Fox Hunting Options

[Simon Kirby]

Vince Cable gets caught Fox hunting, and it's OK? Err, no, suppression of the free press is not a Good Thing. If Cameron feels he's unable to remove him why doesn't he do the decent thing and resign, and why for that matter doesn't the feckless weasel Clegg sack him.

[Strafin]

Been on the sauce tonight Simon?

[user23]

Vince Cable gets caught Fox hunting, and it's OK? Err, no, suppression of the free press is not a Good Thing. If Cameron feels he's unable to remove him why doesn't he do the decent thing and resign, and why for that matter doesn't the feckless weasel Clegg sack him.

Is Rupert Murdoch owning large chunks of the media a good thing?

Is Vince Cable entitled to his own views?

[GMR]

Vince Cable gets caught Fox hunting, and it's OK? Err, no, suppression of the free press is not a Good Thing. If Cameron feels he's unable to remove him why doesn't he do the decent thing and resign, and why for that matter doesn't the feckless weasel Clegg sack him.

The simple reason is it is better for Cable to pee outside the tent, than stand outside the tent peeing in.

Cable shot himself in the foot. He'll be more manageable now while inside the government. As for the Murdoch, the deal will go through so that he will own 100% of Sky, thanks to Vince Cable.

[GMR]

Is Rupert Murdoch owning large chunks of the media a good thing?

I don't think it will make any difference if he ownes 100% of Sky or just 40%. He is still the master.

Is Vince Cable entitled to his own views?

Not while he is in Government. While in Government they all should sing from the same song sheet.

[Iommi]

Is Vince Cable entitled to his own views?

Of course he is, but in government one should be more careful who he shares them with. He has shown a lack of judgement that suggests he isn't fit for office. All for a bit of fluff.

[user23]

Of course he is, but in government one should be more careful who he shares them with. He has shown a lack of judgement that suggests he isn't fit for office. All for a bit of fluff.

I'm pleased he's expressed what he really thinks (albeit being tricked into doing so) and wish more politicians would do the same.

[Iommi]

I'm pleased he's expressed what he really thinks (albeit being tricked into doing so) and wish more politicians would do the same.

That bit isn't the issue, it is that he admitted to being prejudiced and was willing to speak in confidence to people he shouldn't have trusted. Seemingly for vanity and not political reasons.

[GMR]

I'm pleased he's expressed what he really thinks (albeit being tricked into doing so) and wish more politicians would do the same.

But you can't do that in politics. If you are in government you must stick to the government line otherwise you've got anarchy.

If it has nothing to do with government matters then he can say what he wants

[user23]

That bit isn't the issue, it is that he admitted to being prejudiced and was willing to speak in confidence to people he shouldn't have trusted. Seemingly for vanity and not political reasons.

He was speaking to supposed constituents, being honest with them. What's wrong with that?

A Government full of yes-men is what got us into the Iraq War. If more Labour MPs had stood up for what they thought then, we wouldn't be there now.

[Iommi]

He was speaking to supposed constituents, being honest with them. What's wrong with that?

Because they weren't party activists (or constituents) and people in governments should be wise to this sort of thing. In the past, people would have resigned for less.

A Government full of yes-men is what got us into things like the Iraq War.

The problem with the Iraq War, is that on the face of it, it was legitimate, and in my view those that might have felt they knew otherwise were not yes men, with rare exception, they were cowards that put their job before principles. The Iraq War was not, however, an easy call. What if WMD did exist?

The point is why he divulged it rather than what he divulged. This is hardly an Iraq III situation. He's made himself look foolish trying to impress 'a bit of skirt'.

[user23]

The problem with the Iraq War, is that on the face of it, it was legitimate, and in my view those that might have felt they knew otherwise were not yes men, with rare exception, they were cowards that put their job before principles. The Iraq War was not, however, an easy call. What if WMD did exist?

It wasn't legitimate and if more Labour MPs had spoken out about it perhaps we'd have not have lost so many lives. But that's a different thread.

Well done to Vince for speaking his mind. If it's Sky or Cable I choose the latter.

[Simon Kirby]

If it's Sky or Cable I choose the latter.

[Iommi]

It wasn't legitimate and if more Labour MPs had spoken out about it perhaps we'd have not have lost so many lives. But that's a different thread.

Yes, but that is easy to say now.

Well done to Vince for speaking his mind.

If rumours are to be believed about where you work, I have yet to see any evidence that you would be prepared to practice what you preach!

But what has he done and what use has it been? He has increased the likelihood of something happening which he was 'waging a war on'. He has also made it easier for his bosses to move him out of office should they chose to do so. Yes well done.

[user23]

But what has he done and what use has it been? He has increased the likelihood of something happening which he was 'waging a war on'. He has also made it easier for his bosses to move him out of office should they chose to do so. Yes well done.

So what are you saying, he should have stayed quiet and hid what he really thought to further his career?

[GMR]

So what are you saying, he should have stayed quiet and hid what he really thought to further his career?

Of course he should.

Do you speak out in your job (while working for WBC)? No, you are a little mouse. When they say jump you jump. That is why you hide under the User23 moniker so that you can have a free voice.

I suppose you admire him because he is doing something you are too afraid to do.

[Iommi]

So what are you saying, he should have stayed quiet and hid what he really thought to further his career?

You clearly haven't understand anything I've written on this as that is not what I am saying at all. If his ambition was to see fairness, to see Murdock fail, to see the Conservatives back off, he has failed badly. He has shown himself to be untrustworthy.

It is not what he has said, it is who he has said it to. If he meant what he said, he would have said it in the press (after trying in vain to make it happen behind closed doors). He was simply boasting and showing off in front of a couple of women.

[user23]

You clearly haven't understand anything I've written on this as that is not what I am saying at all. If his ambition was to see fairness, to see Murdock fail, to see the Conservatives back off, he has failed badly. He has shown himself to be untrustworthy.

I've understood it perfectly. You think he should have been more devious to achieve his aims.

[Iommi]

I've understood it perfectly. You think he should have been more devious to achieve his aims.

You most certainly haven't.

He is obliged to be discrete, he wasn't. He wasn't entitled to tell strangers that he was determined to see Murdock fail. That is wrong. He also said that he had the nuclear option, well he hasn't now.

The point is, if he was blowing the whistle on something he could not work with, something that was not right, then that is fair enough (like Robin Cook), but it wasn't, he was boasting about how powerful he was, that's all.

Poor form.

[user23]

He is obliged to be discrete, he wasn't. He wasn't entitled to tell to strangers that he was determined to see Murdock fail. That is wrong. He also said that he had the nuclear option, well he hasn't now.

He's entitled to say whatever he feels, as long as it's within the bounds of the law.

We're going round in circles here. You think he should have been more devious and I'm happy he was honest.

Let's leave it here.