catgate Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Weekend debateThe police are now looking into the question of the legality (or otherwise) of the “loans” to political parties, and I can only imagine they are pretty sure of their ground otherwise they would not have started.When/if they final come out and say “guilty”, what will happen?Surely this will mean that the New Labour party gained power by the of use money gained through crime. Legislation brought in by our little cherub and his buddies decreed that the money received by criminals, as a result of crime, must be paid into police funds to help to fund better policing (or something to that effect).It must surely mean also that any legislation dreamed up and either already introduced or pending introduction, must also be null and void due to having been achieved by and through criminal activity.The association of chief constables was less than enamoured by Clarke’s insistence on their forced amalgamation….will they back off?It could mean also that the 'members opposite' are also in opposition through criminal activity.Should we now start to formulate a new form of government that would keep the majority of the population satisfied that things were being done to the will of the people?There must be a form of consensus government possible without having to have “parties”. Party politics is not consensus it is dictatorship.Describe and discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 How about you and me having a go. We could do it in a couple of days per week, at a tiny fraction of the cost. I wouldn't ask for a knighthood either. We could sack all the NHS mis-managers and get everything up and running smoothly again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted April 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 What I had in mind, when I about half way through writing the above post, was that we seem to have a cross section of widely held opinions on WF, and with them there is also sufficient intelligence to be able to reach a concensus of what would work satisfactorily for the majority of the population, rather than the present party political system that is not even satisfactory to a minority. It is just a matter of how "discussions" are formulated and the "conclusions" are logged. I am sure someone with a working knowledge of modern databases could concoct some sort of "scoring" system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanHo Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Catgate - you are using big words again - like enamoured, formulate and concensus.Please note - when promulgating your esoteric cogitations and articulating your amicable and philosophical observations beware of platitudinous ponderosity, and let your conversational communications possess a clarified conciseness and a compact comprehensibleness without coalescent consistency or a concatenated cogency. Eschew all conglomerations of flatulent garrulity, jejune babblement and asinine affectations and let your extemporaneous descantings have a voracious vivacity without rodomontade sagacity. In short, speak briefly, say what you mean, mean what you say, and above all don't use big words like what andsome does.By the way - when you two form the next administration I don't mind serving as Minister of Culture and Domestic Bliss - provided of course that I can spend most of my time fact finding by travelling in first class luxury around the World to get multicultural ideas in order to spread a bit of bliss upon my return.I would add that I too would not want a knighthood - those suits of "amour" must be awfully uncomfortable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-pops- Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Ah, quotations from Homer (J Simpson), Alan :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 urph ..... maybe in another 20 years ...I may add to the post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanHo Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Like most people - I am not happy with the present system of government. However - I am not at all convinced that there is much I can do about it. I can join a political party and hope to change its policies from within, I can grow my hair, stop shaving, take drugs and go on anti everything marches, I can post my opinions on various web forums or I can sound off at my mates in the pub from time to time. But will any of this make any real difference - I don't think so. Hence I remain with the almost silent majority and hope that the few years of life remaining to me will be tolerable.I do not believe that people go into politics with the intent of making our lot any worse - but the World's problems are so immense it is impossible for them to make much of an impact despite their best efforts. Some politicians will take advantage of the rules - but that is true of every level in society - we all do it to a greater or lesser extent. There may indeed be faults with the present political system - but it has evolved over the centuries and is the best we have yet had. To disband the system overnight would be a disaster and anarchy would take its place. I feel that it is unreal to expect that opinions posted on a forum such as this will make any significant difference - who is listening anyway. Hence I will now shut up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Nah...... A Ho ....Just sound off .......some of us are listening........ because we respect your views and experience .... well ......me for one ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.