Posts
Burlesque Gate: No Immoral High Ground For Lib Dems
Every now and then even Lib Dem mimicster for culture Don Foster is going to back the right horse. Unlike for example when he opposed the de-centralisation of the BBC to Manchester and beyond suggesting that we in this city rather than the nation should pay for the BBC to be spread democratically. But I agree with Stephen Tall at LDV that Don has got it right in the case of Burlesque Gate.
Labour's Jack Straw meanwhile shows his advanced age, belying his reputation as a funster, while friend-to-the-stars the Tory member for Ribald Valley Nigel Evans (above, getting excited on the terrace with lewd icon Nicky Tilsey/Adam Rickett) comes down hard on these filthy dirty radio-sexualists.
However, the idea that Mr Tall expounds of some general Lib Dem correctness on this matter is not borne out by looking at the evidence. Colin Breed is among the sponsors of the main McKinley-Evans-Breed EDM and Phil Willis has two bites at amendments, along with salary envy from Tory Bob Spink and another dabble from Alan Simpson and company.
Fuss made on average by about 5% of non-Lib Dem commons parliamentarians, and about 8% of Lib Dem MPs. Almost calls for a barmy bar chart.
16 comments:
Your final point is incredibly anal even for you and your constant anal references.
It is also wrong. First of all you have got the basic maths and percentages wrong. Secondly, you have included the government payroll vote in those in a position to sign any EDM.
You should recaclculate. The truth tells a different story and one that won't be pleasing to you.
You have added the number of Conservative and Labour MPs together simply because the few Tories that have signed the motion brings down the average for 'your side'. You have also ignored the minor detail that Gordon Brown actually left an Economic Summit meeting earlier this week in order to rail against Ross and Brand.
Quite a few Tories there actually. Pretty much pro rata. But anyway, absolutely no sense of humour from the most anal one. And as it goes front benches of all parties don't often sign EDMs. Lib Dems do tend to love them though.
Maybe the LDs were just eager to support Gordon Brown when he correctly concluded that the most important issue facing the world this week is, er, the border between cutting edge comedy and harrassment.
BTW, your maths are still bollocks!
Nope, you humourless and senseless and worthless twit, yours are.
5 out of 60-odd is about 8%. 31 out of about 600 is about 5%. Near as damn it. And none of the front benches do EDMs. But really EHC, who cares? Not Chris Paul that's for sure.
That's the new 'Progressive Alliance' that you bang on about, is it, Chris? Labour, the Tories. UKIP, the DUP.
I wonder how 'a mathematician' knows what you care about, Chris. Very strange.
'Progressive Alliance' adlard? No, quite the opposite you utterly misreading the situation complete schmuck.
Now. Is your so-called maths correct or this mathematician johnny's who has checked my sums and found them reasonably accurate, albeit not to five places of decimal precision?
And why can this mathematician see, like me, that you are a humourless literal thinking uncreative churl ... whereas you cannot?
Because this is how you arrived at your figure.
Firstly, you added together the signatories of several EDMs. The sheer fact that you did this in the first place shows how anal and desperate you are for copy.
When you then worked out that the percentages for the Labour and Lib Dem MPs were not dissimilar enough for your scuzzy arguement you then had to add in all non-LDs, as relatively few Tories had signed any of them. Hence the Progressive Alliance - because you failed to metion that Labour was now in the same category as Bob Spink of UKIP and Jeffrey Donaldson, the Ulster Unionist.
You also forgot to remove the government payroll vote, currently 104 Labour MPs.
You also neglected to explain away the puke-making statement from Gordon Brown about this whole world-shattering affair.
So you describe yourself as a mathematician, do you? Not for the first time on this thread, eh?
God you're a twat EHC.
That may be so, Chris. But he's not wrong about your workings out.
And what a pathetic response from you!
Imagine the scene. October17th 2000, St Louis. The third Presidential Debate between Al Gore and George Bush.
Against expectations, an underperforming and unimpressive Gore has been bested by someone without his gigantic inntellect.
Bush draws his comments to a conclusion: "Should I be fortunate enough to become your president, when I put my hand on the Bible, I will swear to not only uphold the laws of the land, but I will also swear to uphold the honor and the dignity of the office to which I have been elected, so help me God."
To which Gore zings back with: "God, you're a twat."
It is at this point that the whole world knows the election is over. With this beautifully crafted and superbly delivered riposte, Gore has guaranteed himself winning all 50 states. The world will be a better, safer, greener place.
I was wondering whether you had ever come across photographs that linked two recent threads - posh Oxford herberts making obscene hand gestures?
Dave's sock puppet "wally range":
"was wondering whether you had ever come across photographs that linked two recent threads - posh Oxford herberts making obscene hand gestures?"
Exactly the point of the LOL exclusive a full year ago, also given to The Observer's Pendennis. Do try reading what you're given a little more carefully WR. It would save you making a wally of yourself.
I just thought you might want to constantly republish it, Chris - as with the Andrew Neill and Lembit Opik photos in Private Eye.
Do keep up.
On the other point EHC is both a twat AND wrong in all the silly allegations about this throwaway arithmetic supporting my remarks about the Lib Dems wrongly claiming the high ground on immorality.
A funny sort of claim that deserves a lampooning on a satirical blog.
More workings out:
Including the signers of amendments brings more Labour MPs into play. The figures using the original EDM only are about 4% and about 6.5% which is a not disimilar ratio at all arithmetically to 5:8. Spooky.
And of course there are payroll votes in all parties EDM-wise even if the mimicsters don't get paid. Apart from by their sprawling outside interests.
What makes EHC and WR twats is that they are arguing over something and nothing - particularly stupid when the substantive correct point is ignored and the throwaway point also essentially correct.
Standing up to scrutiny from : "A mathematician".
From all the targets that could be criticised for their part in the Brand/Ross afair, you chose the only legitimate one. The, er, Liberal Democrats.
The link you provided to the words of Don Foster MP show him not taking the 'moral high ground' as you say. In fact, he takes a totally non-partisan stance - maybe that's why you didn't recognise it.
You then set about the most tortuous of maths to disprove something that he didn't say in the first place.
This culminates in the sight of you using a step-ladder to climb up your own alimentary canal in calculating that the number of LD MPs signing one of four EDMs is more than that for non-LD MPs - mostly because very few Tory MPs signed them - but which you fail to acknowledge.
Well, if them's the rules ....
PS Look up the derivation of the word 'shoddy'. It fits your methodology like a glove.
Post a Comment