Mr Bairn Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Why is it "ridiculous"? Be very specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Why is it "ridiculous"? Be very specific. Do you think you're Supras? You couldn't light a candle if you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Well it's more realistic that a combined team GB would do well. Murray would never have won that olympic silver of he had to play with a Scottish woman instead of Laura Robson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Well it's more realistic that a combined team GB would do well. Murray would never have won that olympic silver of he had to play with a Scottish woman instead of Laura Robson Where is Laura Robson from then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Born down under, moved to London when she was about 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Maybe we will eventually just stop replying to Mr Bairn. I just can't understand why people still do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Born down under, moved to London when she was about 7 So a Scotsman wouldn't have won a doubles medal for at London 2012 if he hadn't been paired with an Australian. Excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 ^^^ identity fascist Laura represents GB under the residency rules. If the UK was split she'd represent England Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 ^^^ identity fascist Laura represents GB under the residency rules. If the UK was split she'd represent England The point is that you made a bullsh*t argument about Murray not winning silver if he had been paired with a Scottish partner. Would Robson have won silver if she had been paired with an English partner? Would either have medalled had they not been paired with each other? Their silver was a result of two great players who met the qualification rules being paired together, rather than where they were born, raised or trained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 ^^^ identity fascist Laura represents GB under the residency rules. If the UK was split she'd represent England You're really getting a hard on for this fascist chat aren't you? You really need to stop apeing your mum and her girlfriend, it does precisely zero for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Stolen from somebody on FB. I thought it was a good read. Stolen from FB, really good piece I thought seeing as everyone's arguing about the finer details... This is the most important political decision my generation will ever make and I feel very strongly about it. Firstly, let me be absolutely clear - the ongoing political and economic situation in the UK is not 'normal' and the status quo, or whatever variation of the status quo might or might not be on offer in the event of a No vote, is not the best of both worlds. We have the most expensive public transport (run by private businesses for profit), energy (ditto), the longest working hours, the most inefficient tax system, the lowest pensions, the most unequal and skewed economy, the most centralised concentration of political power in Europe and both a government and an opposition in Westminster committed to this status quo, including the dismantling of the NHS to replace it with a US style system that puts profit before people. We live in the most unequal society in Europe. I repeat - this is NOT normal. The imbalance of the UK versus other European countries, and those further afield, is proven by publicly available data whether you want to look at in-work and child poverty, privatisation of public services, local democracy, land ownership, pensions or any number of other measures. These are facts (citations on request or you could just google it and find out for yourself instead of moaning there isnt enough info to make up your mind) but they are also things that can be changed if we choose to change them. It doesn't have to be this way. It is only difficult to change them because it goes against the neoliberal consensus which has become the politics of all 3 Westminster parties over the last 30 years (when they're not knee-jerking even further to the right to satisfy UKIP swing voters in the shires). Politics is a question of priorities. I think the parties at Westminster have their priorities wrong. I think theyve become blinded to whats right for the people they serve by whats good for big business, that they think their economic orthodoxy trickles wealth down, instead of up. Is it more important that we invest in nuclear weapons or education? Aircraft carriers or healthcare? Should private companies be able to make obscene profits from heating our homes or mass transit systems, or our ill health? Do you want to continue to live in a Me First society or share more of the success of our nation with the people who make that success possible by putting All of Us first (with thanks to The Common Weal)? Some of my friends (please correct me if Ive misunderstood your points of view) are voting no because they think Westminster will change its tune with a Labour government in power (worth remembering who deregulated the banking industry, stole the pension pot, began the privatisation of the NHS), or because they think the status quo is as good as it gets (as history shows, it never is), or because they think some sort of anarchist uprising will overthrow the powers that be at some indeterminate point in the future (it wont and its not desirable anyway), or because they think we are stronger (whatever that means) with the most successful political Union in history (again, by what criteria? Successful for whom?). Some of them are voting no because they hate Alex Salmond although he and the SNP administration at Holyrood were democratically elected to a majority in a system designed to stop that happening yet still, after a length of time that would see most governments ousted, have the highest approval ratings of any leader or party in the UK three times as many residents trust Holyrood than Westminster to look after Scottish interests. I'm voting Yes because I don't believe this is as good as it gets, because I see a Labour party thats turned its back on its own principles and is trying to out-Tory the Tories (a race to the bottom they can never win), because I don't believe in an anarchist uprising, nor that the electorate in much of the rest of the UK believes it's either necessary or desirable and because a Yes vote is not a vote for the SNP or Alex Salmond, its a vote for change to the rotten-to-the-core status quo. I'm voting Yes because we have a clear and present opportunity to change things, I hope for the better, by the simple act of putting a cross in a box. I'm under no illusions that a Yes vote will suddenly result in a land of milk and honey. It'll be hard. But when was anything worthwhile ever easy? I believe it is worth it for the prize of a better, fairer place to bring up my daughter, and for her to bring up hers, for the chance to take back control of the levers that can make this country, our society a better place to live. Decisions made here have made Scotland a better place and protected our citizens from some of the worst of the current governments attack on the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. Its also worth pointing out that we can vote for whoever we like in the first elections in an independent Scotland, meaning were far more likely to have a government that truly represents the views of all of us who live here and, yes that includes Tory & UKIP voters. Its not going to be some socialist utopia but it is going to reflect the views of all of us in a way that the first past the post Westminster system doesnt. Recent propaganda from the No side has boasted that Scotland gets the government it votes for two thirds of the time. Wouldnt it be better if we got the government we voted for all the time rather than hope that the rest of the UK votes the same way? The No campaign have based their, self-styled, Project Fear (their term not mine) on threatening Scotland with doom and gloom economic and political prognostications (which have been proven false) and by spreading uncertainty amongst the electorate about what the future might hold as if they have a Unionist crystal ball that they wont let us play with if we choose not to play by their rules. They profess to love us at the same time as telling us they'll f**k us up if we leave (even if it fucks them up too). Id rather take the uncertainty of what an independent Scotland could be than the certainty of what the United Kingdom has become. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizfit Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Both sides campaigning in Perth today, from what I saw the yes group were having more people walking up to there booth for a chat. Better togethers plan seemed to consist of following people up the street telling them a yes vote is disastrous for them. Seen one guy ask BT campaigners exactly why a no vote was disastrous and his answer was "it gives salmond power" :blink I thought he already had power what with his position and all that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Both sides campaigning in Perth today, from what I saw the yes group were having more people walking up to there booth for a chat. Better togethers plan seemed to consist of following people up the street telling them a yes vote is disastrous for them. Seen one guy ask BT campaigners exactly why a no vote was disastrous and his answer was "it gives salmond power" :blink I thought he already had power what with his position and all that? Horrendous. I was told by a BTer that I would need to remove all my money from my English bank if I voted Yes. I said my bank's headquarters are in Australia so she quickly left that and moved onto Salmond being a liar. BT are getting people out to represent them with next to no information on the subject. People don't want to think for themselves so I think they could quite easily change people's minds even with a little bit of knowledge on the downsides of what could happen if we voted Yes. All these people end up doing is resorting to playground name calling because they don't know what they are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 This is the entrance to Arbroath, not been photoshopped or nothing it's actually sitting there. Love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecto Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 This is the entrance to Arbroath, not been photoshopped or nothing it's actually sitting there. Love it. ImageUploadedByPie & Bovril1406395312.653358.jpg hopefully not for long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 hopefully not for long Yep, after a yes vote there won't be any need Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 hopefully not for long You can put a BT one up at Auchmithie if you get the permission of the 40 people that stay there bud. Arbroaths for Yessrs pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 President George W. Bush displays an American flag as he cheers on the U.S. Olympic Swimming Team Sunday, Aug. 10, 2008, at the National Aquatics Center in Beijing. President George W. Bush and former President George H.W. Bush pose for photos with U.S. Olympic swimmers Larsen Jensen, left, and Michael Phelps Sunday, Aug. 10, 2008, at the National Aquatics Center in Beijing. 2nd picture Ok, seems fair enough, but 1st picture, go on then you got me! Even Salmonds not as mad as that wee runt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizfit Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 I just realised he's holding it the wrong way :lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.