erskinebud Posted January 1, 2015 Report Share Posted January 1, 2015 No one has claimed that the SNP suddenly support the Bedroom Tax, not even Murray. The issue is what the SNP will be willing to trade for concessions with regards to more powers for Holyrood. They are a single issue party after all. Odd that you are running so scared of the potential power that a "single issue party" may be able to wield after the next election that you feel the need to start a thread seeking to reignite a debate about a referendum that most of us have moved on from. Given that the party you support are more a one (at most!) MP in Scotland party, perhaps you should be working on the allegiances your own lot will have to make to have any say, either here in Scotland or nationally. UKIP may be your only hope though, should the current rate of defections to that mob continue, maybe they'll be calling the shots as the bigger partner in any alliance forged. Anyway, if the SNP are a single issue party, how come you manage to find several different strands of their issues so worthy of mention in your original post? Oh and Happy New Year to you and everyone slightly more associated with St Mirren than yourself! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 I disagree. I'll give her one you that...(Where's the "trivial sexist comment for a cheap joke" smilie , when you need it?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 So democracy only counts over what number then? It either is or isn't democracy surely? It's not about numbers. It's about status. When Nairn becomes a separate country within Scotland you'll have a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 It's not about numbers. It's about status. When Nairn becomes a separate country within Scotland you'll have a point. And if Scotland ever decided to leave the UK you will have a point. Till then though, selective democracy methinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 It's not about numbers. It's about status. When Nairn becomes a separate country within Scotland you'll have a point. Which negates your own argument. When Scotland becomes a separate country within the UK you'll also have a point. (You may genuinely not have noticed but the referendum for separation failed last year.) You really are not very sharp, are you? Better stick to your Ivory towers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 Scotland is already a separate country within the UK and always has been. It's not a separate state, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 And if Scotland ever decided to leave the UK you will have a point. Till then though, selective democracy methinks. So Scotland isn't a country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 When Scotland becomes a separate country within the UK you'll also have a point. WTF? Scotland isn't a country? Are you and Bud on drugs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zurich_allan Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) Here we go. Why do people get so bogged down with pedantry when each know full well what the other means: Scotland is a country in its own right. But it is NOT an independent country as yet. It is a part of the United Kingdom just as England, Wales, and Northern Ireland are. Scotland has a devolved parliament which has representatives from Scotland alone, to make laws and policies in areas that affect Scotland alone in those areas devolved to us. Rightly so, this is composed of representatives of the combined democratic will of Scottish constituencies. The UK is rightly composed of the combined democratic will of the UK as a whole for laws and policies which affect the UK as a whole. I am genuinely perplexed at there being an argument over the Democratic merits, there isn't an argument to be had. Sure there IS an argument to be had over whose benefit the UK parliament serves (i.e. Southern England) proportionate to other areas, but beyond boundaries for individual constituencies there is no argument to be had over the democratic nature of the Institution itself. Edited January 2, 2015 by zurich_allan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) So Scotland isn't a country?Nice try from the master baiter but you know fine well that's not what I said.Sure sign of an argument lost resulting to petty baiting. Edited January 2, 2015 by BuddieinEK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 I voted Yes to an independent Scotland not for the SNP I do not agree with a lot of what they say but I believe independence would be best for this nation. The idea that giving democratic power to the people of a country is not the correct decision is laughable. Oil is a bonus for this country not the be all and end all, look at our other natural resources, fresh water resources, tourism, fishing, our potential for developing renewable energy . When people moan about Scotland going on about another referendum going against themselves with the 'once in a generation' stuff don't forget that it was the unionist side supported by our current UK government that went against the Edinburgh agreement by publishing the vow just before the referendum. The BBC was shown countless times to be biased along with most of the major national newspapers. Of course we are going to feel cheated. Now we remain in a country £1 trillion+ in debt with major cuts to come, Scottish tax payers funding English only projects, a biased national news agency and a very real chance of a racist political party gaining a level of influence in the next general election and leaving the EU against our will. Well done the 55%. Absolute fools. All the stuff you mentioned above are digs at where (supposedly) SNP have got it wrong. Absolutely nothing to do with Scotland making its own decisions as a democratic country and the resources and income of Scotland being used for the benefit of Scotland. Clearly another no voters that's not understood the question. 'Should Scotland be an independent country?' What you've read is 'Do you like the SNP?' Also, are you stating wind farms are a bad idea..... Hmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 WTF? Scotland isn't a country? Are you and Bud on drugs?Your stupid argument predicated that Nairn had to be a separate country to be considered worthy of thinking for itself. I assumed (silly when YOU are typing) that it was shorthand for separate political identity. As we both know Nairn is a county. One of three counties - a huge swathe of Scotland -that I mentioned as a political constituency - that you dissed by dismissing THEIR political aspirations so ascerbically."Country" is not what is under discussion here, despite your lame attempt to cover how much you despise other Scots who do not share your idiocy. You didn't spot the important qualifier - 'separate'. ( I gave you too much credit, thinking you might 'think' before you mewled.) Nairn is a separate political entity which is the only thing required to be able to choose for itself how it should function. Democracy. Whilst within the larger entity of Scotland its decisions must be tempered by the bigger democratic reality. Democracy. Exactly as it is for Scotland. Democracy. Tough shit for little fuhrers. I didn't believe you were so thick that I had to spell it out. Keep digging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 I am genuinely perplexed at there being an argument over the Democratic merits, there isn't an argument to be had. Sure there IS an argument to be had over whose benefit the UK parliament serves (i.e. Southern England) proportionate to other areas, but beyond boundaries for individual constituencies there is no argument to be had over the democratic nature of the Institution itself. Whether there's a democratic argument or not is one of opinion. You've given your opinion, others have given theirs. Stop presenting opinion as facts and maybe you'll be less perplexed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zurich_allan Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Whether there's a democratic argument or not is one of opinion. You've given your opinion, others have given theirs. Stop presenting opinion as facts and maybe you'll be less perplexed. No - there isn't - again you're misrepresenting what's been said. How simple does this need to be made? The UK is ONE state. The UK parliament is composed of representatives of all of the nations within the state. You simply cannot go down the line of saying that Scotland, Wales, England, or Northern Ireland individually get a rough deal when it comes down to how the parliament is composed: it IS democratic based on the UK AS A WHOLE, not based on any one part of it. You can debate different types of democracy (proportional representation etc.) that you would 'prefer', but you CANNOT claim that the current system is 'undemocratic' - because to use your word 'factually' it is. You simply don't understand what you are talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 (edited) You simply don't understand what you are talking about.I've edited your post to its essence, ZA.Just as I should have done with mine, above: "I didn't believe you were so thick that I had to spell it out." The force for stupidity is strong in this one... Edited January 3, 2015 by bluto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 No - there isn't - again you're misrepresenting what's been said. How simple does this need to be made? The UK is ONE state. The UK parliament is composed of representatives of all of the nations within the state. You simply cannot go down the line of saying that Scotland, Wales, England, or Northern Ireland individually get a rough deal when it comes down to how the parliament is composed: it IS democratic based on the UK AS A WHOLE, not based on any one part of it. You can debate different types of democracy (proportional representation etc.) that you would 'prefer', but you CANNOT claim that the current system is 'undemocratic' - because to use your word 'factually' it is. You simply don't understand what you are talking about. Well you're not an arrogant twat at all. Don't let anyone tell you that. You're in good company on this topic with bluto, bud and dicky. Knock yourself out. In the meantime, someone can point out where I've ever referred to Scotland as a state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 I've edited your post to its essence, ZA. Just as I should have done with mine, above: "I didn't believe you were so thick that I had to spell it out." The force for stupidity is strong in this one... Oh FFS is that you stroking the ego of yet another forum member? He won't thank you for it any more than Dickson will. Cut it out, it's toe curling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 I've edited your post to its essence, ZA. Just as I should have done with mine, above: "I didn't believe you were so thick that I had to spell it out." The force for stupidity is strong in this one... I really can't be arsed reading Oaky's stuff but see it occasionally when someone quotes him. Like today for instance on Pie & Bovril under the heading FAO Oaksoft (graduate figures). Seems he spreads his bonhomie and often faulty wisdom elsewhere resulting in some caustic comments. Shame, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 I really can't be arsed reading Oaky's stuff but see it occasionally when someone quotes him. Like today for instance on Pie & Bovril under the heading FAO Oaksoft (graduate figures). Seems he spreads his bonhomie and often faulty wisdom elsewhere resulting in some caustic comments. Shame, really. You came online just to post that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 You came online just to post that? You came online just to post that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted January 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 I see the proven lying bigot has returned on other threads. Never thought this forum would ever let him post anything again after his previous vile post. Still trying to deflect I see Cockles. Once again Cockles tell me will you be happy to see the SNP in a Westminster Government Coalition with the Conservatives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted January 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 I answered that when you lied about the Saudi Arabia oil price. Don't you remember. But then you outdone yourself with your bigoted comment regarding transsexuals. Do you care to elaborate on that? No I don't remember - perhaps you'd care to refresh my memory. And your final two sentences are just ridiculous and you know it. I think the term used on here for what you are doing is whataboutery Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted January 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) The answer is in my last post. So you believe that calling a transsexual freakishly weird and wired to the moon is acceptable? Oh dear. Your poor run of form continues. I called SNP candidates freakishly weird and wired to the moon. I notice you are still dodging the question though. Can you not just simply say Yes or No? You managed it back in October FFS Edited January 5, 2015 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 Can you not just simply say Yes or No? You managed it back in October FFS What happened in October? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 Oh dear. Your poor run of form continues. I called SNP candidates freakishly weird and wired to the moon. This really is whataboutery. That's not how any reasonable person would read what you said. I know some of the SNP candidates are freakishly weird and wired to the moon but I didn't have Craig Murray down as transsexual. You called 'some' of the candidates 'freakishly weird and wired to the moon' and then made a comment about a candidate not being transsexual. It's not a huge leap to infer that you believe transsexuals to be 'freakishly weird and wired to the moon.' 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.