Bored of Netflix one evening and having watched everything good on BBC4 I decided to see what the Parliament channel had to offer and came across a series of lectures given at Speakers House, including this one given by Jacob Rees Mogg on the 13th of June.
I don't like Mogg. I think he's dangerously ideological, too clever for his own good and smug with it. He happens to be MP for where I grew up and if I still lived there I would be giving him so much grief, but I've never actually listened to him so I thought I'd see what he has to say about Brexit, which basically boils down to there's a whole world of nations out there that aren't doing particularly well and we should be doing business with them. He spoke a lot about Brexit being good for the poorer members of our society but I'll assume he's not actually that bothered.
I had trouble early on though when he was laying out his three views of how Brexit might go. I can't find a transcript online but this is what he said about those people wanting to stay closely aligned with Europe:
'"I'm sticking to you because you're made out of glue". I think this was an advert for Hyundai. Actually I'd completely forgotten but one of my assistants kindly looked up that it was an advert for Hyundai in 2002.'
Two points. Firstly, yes it was, but the line is taken from a Velvet Underground song. The advert doesn't appear to be online anywhere but you can find references to it here and here. If you're going to cite sources, do it right, and if that's the quality of research that can be expected from Mogg's team then we can add lazy and ignorant to the list.
Secondly,the line is "I'm sticking with you because I'm made out of glue". Very different, and in changing it he makes Europe sound controlling and domineering whereas the song is about loyalty and devotion, but this is the Tories we're talking about who are currently fighting like rats in a sack which would be fun if we weren't all in there with them.
(Also, how are the implications of his religious beliefs any different from Tim Farron's, who got hammered for them?)
(Also, how are the implications of his religious beliefs any different from Tim Farron’s, who got hammered for them?)
Potential Lib Dem voters more likely than Tories to be put off by a God-bothering homophobic asshat?
Is this a euphemism?
Nope. A reference to Wilde's [I]Picture of Dorian Gray[/I]
As far as faith goes, Farron was more honest that Rees-Mogg is, in that he resigned when he felt the conflict between his 'legistlative' life and his religious life. It makes you wonder what Rees-Mogg would if he ever did get elected to lead the Tories.
It makes you wonder what Rees-Mogg would if he ever did get elected to lead the Tories.
A tory party under him would just be UKIP for posh people.
As I said on the other thread it would be amazing viewing to see him running a proper brexie weathersppons and dealing with all the people in there. Kind of an I'm a celebrity with no pension plan
WARNING: I followed a Google News link to the DM, in which JRM is discussed.
I won't link to it, but there is an article in the DM today about JRM, surprising for how insightful it is. Written by Dominic Sandbrook, it dissects JRM's persona and behaviour, and shows the reader what he really is. Worth the read if you can bring yourself to go there...
it dissects JRM’s persona and behaviour, and shows the reader what he really is
Alien autopsy?,
I think we're all well aware what he really is.
Care to give us a synopsis then I don't have to sully myself reading that shitrag's website?
Interesting conflation of "staunch Catholic beliefs" and "speaking sense", there...
I tend to get suspicious whenever the word "staunch" gets used.
Being a Catholic didn't make him a complete twunt. He's just a twunt with convenient religious or ideological excuses for his acts of advanced ****hattery.
As far as faith goes, Farron was more honest that Rees-Mogg is, in that he resigned when he felt the conflict between his ‘legistlative’ life and his religious life.
This is rubbish. First Farron resigned from the leadership when he came to the conclusion his faith was incompatible with leading with Liberals, because essentially there are not many Liberals in the party. It had nothing to do with his legislative life as he is still an MP and therefore legislator. His decision was no doubt informed by the fact that he felt the need to give a misleading answer when responding to a shabby line of questioning. I have no problem with Farron, I think he comes out of it well, the same can not be said for many in his party.
This can be compared with JRM who when asked about a subject where his views are very narrowly shared, he did not try and mislead, he did not dissasembble, he confirmed he thought abortion was wrong even in the case of rape. It is difficult to see how this can possibly be less honest than what Farron did.
His voting record speaks volumes
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24926/jacob_rees-mogg/north_east_somerset/votes
The man is scum
Being a Catholic didn’t make him a complete twunt.
No but as they say it sure does help.
How does his staunch catholicism align with his enthusiasm for blowing up foreigners? (and yet dislike of improving the military covenant?) His desire to punish the poor and especially the unwell and disabled? His religion comes and goes depending on how he feels on the subject himself.
And let's not forget, in this time of austerity, where working people and their children are starving, he took £7,500,000 of tax payers money, to do up his countru estate.
The least he could do after all that money was spent, would be to let a few homeless people believe there.
How does his staunch catholicism align with his enthusiasm for blowing up foreigners? (and yet dislike of improving the military covenant?) His desire to punish the poor and especially the unwell and disabled? His religion comes and goes depending on how he feels on the subject himself.
You are absolutely right. Inconsistency and hypocrisy.
I have mentioned it before, but the great Prime Minister of Canada, Pierre Trudeau, was a devout Catholic, but no one knew until his funeral. This is because he believed that his faith could and should in no way be imposed on people through legislation to the extent that he drove the eradication of laws against homosexuality, and introduced the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as an intrinsic part of the Canadian Constitution.
His best quote? "The State has no business in the bedrooms of the Nation".
Friend of mine was in the same college as him at Cambridge. He was as odious back then as he is now, apparently.
Unfortunately he is my local MP. Anyone who thinks he is a diligent constituency MP has obviously only ever seen issues presented to him that conform to his own interests. He is entirely useless if presented with anything outside of this.
I suggest that those who still think he's OK go and have a look at his voting record. I'm not particularly partisan with politics, so I thought I'd initially give him the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately he has an astounding ability to vote, with relentless consistency, in the opposite way to any decent person, regardless of their political persuasion.
JP
Jacob Rees-Mogg = Jake the Snake.
I don’t know how someone’s mate above was at Cambridge with him. It must have been another jrm.
The jrm at Oxford was young and obnoxious. But he wasn’t alone in that.
My mistake - it was Trinity College.
JP
I agree with Bob.
The man is scum. A bottom feeder of the lowest order.
He sums up all that can be bad in humanity with not one saving grace. Not one.
Utter walking garbage.
Seems like Wikipedia has it spot on:
This has since been removed in the last 5 mins!
You are absolutely right. Inconsistency and hypocrisy.
It's all ok though, as long as you go to confession on a Friday and do the set penance.
It’s all ok though, as long as you go to confession on a Friday and do the set penance.
I doubt he sees his political behaviour as contrary to his professed faith, and therefore that it takes up much of his time when making confession. In any case, I know you’re being sarcastic, but it doesn’t quite work like that.
I think a lot of you don't really understand Catholicism. Confession is not there to absolve you of being a numpty, nor does it give you a blank canvas to cover your sins. Theoretically it only works if you really want to repent. I'm not sure that the Moggster ever thinks that what he is doing is wrong in any way, shape or form.
Hes just a blight on humanity. Can we crowdfund a trip to Dignitas for him?
This thread needs less odious turd and more a celebration of a Metal Band with the same name.
I’m not too sure anyone in the band is called Jacob, in fact I’d lay bets that there probably isn’t .
This ^..........then drag his carcass outside for the crows and rats to finish off. ****in odious creep.
I think Teresa May and the Remainers could more readily be compared with Charles I, than JRM. In that context JRM is more like John Hamden, standing against the establishment’s determined attempts to thwart the will of the majority.
I don’t like him but I think a lot of what JRM says is right.
So whoever said he said good stuff and he thought he was alright has failed to present any evidence of that. How strange....
Can someone please give an example of something he says being right?
I've tried to keep an open mind but his voting record genuinely disgusts me. And that is before I even start to think about Brexit.
To put it another way, Charles I came to grief because he defied the will of the people. He did the same as the establishment are trying to do now to the majority who voted for Britain to exit the EU.
JRM, odious or not, is trying to fight the corner of that majority against the establishment who are trying to ensure the majority don’t get what they voted for.
The analogy made several posts back that JRM was like Charles I is made in error, and shows an ignorance of history.
JRM is saying we should leave the EU. That is what the majority of UK voters said in 2016. The majority think he is right.
Simple!
JRM is saying we should leave the EU. That is what the majority of UK voters said in 2016. The majority think he is right.
Theresa May wished to propose a vote in parliament which would have brought about Brexit as per the 2016 referendum result. Mogg's is one of the main voices pushing the view that May should not get this deal through parliament.
Also, don't whine about bringing back control of affairs to the UK parliament and then refer to it as an establishment if it does things you don't like.
JRM, odious or not, is trying to fight the corner of that majority against the establishment who are trying to ensure the majority don’t get what they voted for.
He isn't very good at it is he. As pointed out he actually stopped the process with his last game. He is yet to provide a useful or constructive approach to leaving too.
If you think JRM represents you they I have to conclude your either mates with him or very deluded.
" the establishment who are trying to ensure the majority don’t get what they voted for."
Weird that the pro-EU establishment is so powerful, yet the government, the prime minister, the opposition, and the largest newspapers are all committed to Brexit. Presumably that means that May, Corbyn and Murdoch are not part of the establishment...
JRM is saying we should leave the EU. That is what the majority of UK voters said in 2016. The majority think he is right.
Simple!
No he's just a liar, he's constantly on panel shows & retweeting fakenews about the EU particularly about tarifs, which he either deliberately misconstrues or genuinely doesn't understand.
He doesn't have Johnson's recall & understanding of history, but it's amazing how much deference his accent & mannerisms induce in some.
It's fairly obvious that he's not driven by concern for improving the lot fellow leave voters. He's just driven by ideology.
@kimbers has it, hands down.
JRM is saying we should leave the EU. That is what the majority of UK voters said in 2016. The majority think he is right.Simple!
Horseshit. I don’t care where you are on the Brexit question; the referendum as a legitimate indicator of the will of the majority of the populace was so flawed, it wouldn’t have met constitutional requirements in many other Western countries.
It’s one reason I would accept the result of a second referendum, even if it went against my beliefs. A second would go a long way to solidifying the validity of the process.
To put it another way, Charles I came to grief because he defied the will of the people.
No he came to grief because he defied the right of parliament and the nobility. aka the elite, and refused to let it vote on certain items. You know, like the Maybot is doing. Could also mention that part of why it went wrong was trying to impose things in Scotland (see any similarities) which led to him needing parliament.
The "people" were very much secondary and when they got to uppity they were slapped down by both sides.
JRM, odious or not, is trying to fight the corner of that majority against the establishment who are trying to ensure the majority don’t get what they voted for.
Absolute ****ing bollocks. He is pushing his own self interests and has zerobinterest in the will of the majority. Maybots proposal does meet the simplistic leave the EU requirement so why isnt Rees_mogg happy?
The analogy made several posts back that JRM was like Charles I is made in error, and shows an ignorance of history.
pot calling kettle there.
Your first paragraph argues for the point I was making. Theresa May is more like Charles 1.
As much fun as trying to decide who is more like whoever, how come given the chance to push forward Brexit did JRM try and sabotage it by objecting to May's deal.
You are not much of a Saxon, Saxonrider! A true Saxon would be on top of Senlac Hill bashing his shield and shouting “Out, out, out”.
May’s deal is EU membership by another name.
Has ninfan got a new persona?
