Now i have your attention
As this place isn't 'my life' sorry bud i'm not going to multi quote every line just for you to continue to dissect until
A) You are dissecting the construction of my font down to pixel level.
B) Ive bored myself void of excrement trying to read it all.
If that isn't a pathetic attempt to avoid having to face up to the very real issues which stem directly from your posts, I don't know what is.
At times you and a few others on here romp onto threads like overgrown kids, you jump on a thread and attempt to suck up all the air in the room.
You have posted 51 times in this thread. I have posted 18 times, including this one. So at the time you wrote that complaint, you'd posted 3 times as often as I.
Regarding the posts of yours to which I responded, they totalled 1258 words, not including quotes, and my responses totalled 325 words.
i find your thoughts utterly blinkered and unwilling to look at the bigger picture.. biased, but that's diversity for you, which i guess just how different we perceive things.
I guess one of the differences in how we perceive things is whether 51 posts suck up more or less air than 17, or 1258 words more or less than 325.
"Would you be quite happy with the situation where a leave deal was agreed, and then a future administration could just come along and change it?"
If i was Corbyn i would nail what we agreed to the gallows of the HOC's for all to see, and make it clear any future leadership change must commit or face the public to explain why the other parties would no longer support the modified leave deal. These are politicians here, and whilst i get it they don't trust eachother it's also convenient to use this as an excuse just to continue to block and delay progress. And this was my original point, im too cynical to believe either side in their excuses. And i still believe Corbyn is fkin useless and wants to just bury the tories in this mess until GE time.
In the interests of minimising evacuation, shall we summarise your 116 word answer to my "Would you be happy...
" question with a 1-word one, "No"?
"Do think that it is OK for MPs to vote against the proposed deal if there are valid reasons to do so?"
Absolutely i do. Now you answer me. Do you honestly believe Labour being the opposition and how they voted in Mv1/2 are voting for the good of their constituents/country
Actually, I do honestly believe that they were voting for the good of their constituents and country.
or just to spite the opposition, to detract any glory from them? Apart from i think 4, Labour are polarized in opposing tories or the actual deal?
As i said before and pointed out myself at least some tories have rebelled for reasons i agree which is the May 'deal' is sh1t and we deserve better.
Given that the vast majority of Labour MPs voted for triggering the Article 50 process (and that you can't know how many opposed it because they thought more preparatory work should be done first), and that at the subsequent GE the Labour Party manifesto committed to honouring the referendum, why are you so determined to deny the possibility that Labour MPs now voting against the withdrawal agreement also agree with you that "the May 'deal' is sh1t and we deserve better
It still seems that you are quite happy for Tory rebels to vote against what you think is a sh¡t deal, and not acknowledge that at least some of them might be doing so to bring down Theresa May for their own personal benefit, and at the same time are determined to portray Labour opposition to it as entirely for party political benefit reasons and not because they think it is a sh¡t deal.
Why is that?
Could it be, perhaps, that because you believe "Corbyn is fkin useless", and because you are a Tory voter, that you flatly refuse to accept that he is being truthful? How many times has he said that the referendum must be honoured but not via a deal which is (paraphrasing) sh¡t?
Could it be, perhaps, that "i find your thoughts utterly blinkered and unwilling to look at the bigger picture.. biased" applies to you?
"You said you aren't defending May, and don't think she should ever of (sic) been elected to negotiate our exit. But you voted for her to do just that. Are you able to explain the logic there?"
WTF? BAS are you ok? This is another example where you address me as a tory MP, i am jo public remember.. We of course had no say in electing May to lead. You know that so why ask a stupid question? Come on mate sort it out.
Surely not even you can really believe that you can re-write history like that?
See if you can answer these questions:
Who was leader of the Tory party at the time of the last general election in which you voted for the Tories?
Who did you vote to become Prime Minister?
"It isn't the deal they offered us it is the deal which we negotiated with them. Did you not know that?"
Again i am of course fully aware but. Juncker and his posse have already pointed out this 'deal' is not negotiable. What does that tell you?
It tells me that, like any deal, once all the parties have agreed it, and it's written up in its final form, and all the parties have certified their approval of it, it is done, and not up for renegotiation.
Ask yourself how would you, or MPs, or members of the public react if the deal had been approved by Parliament, and things were trundling along, but hadn't got to the stage of signing an international treaty, if "Junker and his posse" had said "Actually, hang on, we've changed our minds, we want to reopen it and make alterations
". And see if you can do so honestly.
I dont believe much of the deal was what May negotiated, i believe alot was flung at her to take or leave hence Dominic Raab seeing the **** state and resigning over it. Of course not wanting to put his name to it. They were never going to give much were they? I know that you know that. So i still believe
A) Its not a deal more of akin to a divorce proceeding
B) The EU just can't afford anyone else to leave.
One Prime Minister.
Two Secretaries of State.
Do you really think that it is entirely a case of utter incompetence by very senior politicians, and not that there simply was never, ever, going to be a way that anybody could have negotiated a good way to leave the EU after they'd started the 2-year timer ticking and before they'd decided where they wanted to be after leaving?
My whole point in my original post is the scepticism i have in both sides. May is a dick to even consider talking to Corbyn 'the opposition' and expect it to end well. I stand by that.
Reversing that is equally valid regarding JC talking to TM and expecting it to end well.
But bear in mind that Labour were saying let's discuss this on a cross-party basis long before she agreed to, that she only agreed to after, thanks to all the MPs on her "side" who considered her deal such sh1t and that we deserve better, she was left with no alternative, and that some of her MPs are saying that she must not make any compromises in these talks.
At the same time i believe this process is unique and all MPs should be dropping their weapons for the time being to try and work sh1t out. Which isn't happening.
To use a very apposite saying, given your characterisation of the deal, it isn't happening because no matter how hard you try you cannot polish a turd.