NATION

PASSWORD

UK Politics Thread X: Boris' Big Bonkers Brexit Bash

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What is your favoured form of brexit?

Mays deal
22
5%
EFTA
29
6%
Some other sort of deal (please elaborate in the comments)
20
4%
Mays deal without Irish backstop
5
1%
No deal
105
23%
No deal+ (no deal minus NI and Scotland)
15
3%
I want a second referendum
169
38%
Revoke article 50 without even calling a referendum
85
19%
 
Total votes : 450

User avatar
Nimzonia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1238
Founded: Feb 27, 2004
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Nimzonia » Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:49 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Nimzonia wrote:
You seem to expect our MPs to "take their petty squabbles" somewhere besides the courts, and "settle things like adults" - I am just wondering where that might be?


Parliament, talking to each other, accepting they’ve lost.


So let me get this straight. Parliament is prorogued, but going to the courts to get it convened again is "Yet another falling of the current political class when they take their petty squabbles to court like a episode of judge Judy rather then settle things like adults", and you think that should be done in parliament instead, even though parliament is prorogued?
Last edited by Nimzonia on Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gravlen
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11470
Founded: Jul 01, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Gravlen » Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:51 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Can't talk in Parliament if it's shut. Hence the legal case.


They had time before it shut, and they’ll have time again afterwards.

"Don't go to court, go to Parliament and talk it out."
"That's what we're trying to do, and that's why we go to court."
"Well I don't mean you should go to Parliament and talk right now! Or for the next five weeks..."

Sounds legit.
EnragedMaldivians wrote:That's preposterous. Gravlens's not a white nationalist; Gravlen's a penguin.

Unio de Sovetaj Socialismaj Respublikoj wrote:There is no use arguing the definition of murder with someone who has a picture of a penguin with a chainsaw as their nations flag.

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:52 pm

Gravlen wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
They had time before it shut, and they’ll have time again afterwards.

"Don't go to court, go to Parliament and talk it out."
"That's what we're trying to do, and that's why we go to court."
"Well I don't mean you should go to Parliament and talk right now! Or for the next five weeks..."

Sounds legit.


Leavers tend to have.....interesting chains of logic in their arguments.

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:57 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Gravlen wrote:"Don't go to court, go to Parliament and talk it out."
"That's what we're trying to do, and that's why we go to court."
"Well I don't mean you should go to Parliament and talk right now! Or for the next five weeks..."

Sounds legit.


Leavers tend to have.....interesting chains of logic in their arguments.


There was time before it happened, there will be time after it happens. They got beat at their own stupid game, and are now refusing to admit defeat and potentially setting a precedent that the courts can rule, and potentially overrule the government. What next, overturning ‘unconstitutional’ legislation?

And remainers don’t?

I’m not even arguing it from a Brexit stance, it’s just desperate publicity seeking, general incompetence and infighting.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Nimzonia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1238
Founded: Feb 27, 2004
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Nimzonia » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:02 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Leavers tend to have.....interesting chains of logic in their arguments.


There was time before it happened, there will be time after it happens. They got beat at their own stupid game, and are now refusing to admit defeat and potentially setting a precedent that the courts can rule, and potentially overrule the government. What next, overturning ‘unconstitutional’ legislation?

And remainers don’t?

I’m not even arguing it from a Brexit stance, it’s just desperate publicity seeking, general incompetence and infighting.


You're happy to allow the proroguing of parliament for purely partisan reasons, because it happens to facilitate an outcome you want, and you have the temerity to talk about setting precedents!?

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:06 pm

Nimzonia wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
There was time before it happened, there will be time after it happens. They got beat at their own stupid game, and are now refusing to admit defeat and potentially setting a precedent that the courts can rule, and potentially overrule the government. What next, overturning ‘unconstitutional’ legislation?

And remainers don’t?

I’m not even arguing it from a Brexit stance, it’s just desperate publicity seeking, general incompetence and infighting.


You're happy to allow the proroguing of parliament for purely partisan reasons, because it happens to facilitate an outcome you want, and you have the temerity to talk about setting precedents!?


It doesn’t facilitate an outcome I want, you’re just assuming I do. I didn’t like Boris manipulating the system, but it fell within procedure and precedent.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Vassenor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 45359
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Vassenor » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:21 pm

So now can we agree that Brexit was a stupid fucking idea?
Jenny / Sailor Astraea
WOMAN

MtF trans and proud - She / Her / etc.
100% Asbestos Free

Hufflepuff/Team Mystic

User avatar
Nimzonia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1238
Founded: Feb 27, 2004
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Nimzonia » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:36 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Nimzonia wrote:
You're happy to allow the proroguing of parliament for purely partisan reasons, because it happens to facilitate an outcome you want, and you have the temerity to talk about setting precedents!?


It doesn’t facilitate an outcome I want, you’re just assuming I do.


So you're excusing the abuse of executive power to facilitate an outcome you don't want? Sounds legit.

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:47 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Nimzonia wrote:
You're happy to allow the proroguing of parliament for purely partisan reasons, because it happens to facilitate an outcome you want, and you have the temerity to talk about setting precedents!?


It doesn’t facilitate an outcome I want, you’re just assuming I do. I didn’t like Boris manipulating the system, but it fell within procedure and precedent.


The Scottish court found otherwise. Now we wait to see what the Supreme Court says.

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:51 pm

Nimzonia wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
It doesn’t facilitate an outcome I want, you’re just assuming I do.


So you're excusing the abuse of executive power to facilitate an outcome you don't want? Sounds legit.


It’s only an abuse because people are saying it is, primarily remain factions. And Labour. I may not like it, but that isn’t enough to make it illegal.

I’m saying that it’s an inconsequential action in the larger picture and is only an issue due to the continual inaction and uncertainty. Again, there have been three years of this...uncertainty, because parliament and the MPs and parties that are part of it have been unable to do anything but ask the EU for more time to squander on petty politics rather then make any sort of progress.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Heloin
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7467
Founded: Mar 30, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Heloin » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:55 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Nimzonia wrote:
So you're excusing the abuse of executive power to facilitate an outcome you don't want? Sounds legit.


It’s only an abuse because people are saying it is, primarily remain factions. And Labour. I may not like it, but that isn’t enough to make it illegal.

I’m saying that it’s an inconsequential action in the larger picture and is only an issue due to the continual inaction and uncertainty. Again, there have been three years of this...uncertainty, because parliament and the MPs and parties that are part of it have been unable to do anything but ask the EU for more time to squander on petty politics rather then make any sort of progress.

The Scottish courts saying it's unlawful does though.

And Parliament being in prorogue fixes this uncertainty somehow?
"Don't waste any time mourning. Organize!" - Joe Hill

Rabbit and Rhodie Girl in her 20's. Proudly Zimbabwean, living in sunny and humid Florida. Industrial Workers of the World
I love Rugby. Go Springboks, Go Sables! Singing Queen of NSG. I draw things. Take a look!

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 2:57 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
It doesn’t facilitate an outcome I want, you’re just assuming I do. I didn’t like Boris manipulating the system, but it fell within procedure and precedent.


The Scottish court found otherwise. Now we wait to see what the Supreme Court says.


Which itself was outside the traditional scope of the courts not to rule on political issues. Let’s hope the supreme one gets it right.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:03 pm

Heloin wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
It’s only an abuse because people are saying it is, primarily remain factions. And Labour. I may not like it, but that isn’t enough to make it illegal.

I’m saying that it’s an inconsequential action in the larger picture and is only an issue due to the continual inaction and uncertainty. Again, there have been three years of this...uncertainty, because parliament and the MPs and parties that are part of it have been unable to do anything but ask the EU for more time to squander on petty politics rather then make any sort of progress.

The Scottish courts saying it's unlawful does though.

And Parliament being in prorogue fixes this uncertainty somehow?


The courts should not make judgements on political issues, prorogue is a political issue.

No, leaving the EU would. Or remaining in it. Or securing a deal. None seem to be something the current parties can agree on, so the prorogue is irrelevant.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:03 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
The Scottish court found otherwise. Now we wait to see what the Supreme Court says.


Which itself was outside the traditional scope of the courts not to rule on political issues. Let’s hope the supreme one gets it right.


Bollocks. Here's a recent court ruling on a political issue.

https://www.caat.org.uk/campaigns/stop- ... ial-review

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:15 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Which itself was outside the traditional scope of the courts not to rule on political issues. Let’s hope the supreme one gets it right.


Bollocks. Here's a recent court ruling on a political issue.

https://www.caat.org.uk/campaigns/stop- ... ial-review


“The High Court in London says that advice given by the prime minister to the Queen to suspend parliament is basically "political" - something the government has argued from the get go - and so it's not a matter the courts should get involved in because there are really no legal standards against which to judge it.“ - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49661855

The High court in London says its political and this the courts shouldn’t get involved. The Scottish court disagreed. That’s why it’s going to the Supreme Court. Which is also why the courts should stay out of politics if they can’t make a unanimous decision.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:18 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Bollocks. Here's a recent court ruling on a political issue.

https://www.caat.org.uk/campaigns/stop- ... ial-review


“The High Court in London says that advice given by the prime minister to the Queen to suspend parliament is basically "political" - something the government has argued from the get go - and so it's not a matter the courts should get involved in because there are really no legal standards against which to judge it.“ - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49661855

The High court in London says its political and this the courts shouldn’t get involved. The Scottish court disagreed. That’s why it’s going to the Supreme Court. Which is also why the courts should stay out of politics if they can’t make a unanimous decision.


The decision on who to sell weapons to is political. What's the difference?

User avatar
Nimzonia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1238
Founded: Feb 27, 2004
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Nimzonia » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:20 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Nimzonia wrote:
So you're excusing the abuse of executive power to facilitate an outcome you don't want? Sounds legit.


It’s only an abuse because people are saying it is, primarily remain factions.


You might as well say that it's only not an abuse, because people are saying it isn't, primarily leave factions.

I don't see how you can argue that it isn't an abuse of power to shut down parliament for the sole purpose of stifling democratic opposition, unless your judgment is fundamentally biased.

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:28 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
“The High Court in London says that advice given by the prime minister to the Queen to suspend parliament is basically "political" - something the government has argued from the get go - and so it's not a matter the courts should get involved in because there are really no legal standards against which to judge it.“ - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49661855

The High court in London says its political and this the courts shouldn’t get involved. The Scottish court disagreed. That’s why it’s going to the Supreme Court. Which is also why the courts should stay out of politics if they can’t make a unanimous decision.


The decision on who to sell weapons to is political. What's the difference?


I have no idea, you should probably ask the high court, since that was their interpretation.

Nimzonia wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
It’s only an abuse because people are saying it is, primarily remain factions.


You might as well say that it's only not an abuse, because people are saying it isn't, primarily leave factions.

I don't see how you can argue that it isn't an abuse of power to shut down parliament for the sole purpose of stifling democratic opposition, unless your judgment is fundamentally biased.


Because it’s been done before, by many past PMs?

And stifling what democratic opposition, what were they going to do in those five days before the party conferences that was so important they’ve negated to do it before right now?
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:49 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:I have no idea, you should probably ask the high court, since that was their interpretation.


Okay. Do you believe the two are different, and if not, why?
Last edited by Fartsniffage on Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:53 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:I have no idea, you should probably ask the high court, since that was their interpretation.


Okay. Do you believe the two are different, and if so, why?


Probably the implication that the court ruling against the prorogue would require parliament to be reopened, thus taking power from parliament and giving it to the courts. Opposed to the arms deal ruling which seems more advisory to parliament, requiring parliament to take the action if any.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:58 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Okay. Do you believe the two are different, and if so, why?


Probably the implication that the court ruling against the prorogue would require parliament to be reopened, thus taking power from parliament and giving it to the courts. Opposed to the arms deal ruling which seems more advisory to parliament, requiring parliament to take the action if any.


So the courts have the ability to rule against some political decisions but not others....

How do we tell the difference?

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:03 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Probably the implication that the court ruling against the prorogue would require parliament to be reopened, thus taking power from parliament and giving it to the courts. Opposed to the arms deal ruling which seems more advisory to parliament, requiring parliament to take the action if any.


So the courts have the ability to rule against some political decisions but not others....

How do we tell the difference?


I have no idea. But a good place to start would be ensuring the courts decision is advisory to parliament, and not actually able to change things on its own.

And yes I know this one is being criticised because parliament is currently closed because of the issue before the court, but parliament is closed a lot, so that’s hardly a unique situation.
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:06 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
So the courts have the ability to rule against some political decisions but not others....

How do we tell the difference?


I have no idea. But a good place to start would be ensuring the courts decision is advisory to parliament, and not actually able to change things on its own.

And yes I know this one is being criticised because parliament is currently closed because of the issue before the court, but parliament is closed a lot, so that’s hardly a unique situation.


That can't happen for obvious reasons.

User avatar
Dooom35796821595
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9021
Founded: Sep 11, 2011
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Dooom35796821595 » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:08 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Dooom35796821595 wrote:
I have no idea. But a good place to start would be ensuring the courts decision is advisory to parliament, and not actually able to change things on its own.

And yes I know this one is being criticised because parliament is currently closed because of the issue before the court, but parliament is closed a lot, so that’s hardly a unique situation.


That can't happen for obvious reasons.


And why is that?
When life gives you lemons, you BURN THEIR HOUSE DOWN!
Anything can be justified if it is cool. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all in your way.
"Your methods are stupid! Your progress has been stupid! Your intelligence is stupid! For the sake of the mission, you must be terminated!”

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32829
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:12 pm

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
That can't happen for obvious reasons.


And why is that?


Because if the Government does something illegal then there has to be a recourse.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aclion, Antityranicals, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Auzkhia, Cannot think of a name, Cekoviu, Dooom35796821595, Dresderstan, Estanglia, Fartsniffage, Galloism, Gig em Aggies, Gormwood, Gravlen, Hakons, Incredible Bums, Internationalist Bastard, Kenmoria, Kowani, LiberNovusAmericae, Minachia, Ors Might, Pacomia, Rojava Free State, Silver Commonwealth, Telconi, The Huskar Social Union, The New California Republic, The-Tion Hegemony, Ther Sul Citzpacia

Advertisement

Remove ads