Oor Nicola Sturgeon thread.

[Salt n Vinegar]

5 hours ago, Stormzy said:

You said it's not hard to work out why Glasgow is still in T3, it's because you elected the SNP. If you hadn't I doubt there would be such bed wetting in Glasgow right now. 

I wasn't aware that the virus was noted for paying particular attention to party politics.  Your rather startling take on the management of global pandemics might puzzle those elsewhere in the world who did not vote for the SNP, but I'm sure they'll take it into account. 

Edited May 26, 2021 by Salt n Vinegar
Oops... Typo

[Florentine_Pogen]

Uh oh......Stormfront putting too much sugar on his Rice Krispies ?

Edited May 26, 2021 by Florentine_Pogen

[SANTAN]

11 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

I wasn't aware that the virus was noted for paying particular attention to party politics.  Your rather starting take on the management of global pandemics might puzzle those elsewhere in the world who did not vote for the SNP, but I'm sure they'll take it into account. 

Again, you said it isn't hard to understand why Glasgow was still in T3. Covid doesn't set lockdown restrictions and different tier systems now does it? 

Or were you being wilfully ignorant to the fact it's the SNP that dictate the response and it is up to them how they balance freedoms with controls, unsurprisingly under less authoritarian governments other countries have opened up considerably quicker due to how they value each part of the equation.

Obviously with the SNP being quite authoritarian and having been emboldened by their devoted followers it's of no surprise they adopt the slow easing, stricter approach, maintaining extra ordinary powers over the people and they can do so freely because... well... "indy no matter what". 

If you want a nice easy comparison compare how many fans were at the football last weekend in England then do the same for Scotland. 

[Salt n Vinegar]

1 minute ago, Stormzy said:

Again, you said it isn't hard to understand why Glasgow was still in T3. Covid doesn't set lockdown restrictions and different tier systems now does it? 

Or were you being wilfully ignorant to the fact it's the SNP that dictate the response and it is up to them how they balance freedoms with controls, unsurprisingly under less authoritarian governments other countries have opened up considerably quicker due to how they value each part of the equation.

Obviously with the SNP being quite authoritarian and having been emboldened by their devoted followers it's of no surprise they adopt the slow easing, stricter approach, maintaining extra ordinary powers over the people and they can do so freely because... well... "indy no matter what". 

If you want a nice easy comparison compare how many fans were at the football last weekend in England then do the same for Scotland. 

Look, this is quite straightforward.  You have to tailor the covid response to the covid situation. I would much prefer caution, but I accept that others are prepared to take more cavalier approaches with the health of others.  Opening up too early was stupid.  Continuing to allow intercontinental air travel was mental. Dine out to help out was mental.  Unfortunately, those who decide to rake risks with their own health are also choosing to risk the health of others. I miss seeing lots of people and doing lots of things, but there's nobody that I want to see so much that I'm prepared to increase their risk of premature death.  Some might not regard their own friends or family as highly as I value mine, but that's up to them and you. 

[SANTAN]

5 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

Look, this is quite straightforward.  You have to tailor the covid response to the covid situation. I would much prefer caution, but I accept that others are prepared to take more cavalier approaches with the health of others.  Opening up too early was stupid.  Continuing to allow intercontinental air travel was mental. Dine out to help out was mental.  Unfortunately, those who decide to rake risks with their own health are also choosing to risk the health of others. I miss seeing lots of people and doing lots of things, but there's nobody that I want to see so much that I'm prepared to increase their risk of premature death.  Some might not regard their own friends or family as highly as I value mine, but that's up to them and you. 

Save that stuff for your diary. 

[NotThePars]

I'd say it's pretty dangerous to disregard one of them as "nonsense".  
I'd love to hear a list though and the justifications for what's worse than each other, what could possibly go wrong? 

I think the reason (other than the SNP being full of papists) is that protestants in this country don’t have any history of marginalisation and hence calling someone a name which may be offensive to them doesn’t have the same connotations as a derogatory term used against the African American community or even closer to home terms used against the Irish Catholic community.

[SANTAN]

1 minute ago, NotThePars said:

 

I think the reason (other than the SNP being full of papists) is that protestants in this country don’t have any history of marginalisation and hence calling someone a name which may be offensive to them doesn’t have the same connotations as a derogatory term used against the African American community or even closer to home terms used against the Irish Catholic community.

 

Fair reasoning. For clarity, I don't disagree with the initial joke about choosing what gets censored first or your assesment on why some slurs could be considered worse than others, I was really just being puerile and looking for a big list of all the slurs in order from BFTD.  

[GiGi]

Not sure where this goes but here will do. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57257631

SNP and Greens talking formal co-op agreement.

Naturally because it's SNP related they've opened a comments section and the gammon are understandably thrilled at the prospect.

Edited May 26, 2021 by GiGi

[Salt n Vinegar]

9 minutes ago, GiGi said:

Not sure where this goes but here will do. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57257631

SNP and Greens talking formal co-op agreement.

Naturally because it's SNP related they've opened a comments section and the gammon are understandably thrilled at the prospect.

OMG, the comments. 

Dunno what all the fuss is about with the Australian trade deal.  The UK is clearly self-sufficient in gammon... 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Not sure where this goes but here will do. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57257631
SNP and Greens talking formal co-op agreement.
Naturally because it's SNP related they've opened a comments section and the gammon are understandably thrilled at the prospect.

The usual gammon suspects posting.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Not sure where this goes but here will do. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57257631
SNP and Greens talking formal co-op agreement.
Naturally because it's SNP related they've opened a comments section and the gammon are understandably thrilled at the prospect.

The comment calling NS "pure evil" shows these roasters for what they are.

[Dan Steele]

The Daily Express calling the SNP/Greens working together a PLOT to destroy the UK.

Daily Mail, however, running with Kate wearing an outfit the colour of the blue in the Scottish flag.

[Ned Nederlander]

3 minutes ago, The Skelpit Lug said:

The Daily Express calling the SNP/Greens working together a PLOT to destroy the UK.

Daily Mail, however, running with Kate wearing an outfit the colour of the blue in the Scottish flag.

Nicola Sturgeon could shite a gold bar and the Express would say it was because she was rattled about something Willie Rennie had said at FMQs

[Salt n Vinegar]

5 minutes ago, The Skelpit Lug said:

The Daily Express calling the SNP/Greens working together a PLOT to destroy the UK.

Daily Mail, however, running with Kate wearing an outfit the colour of the blue in the Scottish flag.

It is outrageous that two democratically elected parties that between them have a clear majority of seats in a Parliament should "plot" to implement a major plank of their manifestos.  What's the world coming to?

[Shipa]

If the unionists are so bothered about this, why do they not encourage their various unionist parties to form an opposition coalition, and vote together to challenge new legislation, instead of pissing and moaning that pro-indy parties are doing that?

Could it be that Indy supporters are more prepared, to an extent, to eschew other political affiliations for the greater cause, while unionists put their party political beliefs first?

[Dan Steele]

35 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

It is outrageous that two democratically elected parties that between them have a clear majority of seats in a Parliament should "plot" to implement a major plank of their manifestos.  What's the world coming to?

I know. Ridiculous. Glad the Royal charm offensive is off to a cracking start though.

[Salt n Vinegar]

7 minutes ago, The Skelpit Lug said:

I know. Ridiculous. Glad the Royal charm offensive is off to a cracking start though.

Ah yes, the good old royal family, who are meant to be above politics. 

Some of them are so low they could limbo dance under a snake's belly. 

[Granny Danger]

48 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

It is outrageous that two democratically elected parties that between them have a clear majority of seats in a Parliament should "plot" to implement a major plank of their manifestos.  What's the world coming to?

Don’t worry, with Johnson as PM the idea of manifesto commitments being delivered won’t catch on.

[SANTAN]

50 minutes ago, Shipa said:

If the unionists are so bothered about this, why do they not encourage their various unionist parties to form an opposition coalition, and vote together to challenge new legislation, instead of pissing and moaning that pro-indy parties are doing that?

Could it be that Indy supporters are more prepared, to an extent, to eschew other political affiliations for the greater cause, while unionists put their party political beliefs first?

I would certainly agree than Indy supporters don't seem to care much about domestic agendas and are willing to blindly back whoever they think will deliver their promised lands. 

[strichener]

1 hour ago, Shipa said:

If the unionists are so bothered about this, why do they not encourage their various unionist parties to form an opposition coalition, and vote together to challenge new legislation, instead of pissing and moaning that pro-indy parties are doing that?

Could it be that Indy supporters are more prepared, to an extent, to eschew other political affiliations for the greater cause, while unionists put their party political beliefs first?

Could it be that it would be a waste of time given that the still wouldn't have a majority.  Political suicide springs to mind.