I sorta recognise this rhetoricAugust 24, 2015 Tim WorstallPolitics21 Comments “Totally Corrupt” etc. The wilder shores of the party I support sometimes talk that way and it doesn’t help us much…. previousThe future if the Murphmeister gains economic powernextAs neat a demolition of the Murphmeister as you’ll see. 21 thoughts on “I sorta recognise this rhetoric” Ironman August 24, 2015 at 8:34 am The problem is the “wilder shores” are causing reason people, who would otherwise give it serious consideration, to avoid Ukip at all costs. Ironman August 24, 2015 at 8:34 am Reasonable people! Mr Ecks August 24, 2015 at 10:16 am Reasonable does not= operates by use of reason. They are mostly the gutless, thoughtless middle who blow with the wind. If the sight of a mildly worded banner, mildly displayed, psyches them out they are of little value. to any worthwhile cause. The first point of reason would be the establishment of fact and clear definition. Are the protesters wrong about Robinson? No– he is a leftist who is paid by taxpayers and –like the BBC in general– spreads propaganda for the left. In contravention to the BBC charter. The banner is unclear. It does not specify the nature of Robinsons corruption. It is not likely that he is “on the take” so to speak. He is more like a corrupted computer file. “Leftist bias” would be a better phrase. Maybe the word “liar” is too much for these “reasonable” people. Robinson helps to propagandise for a crew with an ocean of blood on their hands. If he can’t even by countered by calling him what he is (by commission or omission) you might as well pack up and go home. Anonymous August 24, 2015 at 10:27 am I think the BBC is corrupt a UKIP candidate Alex Wood recently had an apology from the mirror for calling him racist the mirror said “We apologise to Mr Wood for the allegations made and any hurt and distress caused as a result. We hope this apology will go some way to repairing Mr Wood’s reputation.” The BBC reported the original accusation but not the apology. If it had been a Labour MP it would have been reported. Ironman August 24, 2015 at 10:37 am Er, those SNP activists weren’t protesting about Nick Robinson being a lefty. Eddy August 24, 2015 at 10:42 am Ironman has it, it is the SNP who are protesting. Its not just activists, Alex Salmond is making the case. Theophrastus August 24, 2015 at 10:54 am Ah, the delicious irony of Ecksy lecturing us about reason! Mr Ecks August 24, 2015 at 11:09 am Didn’t know who they were –don’t watch the news all that much. Doesn’t alter the general point about “reasonable” people. Ah Theo–don’t waste your time sniping at me. Keep both(?) your eyes on the markets. And start planting veggies instead of your lawn. GlenDorran August 24, 2015 at 12:17 pm Ironman: There’s a lot of dissembling going on about those protests. Despite Salmond cheering them on at the time and now, despite being made up almost exclusively of SNP supporters, despite the “message” of the protests, despite all of this because the SNP didn’t actually organise it then they all deny it is an SNP protest. Johnnydub August 24, 2015 at 12:20 pm “Ironman has it, it is the SNP who are protesting. Its not just activists, Alex Salmond is making the case.” It’s not a right / left issue per se… It’s the SNP bitching that the BBC protects the establishment – the fact that the establishment is soft left is neither here nor there, they just oppose Scottish independence. So yet another issue where the BBC is absolutely on the wrong side of the argument. Free the Scottish lefties… they need a hard dose of reality. Squander Two August 24, 2015 at 12:36 pm The BBC are simply pro-Labour. If Scotland were staunchly Tory and its leaving would likely lead to more Labour governments in future, the BBC would have replaced the Nine O’clock News with nightly reruns of Braveheart. The funny thing about the protests is that they are coming from people who have steadfastly denied for years that the BBC is at all biased. I used to have that argument with them regularly. Dongguan John August 24, 2015 at 12:45 pm S2 My experience with lefties and BBC bias usually ends with them making this bizzare statement: “Well we think the BBC has a right wing bias so therefore it’s not biased at all” Sneaky cunts. They also tell me that the Independent has no bias because it’s called The Independent. Squander Two August 24, 2015 at 1:06 pm > “Well we think the BBC has a right wing bias so therefore it’s not biased at all” Yes, no grasp of logic whatsoever. They seem to think that bias is to do with whether you agree with them. Whereas in fact a true lack of bias would involve not even knowing whether I agree with the BBC because I would have no idea what their opinion was. As I think I’ve mentioned before, I went to John Haldane‘s Moral Philosophy lectures at St A. Look at his CV: it’s hard to be much more Catholic than that. He’s on the Pontifical Council. And yet, listening to his lectures on subjects such as abortion, euthenasia, and sex, it was completely impossible to figure out what his own views were. He recommended we read Peter Singer. That’s unbiased. JeremyT August 24, 2015 at 1:06 pm The BBC is a refuge for people who can’t deal with the dual disciplines of being accountable to owners and satisfying paying customers. Paying themselves the same salaries as free-market participants happens in all organisations lacking owners, e.g. housing associations, local authorities. Taking money by force from poor people happens in all organisations lacking customers, e.g. governments, the Mafia. But it’s not corrupt. GlenDorran August 24, 2015 at 1:17 pm @Johnnydub: The BBC’s “crime” to these protestors was just them doing their job. The Yes mob were just making shit up about the currency, economy etc of an iScotland. BBC journalists were asking basic questions which the Yessers couldn’t answer. Hence the protest. Squander Two August 24, 2015 at 1:38 pm Glen, Yes, it’s interesting that they’re calling Robinson a liar because he asked questions. How can a question be a lie? Squander Two August 24, 2015 at 1:45 pm I know one Yes-voter who said that (a) as far as he was concerned, once Scotland achieved independence, the SNP’s job was done and they could fuck right off; and (b) that independence would of course lead to all sorts of mistakes and screw-ups and terrible policies while the country found its feet, but it would be worth it long-term. I wish more of the Yes campaign had been like that. Sadly, it was mainly characterised by utopian wishful dreaming, outright lying, and the demonization of anyone who disagreed with them about anything. I found the whole thing very sad. Was asked by a friend the other night whether I ever regret leaving the country. Replied that I sometimes miss Glasgow, but that, if I hadn’t left back then, I’d have to get the hell out now, as the SNP are going to wreck the country. BraveFart August 24, 2015 at 2:39 pm I wonder which would be worse. An independent Scotland run by that lying simpleton John Swinney, Finance Minister of the SNP, or a UK or rUK run by Corbyn/Murphy? GlenDorran August 24, 2015 at 2:48 pm Interesting question. I know people who worked with Swinney when he was at Scot Am and they all say he is an extremely bright chap. I suspect he knows that the finances don’t work for an iScotland but that he is too in deep with the independence movement to tell the full truth. Murphy however is pig ignorant and wouldn’t recognise the truth if it confiscated his pension. BraveFart August 24, 2015 at 3:21 pm Well if he is extremely bright then it makes his position worse, because he is being knowingly misleading, just as his suppressed secret report on the uncertain economics of independence indicated. GlenDorran August 24, 2015 at 4:01 pm BraveFart – agreed. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.