[Closed] David Cameron - thick or a liar?

Does it matter? he is our future PM and as leader of the Conservative Party it is reasonable to assume that two in every three words that utter from his mouth are untruths. Hunker down and look forward to at least ten years of rule by the rich and privileged.

He knows he can't alter any of this. And he knows anyone with half a brain knows this.

But he's banking on the average foaming-mouthed, Daily Mail reading ****wit being too thick to realise this. Then he can turn round, having been elected and say "I tried, but they wouldn't let me. Not my fault" etc etc

Look how the French interpret human rights legislation. I'd assume we can do the same as them. i.e. whatever we want.

both, he's a politician if you hadn't noticed

I, for one, welcome our new reptilian overlords

5th - there is zero difference between UK law and French on this - Zero.

So this proves him to be the liar I always thought he was?

Good lord!!!It's bad enough with the politicians slagging and moaning about each other with "the run up to the next election".

TJ WE KNOW YOU HATE THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY!!
now don't get your knickers in such a twist or you will reach overload by May.

Politician in spouting b******ks and being liars shocker.

They all do it TJ, even your beloved Labour party - even in the good old 'honest' days before they became New Labour.

TJ.

I'd have thought that it was obvious, he probably has a pretty good idea of what percentage of the voting population would be able to provide your level of analysis ( I, for one, would not) and what percentage of the population would be more likely to elect him based on what he's said.

He - like all mainstream politicians - has done the maths and will act accordingly. Most of them probably believe that a little blurring of the reality is justifiable as they will save the country form the terrible mess that their opponents will create.

To a large extent, we get the politicians we deserve. Imagine a politician saying something like:-

"well the evidence suggests that to make thing x happen we should do thing y - but hey we can't be 100% sure, we're just doing what we think is best for the country" - instant savaging by the press / opposition.

I'm even sure that many politicians start out wanting to be accurate and honest but soon realise that spin and messaging is the only way in the current system to achieve any of their aspirations to change things for the better.

Gosh, a long post, sorry.

[i]There is no way of stopping the European convention on Human rights being used in the UK without leaving the EU[/i]

This isn't right. But that doesn't necessarily make you either thick or a liar. 😉

TJ - I'm with you - he tells lies - but will the voting public see through him in time??

5th - there is zero difference between UK law and French on this - Zero.

I am no great fan of the Labour party - in Nu labour lite or other forms.

No do I hate the tory party. I hate liars and political lightweights.

I just want to see some of the toryboys on here defend this load of utter bobbins from Cameron. Its the worst load of tosh I have heard from a politician since "45 mins"

What is particularly awful about this is the way it shows him pandering to the ignorant and predjudiced in society whith what he really should know is a load of lies.

So toryboys - defend this idiocy from your lying leader then

Bigdummy - how can you stop EU law being used in the UK without leaving the EU then? Please tell me.

So toryboys - defend this idiocy from your lying leader then

This is because he usually wears a helmet for commuting, isn't it.

What chip - come on 5th - you are a tory supporter are you not? can you defend this mendacious piece of windbaggery?

I will attack cant and humbug where ever tehy come from

Dont all politicians pander to idiots - lets be honest most of the electorate could not answer some fairly simple political questions if we asked them at the ballot box. It is politically astute by Dave as it panders to the euro sceptic wing and the Mail reading neo -cons without alienating Disraelli /European Tories [who know he cannot do this].
In power he can either ignore this or use it as a tool for moaning about Europe...whichever is the most useful.
Unfortunately the days of principled politicians [of either hue]sticking to their guns are a thing of the past.

TJ, to my mind you clearly do have a chip on your shoulder which has been regularly demonstrated by your perjurative use of the word 'Toff'.

Hunker down and look forward to at least ten years of rule by the rich and privileged.

So vote LibDem, forcing a coalition government that will take the edge off the right-wing sword?

Pejorative?

Clubber - are you or have you ever been a toff? 😉

BTW - I am so middle middle class you would not believe it 🙂

Junkyard, very well put.

Oh, and TJ, thick people don't get on to a PPE course you know.....

[i]I hate liars and political lightweights.[/i]

Thats 99.9% of the Labour party then!

Really CFH? *Raises eyebrow*

So he is a liar then?

PPE?
Is he in 'elf 'n safety then? 🙂

[img] [/img]

most of the electorate could not answer some fairly simple political questions if we asked them at the ballot box.

I've often thought this should be compulsory.

"You have selected: [code]LABOUR[/code].
Which of the following statements describes the [code]LABOUR[/code] manifesto policy on the European Union..."

Minimum 3 out of 5 or your vote only counts half 😀

TJ, in your class war way, you'd probably say I was a Toff but I'm pretty sure I'm not. I'm from a comfortable middle-class family. Not rich enough not to worry about recession and so on but comfortable enough to have been to private school. Probably similar in essence to our Glorious Leader actually.

I'm also lucky enough to have been to a very mixed class state school (one of the kids in my class was from just about the richest family in Britain at the time while there were also kids from the nearby housing estates) when younger and a very public school uni later on.

Funny thing is that having met people from lots of well known private schools, I'd have said that the Etonions while being a little separated from the real world as you might expect were far less bad than many at other schools which wouldn't be used as ammo in political discussions - Winchester College is one in particular that seemed to breed people with no concept of people less fortunate than themselves and worse in fact, contempt. Eton as far as I could work out did at least try to ensure that their pupil's appreciated how lucky they are.

PPE - politics, philosophy and economics. Traditionally the easiest degree to get and the haven for the thick sons of the aristocracy ( if they are not too thick when they go to agricultural college instead) and sportsfolk

What chip - come on 5th - you are a tory supporter are you not? can you defend this mendacious piece of windbaggery?

I gather callmedave's point is we can look at how we implement the law. France appears to manage to do what it wants, so there's no reason we can't.

Is he thick or a liar? Probably. He's a politician. Is he less thick and less of a liar than brown? Hard to believe otherwise.

TJ - where is your source for "There is no way of stopping the European convention on Human rights being used in the UK without leaving the EU" ?

Clubber - you don't sound like a Toff to me - sound rather middle middle class much like me.

I am not interested in class war. I am interested in fairness and equality of opportunity rather than the entrenching of privilege. Thats equality for all no matter the background

Interesting what you say about etonians - the only ones I have net were dreadful stereotypical upperclass twits

Or, TJ, PPE - current entry requirements for Oxford are at least three A grades at A-level (At least one of which must be maths) and a supplementary entrance exam.

So, not exactly one for [i]" thick sons of the aristocracy ( if they are not too thick when they go to agricultural college instead) and sportsfolk "[/i] (Your chip is showing again....)

I'm far more interested in how the economy will be dealt with than something like this so I don't care. Maybe Gordon is less of a liar than Tone but that don't mean I'll vote for him.

All the pies - that is the position. The UK is a signatory to the European convention on Human rights which is incorporated into EU law. It is a prerequisite for being in the EU that you obey EU law.

CFH - he got a first as well IIRC.

Its still the tradition haven for the thick as you well know

What about Blair?
Was he lied to by everyone (Bush, Govt Int) about Iraq or did he lie?
Didn't Brown support his decision to invade?

It is a prerequisite for being in the EU that you obey EU law.

Blair - my feeling is he believed what he said - even tho it was utter bobbins some of the time. I believe he was sincere - just deluded. I am not sure that is any better - infact probably worse.

>All the pies - that is the position. The UK is a signatory to the European convention on Human rights which is incorporated into EU law. It is a prerequisite for being in the EU that you obey EU law.

Yes, so you say. Just looking for verification of that. I can find government documents discussing repeal of the UK act but they don't mention withdrawal from the EU as a prerequisite.

TJ - the European Convention on Human Rights is not an EU treaty, and the Council of Europe which supervises the European Court of Human Right in Strasbourg has nothing to do with the European Union.

A large number of the Council of Europe members (Russia, crucially but also Azerbaijian and others) are not and will not be EU members.

It is the European Convention on Human Rights which is incorporated into British law by the Human Rights Act.

Theoretically I don't think there is a legal reason why the British government could not repudiate the ECHR and its Council of Europe membership while remaining an EU member state, although as a practical matter it is admittedly unlikely.

5th - perhaps so ( but I don't believe it is) - but the then thats nothing to do with the human rights act being incorporated into UK law. Remember before 1998 you could still take rights cases to Starsbourg

Big Dummy - you miss one of the crucial points by mixing up English. Scottish and UK law.

A UK ( there is no such thing as british government) cannot repudiate the incorporation of the ECHR in scottish lawa s they do not have the power.

I thought that being a signatory to the ECHR was a prerequisite for being an EU memebr - perhaps I have that wrong

As a gloss to that, I agree that signing the ECHR is regarded as pre-requisite for new EU membership, so in practice repudiating the ECHR would be a tough sell. I don't think that it's formally a condition of the UK's continuing membership of the EU however.

I'm not sure it greatly affects the argument you're making incidentally, so I do not propose to spend much energy worrying about it. 🙂