And another thing…

They don’t know you very well do they Tom?

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/tom_harris/glasgow_south

You don’t vote against the government very often…

No, they certainly don’t. And no, I don’t (which is what I said in my post).

Anyone who is confused with Evan “Dr Death” Harris should get his pulse checked immediately.

I hope the Lords reverse that terrible vote against free speech in the Commons.

Playing ping-pong with our freedom of speech

Dr Harris and a group of druggies and other ne’ere-do-wells think they are eating Alan Johnson for breakfast.

http://drevanharrismp.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/nutt-sacking-johnson-responds-and-is-still-wrong/

I spose they think Johnson may become labour Leader one day.

Pity they care not about the effect of the Nurr case on teenage kids re dope, which is the real issue.

Not worth spit imho.

You should sue.

Slightly off-topic here (but it’s a bit of a ‘bleagh’ topic).

Can anyone help me with New Labour Nuspeak.

When anyone in government talks about, ‘Labour savings’ (which sounds like rather a good thing) – is this the same as, ‘Tory cuts’ (which sounds as though it might be quite a bad thing)?

Thanks in advance.

PS Quietzapple need not reply, my sides are still split – they need some healing time.

If we were designing a political system, would we come up with this one?

Elected on the basis of a few vague statements that your party may, or may not carry out. Then ignore the views of the people who elected you for 4ish years and blindly hammer on the yes button[1].

There has to be a better way of doing this.

[1]yes I know, no buttons, perhaps another 50 years and they may move to using a punch card system!

Sammy should recall that the NHS now works and take his “sides” to his local A & E. (Affected and etiolated)

@Steve:

Political systems are only ever really “designed” as you suggest after wars eg Germany after WW2 or in the articles of Social Democrats who ignore the facts that such things usually evolve.

It is time for a Bill Of Rights to be begun – lots of debate – and jack Straw is the man to carry it forward imho.

“When in that House MPs divide,
If they’ve a brain and cerebellum, too,
They’ve got to leave that brain outside,
And vote just as their leaders tell ‘em to.
But then the prospect of a lot
Of dull MPs in close proximity,
All thinking for themselves, is what
No man can face with equanimity….”

Thank you WS Gilbert.

As a variation on an old joke I guess an optimist is someone (like me) who believes that liberal democracies with strong parties are the best (or anyway the least worst) forms of government that mankind could devise

whereas a pessimist is someone who fears that liberal democracies with strong parties are the best forms of government that mankind could devise

“A most ingenious paradox” -The Pirates of Penzance.

Gilbert’s influence is investigated here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3634126.stm

The decline of history in schools hasn’t helped imho and comparative government should be compulsory.

Tom: “They probably imagine that the more often you vote against your own party, the better.”

No. We imagine that the more often you vote for a proposal after weighing up the pros and cons yourself, the better.

Voting perpetually with your party is dumb unless you believe them to be 100% correct. The state of the country suggests that’s not the case.

Voting 100% against the party is dumb (for same reason).

Voting always as you as told is dumb. It’s also ridiculous, idiotic and a waste of the mandate you were given by your constituency.

Just vote for what you think (note the word *think*) is best and in line with what your constituency would want – that is all people ask of you.

Amazing that MP’s don’t understand this.

“I’ve voted against my party whip a total of twice since I was first elected.”

Sanctimonious, and dull! Clearly not a man with a brain of his own, based on this. But occasionally in your posts, a real person shows through.

D R Harris is a very good chemist in/near Jermyn St.

I’m not favoured of whips…
I’m not sure they’re needed. Americans don’t have them, indeed Obama has struggled to get even a basic healthcare plan passed, even though he has a good working majority in both houses, simply because he can’t just order his party to vote.

In that case, it may end up being bad overall, but it does cause a more balanced consensus, and you cannot honestly tell me Tom that there aren’t things you’ve voted for that if YOU had to actually choose, not just vote as the whips said, that you would have voted that way.
Voting against conscience destroys the representative nature of a parliament. It means instead of 645 members voting, we have 3 members, one for each of the main parties, then 10 or 15 others for the SNP, Plaid, the Greens, the N. Irish parties etc.
Particularly on matters like freedom of speech, whipping is immoral. I know it’s not a perfect world, and therefore whipping will stay. But a big part of me wishes that just occasionally, members like yourself would say “No, the party’s wrong on this, and I’m not feart to say it”, and vote as your constituents might hope you vote, instead of how your party want you to.

I’ve always been rather a fan of Evan Harris. He’s my favourite Lib Dem, in fact.

It will be mixing it up in a real vote today. I had to really search to find anything about the Glasgow election today.

Have there been any polls.? Do you expect to win Tom. Your party has been very good at making sure there is no reporting on it.
Will you be keeping on record anyone who did not vote Labour for 6 years or longer?.

Andrew F: “I’ve always been rather a fan of Evan Harris. He’s my favourite Lib Dem, in fact.”

You do surprise me…

Johnny: Try Google.

You are dreaming if you imagine that the Labour Party has any control over what the billionaire press publishes.

Even the BBC follows Murdoch et al – How the recent disgraceful traducement of Gordon Grown fell foul of the public – the Beeb was copying it 24/7.

“there was a vote later on on Monday night which, had I been present, would have resulted in my rebelling against the government”

So then why were you not present?

Oh, and . . . Johnny . . Game’s up chum . . .

Here at Alternative Labour HQ we’ve checked our records of all your votes in all the elections you’ve participated in and . .

(Well you know)

You’re a Labour voter, prob in the pay of some wicked online Mcbride clone, trying to put people off voting for Chameleon.

BUT we’re going to win fair, so desist, Sir!

So Tom,

You going to travel down to vote on Lords’ amendment??

I hope so!

Andrew F – if you have the stomach for it, type
aborted foetus into Google Images and you’ll see what “Dr” Evan Harris is a fan of.

It could have been you.

For many people, abortion seems to have been reduced to an abstract issue about a ‘woman’s rights’ rather than the evil, bloody reality.

You seem to suggest that’not voting against your Party’ is a virtue.

Does it therefore follow, that as you have done it two times more than David Cameron, he is twice as virtuous as you?

Tom.

Did you read Quietzappies last post about me.He thinks i am a labour voter. Now I know hes nuts.

Tom: “…I don’t see the point in charging them with a criminal offence.

The point is, neither does the government.”

This government sees everything as an opportunity to charge people with a criminal offence, no conviction needed, then you get their fingerprints, DNA and an excuse to spy on them at will.

How did this vote go? Is being critical of a gay lifestyle now illegal? Did the government change their mind on this? Can we use the same legislation to arrest you for criticising young, single mothers for their lifestyle choice?

Not that I disagree with you, but the idea that criticism is suddenly not allowed is against everything I believe in. Heck, why not bring back in blasphemy laws, I’m sure Stewart Cowan and Quietzapple would be happy, as would most Muslims, the CoE and the Catholics.

When did offending people become reason enough to make you shut up? This government’s repeated attacks on civil liberties offend me, can I get them to shut up?

If someone’s views offend you then either don’t listen or tell them why they are wrong.

e.g. Stewart, abortion is an emotive subject but a foetus is a parasite and until it is capable of survival outside the womb then it has no rights. At the point survival is possible then if the woman wants it removed then doctors should do so, place it in an incubator and try to keep it alive. At which point it is put up for adoption. This gives the woman autonomy and keeps as many lives viable as possible. If you do not agree with this then you either believe all life is sacred (you’re wrong) or you think it may cost too much and encourage women to avoid protection (you may be right).

Tom has made posts recently stating everyone who wants fewer MP’s is wrong.

Tom confirms that he will only vote against his party incredibly rarely (regardless of the Bill).

So what exactly is the point of Tom Harris MP ? What is the point of any unthinking MP ?

Nice to see you standing up for OUR free speech Tom. By doing nothing.

Cheers.

Tom – maybe I missed your post on this, but why are the lords right and the Commons wrong on the freedom of speech thing?

If the aborted creature is a functioning human being, then it’s clinical murder.

If it’s not, it’s removal of a neocyte mass.

There’s nothing in between.

(That is, unless one believes that human potential has equal value to a human being. In which case one must abhor the many millions of woman who use the type of contraceptive pill which, despite its name, actually aborts the fertilised egg, not prevents conception. That’s millions. Every day. For years.)

Paul is quite “mistaken” to suggest that I would necessarily welcome further blasphemy laws. Such laws as now relate to religious opinions may require updating, I don’t know, we do live in a society where more religions would be viewed by most of us as deseerving of respect than formerly.

But a little adherence to facts rather than mere speculation would be welcome from many, not least those who want a return to Gun Law, medieval laws re usury and Black Wednesday.

Paul: It must be humbling for you to think you were once a parasite.

What about mentally and physically impaired children and adults who require constant care? Are they parasites too in your dark world? Are their lives “viable”?

Evan Harris is a ████████ ███ █████ ████ and there are plenty of █████ in the LibDem Party competing with him, the ████.

But as for Tom Harris… no number of large black blocks can conceal how much I hate you. :-p

I think labour will probably win todays election in Glasgow North East, but I was thinking about how they go about things. Labour will never ever see anybody elses point of view they just have their policy and will then not listen to any other point as if they were still fighting things in the last centuary. It is this more than anything else that has put so many off. take the rise of the BNP. Labour cannot see that thay may have a point about the levels of imigration. When you look at the size of our country, the current level of the population, The true ammount of unemployed. The state of out finance. The poor public services the cannot see its not about race but numbers. Labours refusal on this and many other things has made them unelectable. So enjoy your win today Tom it will be your last for some time.

PS. Tom is a slight exception to this rule but there is only one of him and he did not fit the governments mold so is now stuffing envelopes with the rest of us.

Wot rise of the BNP?

The phantasm imagined by those who favour them?

(wether because they like their policy or imagine that they will damage Labour?)

Rather the rise of UKIP and likelihood of still further advances in the wake of Chameleon’s Non Referendum U turn.

I’m glad you’re not the vice-President of the British Humanist Association.

I’m not at all sure that Jack Straw has done anything wrong. I accept, but with some unwillingness, the concept of “hate crime”, but I think free speech should be protected above all. [Indeed, I would incorporate all of American First Amendment jurisprudence into UK and European law if I could.]

At the moment gay people are pretty well accepted by the establishment, but that could change at a moment. History is very far from a predictable progress to ever greater liberation.

At some stage, gay people, like others, will value an established culture of free speech much more than any transient an largely unenforceable hate crime law.

“You do surprise me…”

Likewise.

@Paul Halsall:

Is it not rather like Incitement to racial hatred?

The general temper of the climate more important that the enforcement of specifics?

A society has a right and duty to protect its mores. Ours have changed for the better in my view, and it is reasonable for our laws to reflect and sometimes lead such liberalisations – it will often be unclear which is happening.

@Stewart Cowna
“What about mentally and physically impaired children and adults who require constant care? Are they parasites too in your dark world? Are their lives “viable”?”

Yes, but I do not require any one individual to forego their freedom to look after them. I am glad I live in a society that looks after the elderly, the weak and the disabled but that is society not an individual.

When you say to a pregnant woman “You must nourish this ball of cells with no nervous system (i.e. cannot feel!) for another 8 months otherwise you are breaking the law” you are being unreasonable. Likewise, the mother-to-be who wishes to abort at 8 months is being unreasonable. At 8 months the foetus can be removed and survive, likewise 7, 6… each with less chance of success, but we can try and as medical treatment improve we can push it back farther and farther. But I stop at the point there is no nervous system – that is as much human life as dandruff is.

I am sorry you are blinded to simple science by your religion, but maybe a bit of education on medicine, a bit of reading in philosophy and a bit of common sense will disavow you of the more radical ideas of your 2,000 year old book of (im)morality.

@Stewart Cowan
(got your name right this time)
Parasite: An organism that lives in or on and takes its nourishment from another organism. A parasite cannot live independently.