The Politics Thread 2020

[Comrade 86]

2 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

It isn't, though. That paper can still go & print what the hell it likes.

 

Ok I guess I have to explain this ?

The government is refusing to allow The Times or The Sunday Times to pose questions at during the daily briefing. This is in response to the article The Time ran criticising Johnson for missing 5 consecutive Cobra meetings in late January and throughout February.

Anyway, I think I'd have more chance of knitting an orgasm than getting a half sensible response from you so I'll leave it there.

[GboroRam]

18 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

That's Fraser Nelson or am I missing something?.

Labour supporting paper commissions poll criticising Tory government. Shock.

Toby Helm is posting opposing the government's involvement. Clearly he doesn't think a Tory government trying to influence a national newspaper to make up news is a good thing. Looks like some people here really aren't that bothered though, but if the political editor of the Conservative supporting Spectator doesn't feel comfortable about it perhaps we shouldn't either.

[GboroRam]

10 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

It isn't, though. That paper can still go & print what the hell it likes.

 

It isn't silencing it. It is trying to though.

[Tamworthram]

2 hours ago, SIXTEEN AGAIN said:

Don't like the man, but i did think he was being sarcastic at the time.

 

Maybe i am giving him too much credit but i have similar sense of sarcastic humour and try and wind up (friendly) people that way.

I think you might well be in a minority of one. 
 

If he really was being so subtly sarcastic (I’m not sure he does subtle) then that may be even worse. For such an influential and powerful man (sadly) to make such a sick joke at such an important time as this would outrageous.

I’ll give him the benefit of doubt and assume he wasn’t being sarcastic but later tried to wriggle out of the situation that made him look stupid and dangerous.

[Eddie]

6 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Ok I guess I have to explain this ?

The government is refusing to allow The Times or The Sunday Times to pose questions at during the daily briefing. This is in response to the article The Time ran criticising Johnson for missing 5 consecutive Cobra meetings in late January and throughout February.

Anyway, I think I'd have more chance of knitting an orgasm than getting a half sensible response from you so I'll leave it there.

Shouldn't that be 'clitting an orgasm'?

[Comrade 86]

4 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Shouldn't that be 'clitting an orgasm'?

Less cunning linguistics from you sir, please! ?

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

It isn't silencing it. It is trying to though.

How?

[Comrade 86]

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

How?

By preventing media outlets critical of their handling of the crisis from asking any questions at briefings and attempting to coerce other outlets into changing stories or headlines to paint a more favourable picture than they wish to.

Does this answer your question?

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

By preventing media outlets critical of their handling of the crisis from asking any questions at briefings and attempting to coerce other outlets into changing stories or headlines to paint a more favourable picture than they wish to.

Does this answer your question?

No not really.

Silencing them would be closing them down or banning them from printing articles.

I'm not aware of them trying that?

[Wolfie]

45 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Toby Helm is posting opposing the government's involvement. Clearly he doesn't think a Tory government trying to influence a national newspaper to make up news is a good thing. Looks like some people here really aren't that bothered though, but if the political editor of the Conservative supporting Spectator doesn't feel comfortable about it perhaps we shouldn't either.

That's what I was querying. I couldn't see a reference to Fraser Nelson anywhere.

[Comrade 86]

14 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No not really.

Silencing them would be closing them down or banning them from printing articles.

I'm not aware of them trying that?

So you want to discuss syntax rather than the actual issue? Anything to avoid actually commenting on the fact that the government is seeking to control media output, right? It's not a good look buddy, it really isn't.

We don't agree on a lot mate but you're way better than this ?

[1967Ram]

1 hour ago, A Ram for All Seasons said:

I thought it was The Sun wot won it.

Used to be, so they said

[Comrade 86]

[GboroRam]

15 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

That's what I was querying. I couldn't see a reference to Fraser Nelson anywhere.

My mistake. Observer, not spectator. Apologies.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

So you want to discuss syntax rather than the actual issue? Anything to avoid actually commenting on the fact that the government is seeking to control media output, right? It's not a good look buddy, it really isn't.

We don't agree on a lot mate but you're way better than this ?

I would be very much against the Government controlling the media.

Dont see any evidence of this, or them being silenced, here.

[Comrade 86]

12 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I would be very much against the Government controlling the media.

Dont see any evidence of this, or them being silenced, here.

Ok mate ?

[Angry Ram]

2 hours ago, Van Wolfie said:

Quite right. As one of the millions of middle income families, I don't really know if I was one of the many or the few.

You wait for @SchtivePesley to tell you. 

[A Ram for All Seasons]

59 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

By preventing media outlets critical of their handling of the crisis from asking any questions at briefings and attempting to coerce other outlets into changing stories or headlines to paint a more favourable picture than they wish to.

Does this answer your question?

All very true, but the Times and the Sunday Times are Murdoch papers and not any old rag. You don't go messing with Murdoch. Perhaps the criticism is a reminder for Boris to get on with the work of wrecking the BBC before it is granted sainthood like the NHS.

[Van der MoodHoover]

On 24/04/2020 at 16:12, Van der MoodHoover said:

He's on his way back mate, to waffle at us in ancient Byzantine, to impress us proles....?

Bummer......I got it all wrong. According to the FT, Boris has gone Roman........

....the most crucial factor is Mr Johnson himself. He has taken to quoting Cicero, the Roman statesman, that “the health, or welfare, of the people should be the supreme law”. 

I don't know about you lot, but I much prefer it when our leaders can show their superiority by not needlessly over-simplifying messages into eg "we will always put people's health as the #1 priority" to being able to quote a 2,000 year dead Roman politician. Ideally quoting in Latin

Takes proper intelligence that does....... 

.....or perhaps he just can't resist being a smart-arse??? ?

[ramit]

1 hour ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Anyway, I think I'd have more chance of knitting an orgasm than getting a half sensible response from you so I'll leave it there.

You can however apparently crochet it