BREXIT: Why so personal?

[LadyNorwood]

I think it goes to the Supreme Court next.... But then what do I know, I'm just a girl who likes fluffy kittens....

[Angelina]

yes - early December

[LadyNorwood]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> red devil Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Perhaps they will now take the case to the

> > European Court of Justice... :)

>

> Quote of the week I think!

>

> This attitude of 'we must enforce the will of the

> people' gets on my ties. MP's are elected by the

> will of the people on the basis they know better

> than we do (possibly). A referendum which produced

> a result almost too close to call where many votes

> were very likely based on believing lies, is not

> the right way to decide the future of the country.

> Let the MP's debate on the actual merits or

> otherwise of Brexit and then vote on it.

I'm not sure that would work either, given that most MPs were either firmly Remain or firmly Leave. I think to say "many votes were very likely based on believing lies" is being rather disingenuous; many people I know felt patronised by the elite and made very informed choices (on both sides of the debate)....

[Shaggy]

Today's court ruling is an interesting barometer. I'm sure that lots of those offerings their "opinions" haven't read it, but all it does is to simply state that the government doesn't make laws. It proposes laws, and parliament votes for them or against them. There may be a democratic imperative for parliament not to oppose Brexit, but the government just doesn't have the power to overrule parliament. If it did, we would be living in a dictatorship.

Here is the reason why it is a barometer: it is possible to have a reasoned viewpoint in support of Brexit. It is not, however reasonable to say that the judges in this ruling are wrong, biased, or acting in an undemocratic way. Those suggestions do not withstand a moment of scrutiny. Any "opinion" to the contrary isn't based on fact, and therefore is worthless.

So the response to the ruling will separate the ill-informed morons from normal sensible people.

[LadyNorwood]

Shaggy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Today's court ruling is an interesting barometer.

> I'm sure that lots of those offerings their

> "opinions" haven't read it, but all it does is to

> simply state that the government doesn't make

> laws. It proposes laws, and parliament votes for

> them or against them. There may be a democratic

> imperative for parliament not to oppose Brexit,

> but the government just doesn't have the power to

> overrule parliament. If it did, we would be living

> in a dictatorship.

>

> Here is the reason why it is a barometer: it is

> possible to have a reasoned viewpoint in support

> of Brexit. It is not, however reasonable to say

> that the judges in this ruling are wrong, biased,

> or acting in an undemocratic way. Those

> suggestions do not withstand a moment of scrutiny.

> Any "opinion" to the contrary isn't based on fact,

> and therefore is worthless.

>

> So the response to the ruling will separate the

> ill-informed morons from normal sensible people.

The wording on the ballot paper stated "This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide" - there was no mention of Parliament being involved.

Yours aye, ill-informed moronic, worthless opinoned fluffy kitten loving airhead....

[Shaggy]

And your point is?

[LadyNorwood]

Shaggy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And your point is?

My point is this - at no stage was it indicated to the electorate that Parliament would then debate the outcome - it was clearly stated, again, "This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide". Such was the naivety and arrogance of the ruling elite (on both sides of both Houses) that they did not contemplate the effects of a Leave vote. A question was asked, an answer was given, now the goal posts are being jiggled about in a frantic attempt to appease that ruling elite....

I'm sorry if I wasn't air headed enough for you first time round, I do hope this clarifies that I am, indeed, a really stupid girly....

[JohnL]

LadyNorwood Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Shaggy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > And your point is?

>

> My point is this - at no stage was it indicated to

> the electorate that Parliament would then debate

> the outcome - it was clearly stated, again, "This

> is your decision. The Government will implement

> what you decide". Such was the naivety and

> arrogance of the ruling elite (on both sides of

> both Houses) that they did not contemplate the

> effects of a Leave vote. A question was asked, an

> answer was given, now the goal posts are being

> jiggled about in a frantic attempt to appease that

> ruling elite....

> I'm sorry if I wasn't air headed enough for you

> first time round, I do hope this clarifies that I

> am, indeed, a really stupid girly....

If they didn't even examine the consequences - how do they know if Brexit is even possible.

We're entwined with EU and maybe 30-40 years is the timetable, we aren't even told half the story.

[LadyNorwood]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LadyNorwood Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Shaggy Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > And your point is?

> >

> > My point is this - at no stage was it indicated

> to

> > the electorate that Parliament would then

> debate

> > the outcome - it was clearly stated, again,

> "This

> > is your decision. The Government will implement

> > what you decide". Such was the naivety and

> > arrogance of the ruling elite (on both sides of

> > both Houses) that they did not contemplate the

> > effects of a Leave vote. A question was asked,

> an

> > answer was given, now the goal posts are being

> > jiggled about in a frantic attempt to appease

> that

> > ruling elite....

> > I'm sorry if I wasn't air headed enough for you

> > first time round, I do hope this clarifies that

> I

> > am, indeed, a really stupid girly....

>

>

> If they didn't even examine the consequences - how

> do they know if Brexit is even possible.

>

> We're entwined with EU and maybe 30-40 years is

> the timetable, we aren't even told half the story.

Well that's a totally different argument - what I do know is that all my French neighbours and friends in my tiny Provencal village think that the result is brave and, given the chance, they would vote to leave the EU too...

Anyway I'm not going to trouble my silly head about this any more as I must go and choose a new lipstick and ribbon for my curly hair and leave it to all you sensible men to make things better....

[Shaggy]

No, there isn't a point there. Just a series of irrelevent assertions.

The question now isn't "should there be a Brexit". That's decided. The question is "how do we do it." To say "trigger article 50 and hope for the best" is a childish response. There is a reason why children don't get to vote.

But you are right to say that the govement didn't contemplate the effects of a leave vote. This is what has left us in this situation. If the Referendum Act said (like all other referendum acts) "there shall be a referendum AND if leave wins this shall happen...." But all it said was "there shall be a referendum."

So yes, it is a big mess and people need to stop bleating about "the people's will" to shut out those who are thinking about the issue and foresee problems, and work out in a considered fashion what to do. If you think giving Therea May carte blanche do do whatever she likes and not tell us what it is until she's done it, you have greater faith in her than me.

LadyNorwood Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Shaggy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > And your point is?

>

> My point is this - at no stage was it indicated to

> the electorate that Parliament would then debate

> the outcome - it was clearly stated, again, "This

> is your decision. The Government will implement

> what you decide". Such was the naivety and

> arrogance of the ruling elite (on both sides of

> both Houses) that they did not contemplate the

> effects of a Leave vote. A question was asked, an

> answer was given, now the goal posts are being

> jiggled about in a frantic attempt to appease that

> ruling elite....

> I'm sorry if I wasn't air headed enough for you

> first time round, I do hope this clarifies that I

> am, indeed, a really stupid girly....

[KidKruger]

What's with the girly ribbon BS ?

Whether your point is valid or not, getting all anti-men about it is surely a needless sidetrack.

[red devil]

With her disdain for the ruling elite, I'm wondering why LadyN chose such a moniker. How about PlebbyPeckham?...

[rendelharris]

LadyNorwood Wrote:

> The wording on the ballot paper stated "This is

> your decision. The Government will implement what

> you decide"

No it didn't, it didn't say that anywhere on the ballot paper. Thousands of pictures of the ballot paper online to refresh your memory if you don't believe me. Furthermore, the European Referendum Bill 2015-2016 briefing notes specifically explain: "The Bill requires a referendum on the UK's continued membership of the European Union (EU) before the end of 2017. It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum."

You may believe the government ought to implement the result of the referendum and you would certainly have an arguable case, but nowhere on the ballot did it say they would and there's nothing in law to say they have to.

[JohnL]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LadyNorwood Wrote:

>

> > The wording on the ballot paper stated "This is

> > your decision. The Government will implement

> what

> > you decide"

>

> No it didn't, it didn't say that anywhere on the

> ballot paper. Thousands of pictures of the ballot

> paper online to refresh your memory if you don't

> believe me. Furthermore, the European Referendum

> Bill 2015-2016 briefing notes specifically

> explain: "The Bill requires a referendum on the

> UK's continued membership of the European Union

> (EU) before the end of 2017. It does not contain

> any requirement for the UK Government to implement

> the results of the referendum."

>

> You may believe the government ought to implement

> the result of the referendum and you would

> certainly have an arguable case, but nowhere on

> the ballot did it say they would and there's

> nothing in law to say they have to.

I don't remember the wording - but if it was like that

it was Cameron with a final scare attempt.

Surprised he didn't say

"This is it, on your head be it, don't complain to me

when it gets done."

[LadyNorwood]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LadyNorwood Wrote:

>

> > The wording on the ballot paper stated "This is

> > your decision. The Government will implement

> what

> > you decide"

>

> No it didn't, it didn't say that anywhere on the

> ballot paper. Thousands of pictures of the ballot

> paper online to refresh your memory if you don't

> believe me. Furthermore, the European Referendum

> Bill 2015-2016 briefing notes specifically

> explain: "The Bill requires a referendum on the

> UK's continued membership of the European Union

> (EU) before the end of 2017. It does not contain

> any requirement for the UK Government to implement

> the results of the referendum."

>

> You may believe the government ought to implement

> the result of the referendum and you would

> certainly have an arguable case, but nowhere on

> the ballot did it say they would and there's

> nothing in law to say they have to.

Mea culpa - it was actually in the leaflet sent out by the Government... See under "A Once In A Generation Decision"

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk

[LadyNorwood]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> With her disdain for the ruling elite, I'm

> wondering why LadyN chose such a moniker. How

> about PlebbyPeckham?...

It was given to me by someone much cleverer and better than me....

[LadyNorwood]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What's with the girly ribbon BS ?

> Whether your point is valid or not, getting all

> anti-men about it is surely a needless sidetrack.

It was Shaggy I think who said ill-informed moron, so I just added girly ribbon for a touch of humour, clearly lost in translation.. I adore men actually, I have very old-fashioned views on marriage and actually I do put on lipstick and freshen up before his Lordship comes home... Heaven forfend that topics on the edf get sidetracked, because that NEVER happens!

[JohnL]

LadyNorwood Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mea culpa - it was actually in the leaflet sent

> out by the Government... See under "A Once In A

> Generation Decision"

>

> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/why-the

> -government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-

> european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk/why

> -the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-

> the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk

That was just propaganda really. i threw all of that

in the bin (from both sides) :)

[Alan Medic]

LadyNorwood Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Alan Medic Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > red devil Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Perhaps they will now take the case to the

> > > European Court of Justice... :)

> >

> > Quote of the week I think!

> >

> > This attitude of 'we must enforce the will of

> the

> > people' gets on my ties. MP's are elected by

> the

> > will of the people on the basis they know

> better

> > than we do (possibly). A referendum which

> produced

> > a result almost too close to call where many

> votes

> > were very likely based on believing lies, is

> not

> > the right way to decide the future of the

> country.

> > Let the MP's debate on the actual merits or

> > otherwise of Brexit and then vote on it.

>

> I'm not sure that would work either, given that

> most MPs were either firmly Remain or firmly

> Leave. I think to say "many votes were very

> likely based on believing lies" is being rather

> disingenuous; many people I know felt patronised

> by the elite and made very informed choices (on

> both sides of the debate)....

If so many people were well informed then, how come nobody appears to be now?

[LadyNorwood]

AM - who's to say they're not? Are you talking about the man on the street or those 'in charge'?

[JohnL]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If so many people were well informed then, how

> come nobody appears to be now?

If you don't know, you don't know that you don't know.

And none of us know of the whole can of worms - just some

of us suspect that there is a huge can of worms.

[Otta]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What's with the girly ribbon BS ?

> Whether your point is valid or not, getting all

> anti-men about it is surely a needless sidetrack.

Not sure there was any anti men stuff, but I too thought WTF when I was the "silly girly / hair ribbon" stuff. It's like the over use of this word "mansplaining". Now I am sure that there are plenty of men who talk down to women in a patronising tone and "mansplain", I don't doubt it for a second.

But equally I've found recently that it's been used to just shut me down when I am disagreeing with someone on facebook. I explain my opinion and why I think their opinion is wrong. Which is how debate and discussion works. I then get "thanks for mansplaining", which basically shuts the debate down and paints me as a cunt.

Sorry, totally off topic, but so what.

[red devil]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry, totally off topic, but so what.

That'll be you manterrupting again...

[rendelharris]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Sorry, totally off topic, but so what.

>

> That'll be you manterrupting again...

This type of mantervention is well out of order.

[KidKruger]

Otta I was basically saying what's with the gender focus, perhaps not clearly enough.

I was at a womens' band night a couple of weeks ago (organised by a womens' charity) and when one of the bands started playing, the organiser pushed to the front of the crowd where two men were dancing (wearing the t-shirts of the all-girl band), shouting "women to the front, women to the front". She basically got the men thrown out by security and it was all because in her view men were 'dominating'. So I'm probably overly sensitive to distinctions being made right now, as the whole thing got my back up cos it was completely destructive and unnecessary.

ETA: Sorry for the manologue.