Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think she's being clever to be honest. And as she says, how many people watch BBC Parliament and PM's questions, and how many watch Get me out of here? She will have a platform from which to preach to millions.


Next year there will be an MP from each party, mark my words!

Otta Wrote:

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

> She will have a platform from which to

> preach to millions.


The programme is heavily edited. If she's not careful she could come across as a moronic attention seeking bint*...


*Copyright: Maxxi Put Downs Inc.

"Otta's right, this is the way politics is going. Unfortunately."


I disagree on two counts


1 ) there won't be one from each party in there next year


2 ) if it DOES go down that road then it won't be politics to blame - it'll be the public. If Dorries is correct and people don't bother with "the dry stuff" and they prefer them in IACGMOOH, then it's not the politicians at fault ultimately


I think what will happen is the public will ridicule her, not "listen" to her, just as they did Galloway

From the Indie

"Conservative MP Nadine Dorries.

Conservative MP Nadine Dorries has already arrived in Australia in preparation for her appearance on I?m A Celebrity... Get Me Out Of Here!


While David Cameron is unlikely to mind losing Nadine Dorries to the Australian jungle for up to a month as the Conservative MP competes in I?m A Celebrity... Get Me Out Of Here!, the public (not least her Bedfordshire constituents) might take a different view. Dorries, who has already arrived in Queensland for the show, has refused to forego her parliamentary salary for the period, meaning that she'll receive as much as ?5,478 during her time on the programme (as well as expenses of around ?3,218), in addition to a fee of up to ?40,000."


When I worked full time I was allowed 2 weeks paid leave in one go maximum. maybe 3 weeks if getting married.

How can she get away with this? Surely she has to ask someone first? If Parliament cannot manage this then there should be an independent panel - preferably including people that work for companies as diverse as Ryanair and Poundland to oversee their employment contracts and explain you cannot walk away from the poeple you represent like this- she didn't even tell her constituency. We know from Louise Mencher that leaving employment as an MP is not possible- its time to overhaul it. Especially their pensions !

Let's call it the "Boris effect". Leadership throughout history has always been about personality as much as the values or ideas espoused by a candidate. The problem with the modern age is that the currency of ideas is in decline and it is replaced by the cult of celebrity. This is not a rant about how celebrity culture is ruining our values, it is an attempt to plot the relationship between these ideas. As much as I try and avoid the traditionalist who thump on and on about values and tradition, I can see some of the processes they describe when I see a politician like Boris bereft of ideas but comfortably floating on the cloud of public adoration.


American elections case in point. I wanted Obama to win but I wouldn't have been entirely surprised if Romney had won. He insulted his electorate but expected them to vote for him because he told them he could fix the economy with his experience and a bag full of tricksy tax cuts he couldn't explain.


I am trying to think about the Prince, and I am sure he says you should always tell people what they want to hear. I paraphrase inelegantly, of course.


Yep, celebrity cult, sound and fury without content.

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> "Otta's right, this is the way politics is going.

> Unfortunately."

>

> I disagree on two counts

>

> 1 ) there won't be one from each party in there

> next year

>

> 2 ) if it DOES go down that road then it won't be

> politics to blame - it'll be the public. If

> Dorries is correct and people don't bother with

> "the dry stuff" and they prefer them in IACGMOOH,

> then it's not the politicians at fault ultimately

>

> I think what will happen is the public will

> ridicule her, not "listen" to her, just as they

> did Galloway



1. I was joking about there being one from every party there next year.

2. Totally agree, public includes many a moron.


I hope she goes on about "20 weeks", and I hope someone there argues well with her and makes her look like the tw@t she undoubtedly is.

red devil Wrote:

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

> The programme is heavily edited. If she's not

> careful she could come across as a moronic

> attention seeking bint*...

>

> *Copyright: Maxxi Put Downs Inc.



Wha-?!? If I have ever been so unkind I will; nod sagely/grin smugly/hang my head in shame*



@SJ - I like it now I see it written down - I am already thinking of the new series as Ya-caga-moo (phonetic acronym dept)

Blaming the public? Hang on, leaders set standards and the common folk follow their example. My goodness I am on the verge of a daily mail critique. Going to mull over this for a moment and think about what I want to say.


1. I really do think there has been a decline during the course of history.

2. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

3. Everybody can be a hero, turned into nobody is a hero, which turned into there is no such thing, then we have problems. thinking about Carlye here rather than comparing the prince with the courtier.

3. is there a left critique of consumer culture and celebrity culture, disposable culture with out harking back to standards ?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In 2016 London City Airport began using concentrated flight paths. When there's a predominantly westerly wind, incoming aircraft approach from East London (north of the River). When there's a predominantly Easterly wind, incoming aircraft approach the airport from the West: circling through Forest Hill, Dulwich, Vauxhall, Tower Hamlets, Docklands. This latter flight path affects many of us in South East London. https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/london-city-airport-concentrated-flight-paths The planes going into City are often below 2,000 ft, so very noisy. Sometimes we have incoming Heathrow at the same time, flying higher. The early flights that I hear e.g. 04:30 are incoming to Heathrow. They are scheduled to land at 05:30 but are 'early'. Apparently the government allows a percentage of flights to arrive early and late (but these are now established as regular occurrences, informally part of the schedule). IMHO Londoners are getting very poor political representation on this issue. Incredible that if you want to complain about aircraft noise, you're supposed to contact the airport concerned! Preposterous and designed solely in favour of aviation expansion.
    • Yet another recommendation for Jafar. Such a nice guy, really reliable and fair. He fixed a problem with our boiler and then incredibly kindly made two more visits to replace a different part at no extra cost. 
    • I didn't have any problems with plane noise until city airport started flying planes to and from about 5-8 minutes apart from 5.30 am or  6 am,  and even with ear plugs and double glazing I am woken at about 6 well before I usually would wake  up. I have lived here since 1986 and it is relatively recently that the planes have been flying far too low over East dulwich. I very much doubt that they are headinbg to Heathrow or from Heathrow. As the crow flies we are much , MUCH closer to City Airport than Heathrow or Gatwick. I even saw one flying so low you could see all the windows, when I was in Peckham Rye Park.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...