faraway saint Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 15 hours ago, TPAFKATS said: DougJamie- you are in a great big hole buddie. Stop digging. Aye, hard to believe DJ's posts. People are entitled to think what they like but to put it in "black and white" time after time, well, defies belief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougJamie Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, faraway saint said: Aye, hard to believe DJ's posts. People are entitled to think what they like but to put it in "black and white" time after time, well, defies belief. I have apologised to those who I offended, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 Just now, DougJamie said: I have apologised to those who I offended, People might be offended but more, I suspect, are staggered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellside Bud Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said: Wrong way round! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3169894/Now-official-opposition-SNP-stages-takeover-Labour-benches-Commons-Harman-orders-MPS-not-vote-against-Tory-Budget.html Labour abstained the SNP voted against! Lie or mistake? That's not the vote on the budget where the plans for the Child Tax cuts were announced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 13 hours ago, salmonbuddie said: Or pester until he actually answers? After all these years we know he wont though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Bellside Bud said: That's not the vote on the budget where the plans for the Child Tax cuts were announced. Again show me the specific vote but it's clearly another case where you're misrepresenting what's happened or at best focussing upon some technicality. Edited September 21, 2017 by Bud the Baker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, DougJamie said: I have apologised to those who I offended, You think your WORDS are the problem here? Bud it's your thought process which is the problem. I have no idea what could possibly be going on in your life which could justify such rage against people whose lifestyles have zero impact on you. Look around you. The world is full of murder, rape, child molesting and a vast array of different kinds of violence and suffering. There are many countries in the world where you can't walk anywhere as a woman on your own because if you are attacked or raped you will be blamed for causing it. There are countries where being attracted to the same sex results in a public stoning. Have you seen a video of one of these? I wouldn't recommend it. Most of the South American countries are controlled by a handful of drug cartels who routinely force innocent people to become drug mules. These mules are then brutally tortured and murdered by competing cartels. You can find videos of this sort of thing online as well so don't just take my word for it. Children are routinely used as slave labour in virtually every non-developed country in the world and in some developed countries too. We haven't even talked about people who are genuinely starving (and not just because they have to skip a lunch) and dying of thirst and completely preventable disease in the world. But what really blows your fuse is a bloke in a dress? It's pretty pathetic bud. Why can't you just accept that life is a kaleidoscope of different things? Why can't you just accept that everything is on a continuous spectrum from gender to sexual preference to taste in music, wine and style? Live and let live. Life is difficult enough FFS. Stop projecting your difficulties onto others - sort your own problems out and leave others to do the same. Edited September 21, 2017 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 Right wing labour MP thinks universal credit is so badly designed it increases poverty https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/exclusive-universal-credit-badly-designed-traps-families-poverty/amp/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted September 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 Here it comes, he didn't actually mean "supported" it... They voted to pass the 2015 Budget into legislation. Only Labour opposed it. Wrong way round!http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3169894/Now-official-opposition-SNP-stages-takeover-Labour-benches-Commons-Harman-orders-MPS-not-vote-against-Tory-Budget.html Labour abstained the SNP voted against! Lie or mistake? That's not the vote on the budget where the plans for the Child Tax cuts were announced. Again show me the specific vote but it's clearly another case where you're misrepresenting what's happened or at best focussing upon some technicality. La plus ca change... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellside Bud Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Bud the Baker said: Again show me the specific vote but it's clearly another case where you're misrepresenting what's happened or at best focussing upon some technicality. I couldn't be any clearer. George Osbourne announced plans for a cap on Child Tax Credits in the 2015 budget. Only the Labour Party voted against that budget. That cap stipulated that starting from 2017 Child Tax Credits would only be payable to the first two children born to any family after that date. It was universally accepted. TV coverage at the time had focused on a number of Welfare stories that proved that there were families out there that were basically running "Baby Factories", churning out children to maximise their benefit payments. This was designed to stop that. In the bill a number of exceptions to the cap were added. It was designed to show that the state could show discretion and still provide Welfare support for those who might fall into circumstances due to reasons outwith their control. From memory the two exceptions listed, but that were not exhaustive, were multiple birth pregnancies (twins, triplets, quadruplets etc) and where a pregnancy has occurred as a result of rape and where the Mother has decided to proceed with the pregnancy and to raise the child despite what happened to her. The SNP raised no objections until desperation got the better of them. Losing support to the Tories they dragged this shit out, gave it an emotive title "The Rape Clause" and put in place one of the most disgusting, scaremongering, deceitful piles of nonsense ever launched in an election in this country trying to make political capital out of it. And when challenged - "what would your alternative be" Nicola Sturgeon responded that she wouldn't put the cap in place. That's right Nicola Sturgeon's official position was that she was happy to see the abuse of the Welfare State continue unchecked ever! Why didn't the Tories deal with it better? I don't know. It had never been a controversial piece of legislation so I presume the attack caught many of them completely off guard. However it's now when we can reflect back on the political campaigns that we can see just how fraudulent the SNP and Labour campaigns were. The SNP threw low blows in extreme desperation - one of the worst being Nicola Sturgeons attempt to claim Kezia Dugdale had told her in private she supported Independence on National TV. The Labour Party offered graduates with student debt a massive bribe - vote Labour and they'd wipe out all of your student debt. They've since claimed they didn't offer that but its very clear they did. Despite that Theresa May won without the need for bribes or low blows. She increased the Conservative vote by over 1 million, won seats right across the UK in Labour and SNP heartlands, saw Alex Salmond and a group of high profile Nationalists booted out as MP's, and yet still the opposition claim she's in a vulnerable position. Edited September 21, 2017 by Bellside Bud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 I couldn't be any clearer. George Osbourne announced plans for a cap on Child Tax Credits in the 2015 budget. Only the Labour Party voted against that budget. That cap stipulated that starting from 2017 Child Tax Credits would only be payable to the first two children born to any family after that date. It was universally accepted. TV coverage at the time had focused on a number of Welfare stories that proved that there were families out there that were basically running "Baby Factories", churning out children to maximise their benefit payments. This was designed to stop that. In the bill a number of exceptions to the cap were added. It was designed to show that the state could show discretion and still provide Welfare support for those who might fall into circumstances due to reasons outwith their control. From memory the two exceptions listed, but that were not exhaustive, were multiple birth pregnancies (twins, triplets, quadruplets etc) and where a pregnancy has occurred as a result of rape and where the Mother has decided to proceed with the pregnancy and to raise the child despite what happened to her. The SNP raised no objections until desperation got the better of them. Losing support to the Tories they dragged this shit out, gave it an emotive title "The Rape Clause" and put in place one of the most disgusting, scaremongering, deceitful piles of nonsense ever launched in an election in this country trying to make political capital out of it. And when challenged - "what would your alternative be" Nicola Sturgeon responded that she wouldn't put the cap in place. That's right Nicola Sturgeon's official position was that she was happy to see the abuse of the Welfare State continue unchecked ever! Why didn't the Tories deal with it better? I don't know. It had never been a controversial piece of legislation so I presume the attack caught many of them completely off guard. However it's now when we can reflect back on the political campaigns that we can see just how fraudulent the SNP and Labour campaigns were. The SNP threw low blows in extreme desperation - one of the worst being Nicola Sturgeons attempt to claim Kezia Dugdale had told her in private she supported Independence on National TV. The Labour Party offered graduates with student debt a massive bribe - vote Labour and they'd wipe out all of your student debt. They've since claimed they didn't offer that but its very clear they did. Despite that Theresa May won without the need for bribes or low blows. She increased the Conservative vote by over 1 million, won seats right across the UK in Labour and SNP heartlands, saw Alex Salmond and a group of high profile Nationalists booted out as MP's, and yet still the opposition claim she's in a vulnerable position. Do you mean this one?http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2015-07-14&number=44SNP all voted against.This one maybe?http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2015-03-23&number=179SNP all voted against.Your turn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 Baby factories - FFS.That's the level of debate once again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayrshire Saints Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) Seems history is being rewritten by this Bellend Bud guy. He totally forgot the last and most important line about the outcome of the GE.....and the Tories lead by Teresa May lost their majority but hey hoe that's just a minor detail Just as the plucky Ruth got Scottish Tories as close to the SNP ss Aberdeen got to Celtic we can describe the TM Tories as the Leicester City, champs to chumps. It is a football site after all. Edited September 21, 2017 by Ayrshire Saints Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, Bellside Bud said: I couldn't be any clearer. George Osbourne announced plans for a cap on Child Tax Credits in the 2015 budget. Only the Labour Party voted against that budget. That cap stipulated that starting from 2017 Child Tax Credits would only be payable to the first two children born to any family after that date. It was universally accepted. TV coverage at the time had focused on a number of Welfare stories that proved that there were families out there that were basically running "Baby Factories", churning out children to maximise their benefit payments. This was designed to stop that. In the bill a number of exceptions to the cap were added. It was designed to show that the state could show discretion and still provide Welfare support for those who might fall into circumstances due to reasons outwith their control. From memory the two exceptions listed, but that were not exhaustive, were multiple birth pregnancies (twins, triplets, quadruplets etc) and where a pregnancy has occurred as a result of rape and where the Mother has decided to proceed with the pregnancy and to raise the child despite what happened to her. The SNP raised no objections until desperation got the better of them. Losing support to the Tories they dragged this shit out, gave it an emotive title "The Rape Clause" and put in place one of the most disgusting, scaremongering, deceitful piles of nonsense ever launched in an election in this country trying to make political capital out of it. And when challenged - "what would your alternative be" Nicola Sturgeon responded that she wouldn't put the cap in place. That's right Nicola Sturgeon's official position was that she was happy to see the abuse of the Welfare State continue unchecked ever! Why didn't the Tories deal with it better? I don't know. It had never been a controversial piece of legislation so I presume the attack caught many of them completely off guard. However it's now when we can reflect back on the political campaigns that we can see just how fraudulent the SNP and Labour campaigns were. The SNP threw low blows in extreme desperation - one of the worst being Nicola Sturgeons attempt to claim Kezia Dugdale had told her in private she supported Independence on National TV. The Labour Party offered graduates with student debt a massive bribe - vote Labour and they'd wipe out all of your student debt. They've since claimed they didn't offer that but its very clear they did. Despite that Theresa May won without the need for bribes or low blows. She increased the Conservative vote by over 1 million, won seats right across the UK in Labour and SNP heartlands, saw Alex Salmond and a group of high profile Nationalists booted out as MP's, and yet still the opposition claim she's in a vulnerable position. Osbourne's budget was on July 8th, below is a Guardian article from the 9th - the day after. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/09/government-third-child-tax-credits-proposal-budget-rape If it was reported the day after then the objection must've been raised on the same day (in fact the article confirms they were). Your analysis is just a lie. Edited September 21, 2017 by Bud the Baker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 Osbourne's budget was on July 8th, below is a Guardian article from the 9th - the day after.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/09/government-third-child-tax-credits-proposal-budget-rape If it was reported the day after then the objection must've been raised on the same day (in fact the article confirms they were). Your analysis is just a pack of lies. I'm stunned by the last sentence [emoji6] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayrshire Saints Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 32 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said: Osbourne's budget was on July 8th, below is a Guardian article from the 9th - the day after. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/09/government-third-child-tax-credits-proposal-budget-rape If it was reported the day after then the objection must've been raised on the same day (in fact the article confirms they were). Your analysis is just a pack of lies. He also has again totally failed to state the facts behind the rape clause. The objection by ALL politicians (including ultimately Davidson when she was shamed into an embarrassing climb down earlier this year from her ridiculous isolated stance) was to the victim of rape having to prove that they were indeed raped in order to gain a tax credit cap exemption. It's politicians job to object to legislation especially when it was so badly cobbled together as this was. Davidson knew she was isolated and ultimately wrong in her stance and she has subsequently stated she was open to it being amended as all other parties demanded. Anyone who even tries to defend or justify that clause is beneath contempt, verging on Nazi Germany stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) Edited September 21, 2017 by Bud the Baker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellside Bud Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 3 hours ago, Bud the Baker said: Osbourne's budget was on July 8th, below is a Guardian article from the 9th - the day after. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/09/government-third-child-tax-credits-proposal-budget-rape If it was reported the day after then the objection must've been raised on the same day (in fact the article confirms they were). Your analysis is just a lie. https://www.snp.org/the_rape_clause_explained_in_200_words The SNPs own website. Check out the date Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 https://www.snp.org/the_rape_clause_explained_in_200_words The SNPs own website. Check out the date Of the tweets from SNP MPs it quotes, you mean? The tweets dated July 2015? Is that the date you're talking about?Are you really this stupid? Rhetorical question, btw... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 13 minutes ago, Bellside Bud said: https://www.snp.org/the_rape_clause_explained_in_200_words The SNPs own website. Check out the date I see it as part of a campaign that began on July 8th 2015 the day the policy was announced with Alison Thewliss's tweet which is part of the webpage. Own goal of the season! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) Today I bought a new car. Tomorrow off to the food bank Edited September 21, 2017 by insaintee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted September 21, 2017 Report Share Posted September 21, 2017 Today I bought a new car. Tomorrow off to the food bank Making a donation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 8 hours ago, TPAFKATS said: Making a donation? That would be the sperm bank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 9 hours ago, TPAFKATS said: Making a donation? That's the Sperm bank you're thinking of Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.