Quote:
|
That was their choice and they're not saddos for doing so either. It's like me, who could imply that you are a 'saddo' for supporting and defending a really crap government, but I ain't going to, that's your choice.
|
No, Its nothing to do with your dislike of the government. It is about reducing any disagreements to the level of childish name calling such as the type that would go on in school. Somewhere someone came up with the term Bliar and it is repeated constantly or 'he is Bush's poodle' people dont seem to want to discuss it anymore than that.
It dismissive and allows for no debate.
---------- Post added at 22:23 ---------- Previous post was at 22:21 ----------
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cookie_385
As soon as someone uses the 'Tony Bliar' childishness I realise that they don't have anything intelligent to say so don't bother reading the rest of their post/blog/whatever. So I have no idea whether I agree with what they've said or not.
|
Exactly, Repeating a silly, childish nickname suggests to me that it is someone who repeats what they read and shows no signs of being willing to actually engage in a reasoned discussion, in which case whats the point?
---------- Post added at 22:29 ---------- Previous post was at 22:23 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by RizzyKing
Add to the fact tony blair is a damn liar he said he would serve a full third term if elected as prime minister he did not thats a lie he knew damn well he wasn't going to serve the full term. He told us we would get a referendum on the european treaty we are not going to get that so he lied again and those are just two examples so actually i think using the term bliar is very applicable.
|
No, It isnt. The paragraph of reasoning you gave before is. You don’t need to reduce your argument to 'bliar' you have already made a argument. Although I disagree with you because Blair properly did intend to serve a full term but this was made more difficult by Brown and by Blairs unpopularity with the public. People wanted him to go. I hardly think they can now turn around and say "But you said you’ll serve a full term'. I agree with you that he should but he was prevented from doing so by Brown and by the press/public. The EU treaty is tricky since I know little about what the latest one contains but we have never had one before.
Quote:
|
As to the john major reference i don't remember him having a nice backdoor agreement with maggie to take power and he certainly didn't topple her out of downing street as gordon brown has done. Tony blair and gordon brown were supposed to be longtime friends funny how easily gordon found it to stab bliar in the back when a sniff of power came up.
|
No, but others did backstab Maggie, its just they didn’t end up as the next Prime Minister. I actually do think their should be a election since people do vote depending on the PM a lot of the time but I dislike the people trying to claim that this is a Labour only problem.
By the way, you have admitted that Blair was all but forced out so why do you think he is a liar because he said he would serve a full term. Its obvious that control over his future was removed from him to some extent.