After watching Jeremy Hunt wheedling his way out of resigning by lying through his teeth, here’s something refreshing from everyone’s favourite Tory-headbutter. Worth a watch

Getting a bit ‘fighty’

Not the standard politicians interview. Says he likes getting pissed, and often gets ‘a bit fighty’. That a bloody good punch up is a perfectly acceptable way for consenting adults to settle their differences. And implies it’s only the poncy middle classes that think it isn’t

And on being asked, after admitting he used to nick cars, whether it was thrilling, looks as if he’s dealing with a simpleton

Quality 😀

Refreshing, but you do wonder how much of ‘straight talkin’ fella’ is purposedly aimed at his home electorate when he has to stand as an indy next time around. Having said that, I’d probably prefer him to some of the MPs who’ve “represented me” over the years.

Also, if two guys want to slug it out behind the pub, fine, I agree, nothing to get too het up about, but his technique involves escalating a bit of verbals and asshattery into “non-consensual” violence, bumblebee man style.

Thats Sandhurst for you 😉

Martin – that’s exactly what I thought on watching it! Standing as an Indy next time are we then? He probably made the decision based on George Galloway harnessing the ‘anything but these lot’ vote.

Good luck to him. I suspect he’d be less inclined to the present backsliding we’re witnessing every day

So is the “real life experience” that is being referred to? Indeed quality, I’m so grown up that after a few drinks I resort to punching someone to settle a dispute. More please….!?!? 😕

Justifying moronic behaviour on the basis that it is different from squirming/possibly lying etc is an interesting jump? Can’t say I approve of either personally.

Joyce is a real poster boy for those who dislike the way the current lot act

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/103251/-1m-MP-faces-big-payout

Aracer, I just got a trojan warning from your link. Blocked, but worth noting if anyone doesn’t have decent AV in place.

whilst he does raise an interesting point about why it is reasonable to ruin someone’s career or bear a grudge and attempt to destroy them or their career or their business but it is not ok to hit someone. However he wholeheartedly fails to have noticed that two wrongs dont make a right.

His honesty is admirable though

I’d forgotten about his place in the dodgy expenses league table. Well, I’m sure the good people of Falkirk will get their chance to give their verdict on all that.

I think his honesty was all the more marked as it followed Jeremy Hunt standing up saying how he’d acted with ‘scrupulous honesty’ over B Sky B, when he’s clearly done anything but

So if Anders BreIvik is being “honest” does that make him a better person than Jeremy Hunt? Just trying to understand the logic here?

I don’t think indiscriminately killing massive amounts of people is directly comparable to headbutting a Tory MP. As I think at some point over , say, the last week, most of us have wanted to do one of the above.

But in direct answer to your question THM: yes. Probably

Not directly comparable no, but a good test of the logic. Not a fan of violence per se, but each to their own. A cheat and a thug and an (alleged) lier. Can’t say I approve of either, but there we go.

I am hoping that the AB is a better person than JH is an equally extreme point!?!?

an odd comparison their THM are you trying to get a job in tabloid journalism?

Would it be a bad thing to have honest politicians

it seems clear that, in my opinion, Hunt has been less than honest in his dealings with murdoch and in answering the allegations…still he has his fag* to fall on his sword for him [ innuendo not intentional]

* nott a homosexual slur but a public school boy term for your lacky

JY not at all 😉 not smart enough to drum up the headlines. But the best test of any logic is to test it to its extremes. An honest thug/lier/cheat/alleged adulterer would in my eyes be little better than a dishonest one. They would still be a thug/lier/cheat/alleged adulter. Mentioning no names nor implying anything here, of course.

It would be great to have honest politicians (of course) rather than that being an oxymoron but watching the further spin (white lies) being spouted on QT last night I will not be holding my breath

Got to disagree with you there old chap. If the person you’re talking about is an MP, as opposed to a mass murderer, then surely a degree of honesty is a character trait that might be deemed advantageous.

A degree of honesty is indeed admirable and rare in the Palace of Westminster (allegedly) but an honest thug is still a thug. Not someone I would admire.

But the best test of any logic is to test it to its extremes

in logic this is generally true [ish[ but there are no absolutes in moral philosophy and you can always think of exceptions to universal truths. Sometimes it is ok to lie , iirc the PM can lie in parliament to protect agents abroad or military/spying missions for example. The problem is when it their modus operandi and we dont believe a word they say.
What do you think about his broader point that certain middle class attributes such as ruining someone’s career and life [ say your personal appointed political adviser] is ok but hitting someone is not?
I thought it was interesting that he dealt with issues in a more honest but physical manner than the “acceptable ” middle class back stabbing way.
I dont think either is right but we [ society or posh society as he seemed to want to term it ] views one as bad and the other as “just business ”

Kant?

A cheat and a thug and an (alleged) lier. Can’t say I approve of either, but there we go.

Answered the other questions before surely – if JH is guilty as charged, and on the evidence to date and on the ministerial code (ie accept responsibility) it is seems so, then his behaviour is also deserving condemnation. How is stabbing someone in the back suddenly a class issue? Its abhorrent, cowardly behaviour in any circumstance (oops, getting Kantian again!!). Who is accepting anything as “just business” – the Tories, the SNP, Labour, LD, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all?

edit: this class thing? Do I take it that a smack in the face/headbut is only ok/condemned depending on real/perceived class distinctions as the OP seems to be hinting? Seems odd that and rather patronising that non-middle class people are incapable of not resorting to violence.

Not the standard politicians interview. Says he likes getting pissed, and often gets ‘a bit fighty’. That a bloody good punch up is a perfectly acceptable way for consenting adults to settle their differences. And implies it’s only the poncy middle classes that think it isn’t

he probably works on the basis that as a former scottish judo champion he’s likely to win in any ensuing brawl

I would say he’s no different to the idiots rolling around most town centres on a weekend pissed up and starting fights with anyone they can isolate

Who do you reckon would win in a Judo scrap between him and William Hague then?

Who do you reckon would win in a Judo scrap between him and William Hague then?

who cares?

Well I reckon our parliamentary democracy could be greatly enlivened if, instead of shouting at each other like 12 year olds, they had a playground scrap like 12 year olds.

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!!!

OK, as one of the ‘poncy middle class’ I am going to rise to the bait and say that, in no particular order:

Starting fights while pissed
Fiddling one’s expenses (allegedly)
Having an inappropriate relationship with a 17yo (again, allegedly)

Are all things that demonstrate enough of a lack of judgement to suggest that Mr Joyce is unfit to be an MP. I hope the people of Falkirk will see it that way too, though as my workplace is in Bradford West where that clown Galloway has just been elected, I can’t say I’m counting on it.

Andy