifelong interest in how things go elsewhere. I've observed, for instance, that, while small countries are not guaranteed stable, happy government, that virtually all of the nations which I admire, whose populations seem to be the most content, are invariably those with small populations. For what it's worth, it seems to me this might be because it's so difficult to arrive at any meaningful agreement very often when a nation has a large population. Of course, there are ways to create a sort of stability in large populations, but my guess is not many here will want to use the Chinese model. One thing that people in Scotland realised through the referendum process is that they could make a difference, whereas at UK level, there's much more of a feeling of lack of control. So, thanks Bob, for your wise words, but how about we agree to disagree?

To save a separate post, I'd like to answer some of the less well-thought out jibes bandied around while I'm at it. First of all, to the moronic suggestion that the rest of the Uk should have taken part in the referendum, not only did every mainstream party band together to persuade the Scottish electorate to say No, but so did the media en masse. If I'd believed for one minute that there would have been a Yes result, I might well have found myself taking the wrong, but pragmatic view that that should happen. Why wrong? Well, has there been a single case in history of a nation exercising its right to self determination (note the word 'self') while involving another nation in the decision? For the sake of clarity, constitutionally, the UK is not a nation. Scotland and England are both sovereign nations in their own right. The UK is a state. So, that was a non-starter for many good reasons.

Finally, you can portray any future intention by an elected Scottish government as keeping voting until we get the right result if you want, but that smacks of tabloid thinking. If we are to maintain any pretence of democracy, we have to accept that people change, and that a future Scottish government, given a mandate, has every legal and constitutional right to hold another referendum. The responsibility of any government is to represent its people, to try to gauge their will and respond accordingly. Of course, this does not mean that we can expect another referendum within the next few years, but it would be naive to expect that things don't change. For The Vow, for example, it took around twelve hours before Cameron reneged. That sent Gordon Brown into apoplexy because he thought it damaged his credibility. The poor schmuck thought he had some.

Regards

A 'non-city' Scot