Yes hoorah for that.Spiral wrote:Too right. How else would I know how to properly treat my slave? Three cheers for piety.
While it might be a stretch to call her a liar, she's clearly a huge hypocrite. In her secret speech at Goldman Sachs she was very clear that Brexit would be bad for the economy and that companies would leave the UK. She seems to have conveniently forgotten all that and now somehow thinks that 'taking back control' will be good for the UK. I'm not religious so I'm not sure where it stands on weapons grade hypocrisy.Rowls wrote:She is many things but a "fibber" and "inept" are two things which she is not.
She is a devout Christian and unabashed truth-teller. She is a lady who delivers constant home-truths to those who she believes do not have a good grasp of their brief.
As for the idea that she is "inept" - this is laughable. She has a reputation based on over 20 years as an MP as one of the hardest working and efficient MPs in Parliament. She held her previous role as Home Secretary for the longest period in 60 years and achieved many successes that had eluded her predecessors.
The post had previously been the deathbed of many politicians. Her record as Home Secretary is excellent.
She may not be charismatic or glamorous and she may indulge in too much politicking from time to time but the accusations you are trying to throw here simply do not match up to Theresa May's record or abilities. She is a model of quiet competence.
Considering I'm an atheist by your definition I'm far more dishonest than you are, or others on this board who happen to believe in God.Rowls wrote:I was resolutely descriptivist. It's genuinely diffiult to get "gushy" about somebody as bland as Theresa May.
You've mistaken complimentary language for emotional attachment.
Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. Christians are more honest than most. Good* Christians (and I believe Theresa May to be one) doubly so.
We are all imperfect creatures and prone to telling porkies. What's to stop us? Well, if you're an atheist then only your internal sense of morality. If you're a Christian you have that in equal measure to the atheist but you also have God's looming judgement swinging above your mortal soul. Human nature being what it is, it's a handy thing to have that Old Testament God hanging around at times.
* By which I mean, regular church-going Christians who actually uphold Christian values; not just any old preachy soul who happens to have 'found Christ'.
Changing your mind based upon the decision of the electorate does not equate to "hypocrisy".martin_p wrote:While it might be a stretch to call her a liar, she's clearly a huge hypocrite. In her secret speech at Goldman Sachs she was very clear that Brexit would be bad for the economy and that companies would leave the UK. She seems to have conveniently forgotten all that and now somehow thinks that 'taking back control' will be good for the UK. I'm not religious so I'm not sure where it stands on weapons grade hypocrisy.
That is NOT what I said spijed.Spijed wrote:Considering I'm an atheist by your definition I'm far more dishonest than you are, or others on this board who happen to believe in God.
Oh well.
She's doing her job as PM, due to a democratic vote.martin_p wrote:I think telling people not to take us out of the EU then taking us out of the EU is a text book definition of the word.
She wasn't telling us, she was trying to persuade us.martin_p wrote:I think telling people not to take us out of the EU then taking us out of the EU is a text book definition of the word.
The democratic vote she knew about before she took the job. When the major job a government has got is taking us out of the EU you shouldn't be putting yourself forward as leader if you don't believe it's the right thing to do. It is, as I said, the very definition of hypocrisy!Sidney1st wrote:She's doing her job as PM, due to a democratic vote.
Not leading us out of Europe would be worse.
I think you're confusing yourself here.martin_p wrote:The democratic vote she knew about before she took the job. When the major job a government has got is taking us out of the EU you shouldn't be putting yourself forward as leader if you don't believe it's the right thing to do. It is, as I said, the very definition of hypocrisy!
Even though Kenneth Clarke is not in government he seems to get a very easy ride from the Conservative party over his stance on leaving the EU, especially from members in the cabinet.dsr wrote:It's pretty obvious really - she wanted to stay in the EU, but not with a crusader's zeal. But she also wants to follow the rules of democracy; so after a majority vote to leave, she's willing to accept that she must change her mind.
Politicians who wanted to remain, and who wish to remain in politics and in government, have to ask themselves which is more important: their own personal opinion, or the result of a public referendum. If they decide their own opinion is more valid or more important than the majority view of the electorate, then they must leave the government. If they are willing to accept the referendum result and work towards leaving the EU, then they are fine to stay in government.
Rowls wrote:The post had previously been the deathbed of many politicians. Her record as Home Secretary is excellent.
She may not be charismatic or glamorous and she may indulge in too much politicking from time to time but the accusations you are trying to throw here simply do not match up to Theresa May's record or abilities. She is a model of quiet competence.
She didn't have the job when the referendum happened, she 'applied' for it after the result was known. It's like a vegetarian applying for a job in a butchers! At least Cameron was honourable enough to step down when he knew he'd have to take the county in a direction he didn't believe in.Sidney1st wrote:I think you're confusing yourself here.
Yes she campaigned for one particular outcome HOWEVER she's acting out her duties as PM, something Cameron didn't have the balls to do after the result.
It isn't hypocrisy to do the job you've got, regardless of which way she wanted it to go.
I do. Preferably with mash, gravy and peas. Yum.RocketLawnChair wrote:Who else likes sausages, I love um !
But it wasn't. So they didn't.HelloHiGoodbye wrote:If the vote had been the other way around, with the same margin, Nigel Farage and his followers would've thrown the largest paddy in history.
Damo wrote:I still find it amusing how, when remoaners are challenged about being undemocratic, they suddenly compare themselves to Nigel Farage.
I thought they hated him?
When it comes to throwing paddys, nobody does it quite like the left.HelloHiGoodbye wrote:If the vote had been the other way around, with the same margin, Nigel Farage and his followers would've thrown the largest paddy in history.
You only have to look at the thread title to see that's not true.Sidney1st wrote:We all know what democracy is.
And someone struggled with the concept that applying for a job that will involve implementing something you don't agree with is hypocritical.Sidney1st wrote: This one was a little different when someone struggled with the idea of someone doing their job, despite a possibly opposing view before the vote.
Yes you have a point, just like those who didn't agree with the vote to join, the likes of Tony Benn, he didn't change his view because of the democratic result of the 1975 referendum.martin_p wrote:I think some people need lessons on what a democracy actually is. Yes a decision has been made, and yes the government has a duty to act on that decision. But a democracy doesn't mean that everyone has to agree with it or stop fighting for what they believe in!
I think you're confusing politician with civil servant! Politicians are supposed to have opinions and visions about the future for our country and try to persuade enough people that's it's a good vision to get into a position to get it done. An impartial civil service then has to implement those ideas. With something as fundemantal to our future as EU membership then if you don't think it's a good idea you shouldn't be involved.Damo wrote:As a politician, she would be a hypocrite for not invoking what the public voted for.
You don't represent the people by spitting your dummy out and doing what's best for yourself
ClaretMoffitt wrote:When it comes to throwing paddys, nobody does it quite like the left.
I don't think you quite understand referendums. All the persuasion happens BEFORE the vote takes place.martin_p wrote:I think you're confusing politician with civil servant! Politicians are supposed to have opinions and visions about the future for our country and try to persuade enough people that's it's a good vision to get into a position to get it done. An impartial civil service then has to implement those ideas. With something as fundemantal to our future as EU membership then if you don't think it's a good idea you shouldn't be involved.
I'll point out again, her job on the day of the referendum was Home Secretary.Damo wrote:I don't think you quite understand referendums. All the persuasion happens BEFORE the vote takes place.
The people decided and now her job is to deliver Brexit
Exactly. So whatever her opinion once she became PM is irrelevant.martin_p wrote:I'll point out again, her job on the day of the referendum was Home Secretary.
Hi martin_p, agree with the distinction you make between politicians and civil servants.martin_p wrote:I think you're confusing politician with civil servant! Politicians are supposed to have opinions and visions about the future for our country and try to persuade enough people that's it's a good vision to get into a position to get it done. An impartial civil service then has to implement those ideas. With something as fundemantal to our future as EU membership then if you don't think it's a good idea you shouldn't be involved.
It would be better if you actually had the courage to say what you mean here Lancaster - For the record.Lancasterclaret wrote:Uncanny the amount of brexiteers that are so opposed to the undemocratic nature of the Eu, but by a complete coincidence, also come across as ever so slightly bigoted on threads about Islam.
You're in the wrong country if you want that.martin_p wrote:Well I prefer my politicians to stand for something, have the courage of their convictions and not do a complete about face on such a fundamental issue just to further their own career.
Hi IT, are you having a Sean Spicer moment? Or, like Arsene Wenger you "didnt see it?"Imploding Turtle wrote:At least with the left it stops at a temper tantrum and not terrorism. I can't remember any examples of the left being provoked into such a frenzy that some of them go around killing people over equal marriage rights, or immigration rights, etc.
Paul Waine wrote:Hi IT, are you having a Sean Spicer moment? Or, like Arsene Wenger you "didnt see it?"
But it wasn't a complete about face. She went from "On balance I support membership of the EU" to "I support the result of the referendum". Are you saying that every single politician who supported membership of the EU should never again sit in government in the UK? I would have thought it a valid position to say that although the current situation was not their first choice, they are willing to accept majority rule and will go forward and make the best of the situation. Who knows, there may even be a politician or two willing to concede that although the decision wasn't a decision they would have taken, there is nonetheless a possibility that it was the right decision!martin_p wrote:Well I prefer my politicians to stand for something, have the courage of their convictions and not do a complete about face on such a fundamental issue just to further their own career.