Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You really should stop believing such discredited rubbish. .

Could you just clarify which part you don't think is true?

The bit where Nicola "Socialist Champion of the Poor" Sturgeon and her husband claim well over £200,000 a year (plus expenses) from the Scottish Taxpayer and SNP, or the part where this adds up to over ONE MILLION POUNDS in the course of a parliament?

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

So she claims less that John Bercow. But is First Minister of Scotland ? You'll have to do a little better than that if you're talking troughing then won't you.

Still, is a distraction for you I suppose. Anything rather than face the reality of what might happen in a few weeks time to the Tories. Best hope those 'kippers' come home... Cameron certainly is.

Nope. Actually trying to provide a little context.

Of course if you see everything through the Nationalist lens, everyone not a Nationalist must be attacking you.

skintmacflint

Some words from the man himself MrSalmond

" I turned the Scottish National Party into an avowed Social Democratic force.

But the force that is with us now, is as much to do with social media democracy as with social democracy. In this environment the social media masses have a fair chance of humbling the tax evading classes. I hope to see that front of battle lour at Westminster"

Considering he himself admits the difficulty with grassroots campaigning and the speed of social media is difficult to control. This might prove to be SNPs Achilles heel. However you can't deny his admitted self conceit in himself.

skintmacflint

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It already exists.

The SNP controlled Scottish Government publishes the GERS figures every year.

The problem is these figures show a substantial deficit so the cybernat crowd refuse to believe them.

Nothing seems credible to SNP supporters now unless it's published or confirmed on a recognised Pro Indy site , or said by an SNP party member it seems.

WOS even has an article no 244 called " Telling Good Journalism from Bad", using Mickey Mouse examples and explanations from recent press on . 'The leak' . I assume this is to help the masses identify lies and spin. Lol.

Although I think they maybe felt obliged to, after doing a spoof (called Scotlands changing) in March of a government issued leaflet sent to Scottish households. Leaflets headings had been changed from " Scotlands Changing . Our United Future Build to Last" to You Voted No. Now Shut Up, And Eat your Cereal. Bend Over and Think of England". Generated a lot of comments some hilarious, including a couple who thought it was genuine. And another couple saying FOI requests had been posted demanding to know not just the cost, but the name and address of the company who printed it.

kabayiri

It does look likely that the mid-term future of British politics will involve more coallition than we have known in the past.

Some parties have demonstrated they can work this way. The Lib Dems and Conservatives being a good example.

This coallition spirit clearly does not extend to the SNP; a party of separation and division.

We really don't need divisive politics when we face a lot of challenges ahead. It's a shame politicians put themselves first, as Hamish illustrates.

Crashy_Time

kabayiri wrote: »

It does look likely that the mid-term future of British politics will involve more coallition than we have known in the past.

Some parties have demonstrated they can work this way. The Lib Dems and Conservatives being a good example.

This coallition spirit clearly does not extend to the SNP; a party of separation and division.

We really don't need divisive politics when we face a lot of challenges ahead. It's a shame politicians put themselves first, as Hamish illustrates.

Hamish is just worried that political instability on top of the oil collapse will damage his house price even further. He is all about self interest as well.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Nope. Actually trying to provide a little context.

Of course if you see everything through the Nationalist lens, everyone not a Nationalist must be attacking you.

The only context you need is that she gets paid more or less the same as the Welsh First Minister, though she could claim more, but doesn't. Big deal..

Honestly, some are getting so desperate to pin something, anything on her they're losing sight of all reason..'not everyone not a Nationalist must be attacking you'... sheesh. Since when did pointing out basic facts become any sort of 'prism'. She claims less as First Minister of Scotland than John Bercow MP does, end of story.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Could you just clarify which part you don't think is true?

The bit where Nicola "Socialist Champion of the Poor" Sturgeon and her husband claim well over £200,000 a year (plus expenses) from the Scottish Taxpayer and SNP, or the part where this adds up to over ONE MILLION POUNDS in the course of a parliament?

You may want to recheck Peter Murrell's salary details, you have them wrong ( too high ). Plus, are Chief Executives of political parties paid for by the taxpayer ?

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The only context you need is that she gets paid more or less the same as the Welsh First Minister, though she could claim more, but doesn't. Big deal..

Honestly, some are getting so desperate to pin something, anything on her they're losing sight of all reason..'not everyone not a Nationalist must be attacking you'... sheesh. Since when did pointing out basic facts become any sort of 'prism'. She claims less as First Minister of Scotland than John Bercow MP does, end of story.

Why do you think (I know it's not really allowed in the SNP but I don't tell) that Holyrood freely chose to vote such a high salary for the office of first minister?

Was it to make Scotland a fairer and more equal place?

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The only context you need is that she gets paid more or less the same as the Welsh First Minister, though she could claim more, but doesn't. Big deal..

Honestly, some are getting so desperate to pin something, anything on her they're losing sight of all reason..'not everyone not a Nationalist must be attacking you'... sheesh. Since when did pointing out basic facts become any sort of 'prism'. She claims less as First Minister of Scotland than John Bercow MP does, end of story.

Erm, all I did was post a series of facts. You twist this into some anti-Tory mini-rant.

You really should calm down a bit. The SNP look headed for a big win in Scotland so I'd have thought you'd be quite cheerful. Apparently the Nationalist chip is stronger than I thought.

Still Brent is up a little bit so perhaps FFA will just be disastrous rather than utterly suicidal if the SNP get what they want.