On 11 Sep 2003 14:36:43 GMT, (Mait001) wrote:

Pity the train didn't just drive off and drag that load of
right-on washed up losers under its wheels.

Yes, and let's also have a big man with a gun at polling stations,
shooting people if they don't vote for the right party.

People at polling stations don't screw up services for other people.
If these muppets want to demonstrate fine, but if they make life
difficult for people who just want to get about their business (including
the people in the exhibition) they should be treated with contempt.
Inflicting your opinions on others whether they want it or not is hardly
democratic and personally I'm sick of these so called activists who seem
to think the voting booth isn't good enough for them and they need to
cause trouble instead.

B2003


B2003, you have again taken the words out of my mouth, sir. Well said.


I'm always amused that people who think this way tend to also think
Maggie Thatcher was the greatest PM the country's ever had. That she
wouldn't have been able to get near Parliament if a load of bolshie
Suffragettes hadn't tied themselves to railings and generally acted
like 'so called activitsts' is an irony presumably lost on them...


Marc.

On 11 Sep 2003 07:31:06 -0700 Boltar wrote:
} Robin May wrote in message .. .
} Pity the train didn't just drive off and drag that load of
} right-on washed up losers under its wheels.
}
} Yes, and let's also have a big man with a gun at polling stations,
} shooting people if they don't vote for the right party.
}
} People at polling stations don't screw up services for other people.
} If these muppets want to demonstrate fine, but if they make life
} difficult for people who just want to get about their business (including
} the people in the exhibition) they should be treated with contempt.
} Inflicting your opinions on others whether they want it or not is hardly
} democratic and personally I'm sick of these so called activists who seem
} to think the voting booth isn't good enough for them and they need to
} cause trouble instead.

I try and curb my irritation at demoinstrators. After all there may be
a time when I wish to demonstrate in a manner more direct than is
possible at the polling booth.

Matthew
--
Záhid sharáb píné dé, masjid mein baith kar
ya woh jagah batá dé jahán Khudá na ho.
http://www.calmeilles.co.uk/

Robin May wrote in message .. .
You are wrong. It's incredibly rare for a Government in the UK to have
been voted for by the majority of the population. I'm not actually sure
if it's ever happened. The current labour government has the support of
about 40% of those who voted, which means less than 40% of those

So what would you suggest? Put the 2nd most voted for party into government
instead? Or have that oh so successful setup known as a coalition which is
a disaster wherever its tried because no one ever agrees on anything? No
thanks mate. If I wanted to live in a political cockup like that I'd move to
italy.

that what we call democracy really isn't as good as some people seem to
think it is, and leaves a great many people ideologically unrepresented
in parliament.

Its better than the alternatives.

B2003

And if I remember correctly the Scottish Parliament uses proportional
representation. Which helps to make the point that the Greens are only
"no-hopers" because the electoral system makes them so.

Thank God for that.

Marc.

No, their vote is useless not because hardly anyone else agrees with
them but because the people who do agree with them are spread out
across the country. That means there's never a single constituency with
enough people agreeing with them to elect an MP. It seems a bit unfair
to let geography and the first past the post system dictate whether you
get an MP elected.

That's okay if you are content for the B.N.P. and any other far right party to
be treated in the same way, whose overall electoral support is, I suspect,
rather higher than the politically-correct brigade would be willing to
tolerate.

The price we pay for having a stable democracy is the exclsuion of extremists
on both wings. Personally, I think it's a price well worth paying.

Marc.

Pity the train didn't just drive off and drag that load of
right-on washed up losers under its wheels.

Yes, and let's also have a big man with a gun at polling stations,
shooting people if they don't vote for the right party.

People at polling stations don't screw up services for other people.
If these muppets want to demonstrate fine, but if they make life
difficult for people who just want to get about their business (including
the people in the exhibition) they should be treated with contempt.
Inflicting your opinions on others whether they want it or not is hardly
democratic and personally I'm sick of these so called activists who seem
to think the voting booth isn't good enough for them and they need to
cause trouble instead.

B2003


B2003, you have again taken the words out of my mouth, sir. Well said.


I'm always amused that people who think this way tend to also think
Maggie Thatcher was the greatest PM the country's ever had. That she
wouldn't have been able to get near Parliament if a load of bolshie
Suffragettes hadn't tied themselves to railings and generally acted
like 'so called activitsts' is an irony presumably lost on them...



Personally, I didn't really care for Mrs. Thatcher. She had her good points,
but I don't really see that Parliament has been improved by the presence of
women.

As for the electorate, I'd be in favour of a return to the property
qualification (for men and women).

Marc.

(Boltar) said:

Or have that oh so successful setup known as a coalition which is
a disaster wherever its tried because no one ever agrees on anything?

Interesting that during times of crisis like, ooh, the first world war, the
great depression and, let me think, the second world war Britain has
falllen back on coalition government. Except that calling it a
National government presumably saves it from the curse of coalitions.

I don't think anyone ever seriously accused Churchill of being unsuccessful
or indecisive because he was heading a coalition.

John

"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...

Personally, I'd doubt that most of them were even on the electoral
register
as they might end up having to pay community charge!

Unfortunately, Community Charge was replaced several years ago :-(

"SabineUK" wrote in message
...

I don't think anyone ever seriously accused Churchill of being
unsuccessful
or indecisive because he was heading a coalition.

But he was kicked out just as soon as the electorate were given the
chance so to do

"Mait001" wrote in message
...

I'm always amused that people who think this way tend to also think
Maggie Thatcher was the greatest PM the country's ever had. That
she
wouldn't have been able to get near Parliament if a load of bolshie
Suffragettes hadn't tied themselves to railings and generally acted
like 'so called activitsts' is an irony presumably lost on them...

Personally, I didn't really care for Mrs. Thatcher. She had her good
points,
but I don't really see that Parliament has been improved by the
presence of
women.

As for the electorate, I'd be in favour of a return to the property
qualification (for men and women).

Hallelujah - someone speaking sense at last!