Who will you vote for in the next election(next is EU)

[looney]

Fatbadger, Oh and I wouldn't start on political contradictions or I'll take you lefties apart.

Want to explain why the left beleives that a lot of factors are environmental when it comes to human behaviour and therefor lean heavily to arguements for rehabilitation for offenders. Apart from say, domestic violence, which seems to be "biological" and therefor beyong rehab?

Yea, i'd back down if I were you when it comes to spouting acusations of hypocricy. Yea I know you didn't state the above, nor did I reveal my stance on the topic of domestic violence or the rehab of offenders.

The penny dropped yet?

 

[Mr C]

You really shouldn't get me started but here goes some reasons :-

<snip>

I could go on but I think that's enough for now.

LEAVE THE EU NOW !!!!!

At last - someone who speaks with common sense on this issue

 

[looney]

No it wasn't! Or if it was, it was all confused. It was about geographical entities (islands, for instance). We live in the UK, in the continent of Europe. Those are, I accept, geopolitical identifiers, but since when was an island a geopolitical identifier?

When it divided into.........countries? england, wales and sweaties for example.

Or united................Britain?

 

[bhaexpress]

That'll be the USA that is unable to meet the Human Rights standard required for EU entry, has minimal welfare provision, over 2 million citizens in it's prisions, minimal employee rights, etc,etc.

I have actually got plently of criticisms of the EU and the way it is currently run and major reservations about the Euro but given a choice between the european social model and what Eisenhower termed the military-industrial complex of the US, then pass me the French wine, German Car, Italian clothes, Spanish food and Greek Sunshine any day !

Hard to dsiagree with you Dandyman, most of what you say is completely true. You might have mentioned a non existant health system for the poorand gun control while you were at it. I have more than a few doubts about moving there but as my wife has four kids her moving here is just not an option. Ironically I will become an American citizen in order to live there so the assertion that some one is European and that's it isn't strictly triue. As far as the matter of language is concerned, well, I beg to differ. I've come across more than one American who's asked me if I could speak English.

The big joke is that it's likely that the next election I vote in will be in America, God help me !

 

[Brovion]

Sorry, mate, but (assuming you are British) you ARE a european, and there is bugger all you can do about it. If you want to become an American, you are more than welcome to emigrate.

I'm from the continent of Europe admittedly, but what I was saying was if Britian had to join one or the other and I had a choice between being a citizen of a Federal Europe or being a citizen of the USA I would choose the USA. Hopefully it will never come to that.

 

[fatbadger]

Law and Order.
The only points Ive posted on this topic are that I am against the death penalty(I veiw it as state sanctioned murder). I am in favour of the equal right to choose, yes this would require state arbitration but any other stance would require state co-ersion.

How is the arguement for a sensible immigration policy statist?
I would like a world ware people can come and go as they please but the relative scale of populations, relative levels of wealth and relative populations and their densities make this as viable at present as a Car owning democracy. Put simply, their aint any room. Thats consistant

Military
Well you may be on stronger ground here, except you overlook the point I continually make that we are ar war. peacetime requires de-militarisation which is good. And true wars make the state more centralised and authoritarian But Ive spelt out why this is necerssary. The risks of doing nothing would lead to our anialation.

Law: your assumption that the systems of social/political organisation must involve the state is the clearest statement of your statist attitudes.

Immigration: "policy". Said it all there, really. And that's before we even get onto the issue of borders (nations don't have strict borders, ethnic groups don't have strict borders, language communities don't have strict borders - only (nation) states have strict borders) or, indeed, of the powers needed to enact theinsensible 'policies' you advocate.

Military: "we" are not at war; the state is. Your continued identification with that war, and the state that is prosecuting it, underlines your statist assumptions.

Let's get things clear - I am not saying that your advocacy of the state is wrong (or, indeed, right), just that it is as consistent as your use of anti-statist rhetoric. That is why I point to your pugnat ergo est approach. Minimal statists get lost in this strange netherworld in which they refuse the right of the state to be large, but then call on it repeatedly to intervene on their behalf (especially with regard to 'defence' and 'law and order'). The state is maximalist - necessarily so - so either accept that, or go the whole hog and stop being cowardly, and advocate anarchism. Maximal state theory makes sense; anarchism makes sense; but minimal state theory never can.

 

[fatbadger]

Fatbadger, Oh and I wouldn't start on political contradictions or I'll take you lefties apart.

Now who hasn't been reading posts?

 

[Dandyman]

The Human Rights I was specifically refering to was the application of the Death Penalty (which if I recall correctly you do not support) and by extension its use against the mentally ill and those who were children when they committed their offences

Correct, I am against it. But itse existance in the US is a reflection of there greater level of Democracy rather than any interpretation of Human Rights.


If the DP is a HR issue where does abortion stand? Just Curios.

Put simply I don't regard the foetus as a human life before about the 24th week. As you are also, from memorary, an atheist I am assuming that you don't regard that human life starts at the point of conception. Is your position therefore one about property rights ? I am also confused as to why when you consistently claim to take an anti-statist line you then advocate a position on human fertility that implicitly invites the state to substitute itself for the citizen when making what many would believe to be a purely personal choice.

 

[bhaexpress]

I'm from the continent of Europe admittedly, but what I was saying was if Britian had to join one or the other and I had a choice between being a citizen of a Federal Europe or being a citizen of the USA I would choose the USA. Hopefully it will never come to that.

My sitiation is being dictated by who I'm married to but I wouldn't be be quite so quick off the mark to be an American, there's pros and cons you know.

 

[berkshire seagull]

Conservative for me as i feel thats the best chance will ever get of getting labour out.

BNP is high and as we have stated many of times people are entitled to there view regardless of what others think.

 

[Dandyman]

BNP is high and as we have stated many of times people are entitled to there view regardless of what others think.

I note that none of these Aryan superman have yet had the balls or brains to attempt to justify their views to the rest of us.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Out of interest do our 7 BNP supporters in this thread claim that we lost 1-0 on Saturday as they cannot possibly recognise 2 goals scored by a black player?

 

[bhaexpress]

Unfortuantely the BNP are not interested in any version of democracy other than their own. I agree with Dandyman though, be interesting if one of the seven made some token attempt to explain their rational for voting for a bunch of facists.

 

[berkshire seagull]

I note that none of these Aryan superman have yet had the balls or brains to attempt to justify their views to the rest of us.

Why should they have to justify to you and others
Obviously your not goner like it so whats the point i ask,so let the poll be its poll although most do it to wind people up on here and yes it certainly works.

 

[Brovion]

My sitiation is being dictated by who I'm married to but I wouldn't be be quite so quick off the mark to be an American, there's pros and cons you know.

I'm well aware of that!! I don't particularly want to be an American, all I'm saying is that if at some future date it is decreed that Britain can't be independant and has to decide whether it joins a united, federal Europe or the United States my vote would be for the USA. As I've mentioned before - I hope I don't have to make the choice. In the same situation other posters would vote to join the federal European state. Fair enough.

 

[Albionite83]

Can we just sort out the ridiculous situation in which Scottish MPs can vote for legislation in England (and make all the difference in the case of foundation hospitals) whereas English MPs cannot vote on the same subjects in Scotland.

Independence for England. Jocks out (except Mark McGhee)

I'll vote Lib Dem BTW unless Bellotti or Norman Baker are on the list

 

[fatbadger]

Independence for England. Jocks out

You twat.

 

[US Seagull]

The big joke is that it's likely that the next election I vote in will be in America, God help me !

Don't count on it. From what I understand you are still in the UK correct? Your marriage will get you a green card (I have one) which will make you a permanent resident, but not a naturalized citizen. You have to be lawfully resident in the states for at least five years before you can apply for citizenship.
You have to be a citizen to vote. Don't worry though, they will still tax you all the same (actually more so )

 

[Albionite83]

You twat.

Scottish MPs shouldn't be able to vote on things like foundation hospitals in England when English MPs can't vote on the same things in Scotland. There is no possible justification for this inequality and it is pissing me off.

We're only going to get foundation hospitals in England because the Jock MPs at Westminster voted for it - even though the Scottish Parliament has rejected it and they won't be getting them in Scotland.

 

[bhaexpress]

Don't count on it. From what I understand you are still in the UK correct? Your marriage will get you a green card (I have one) which will make you a permanent resident, but not a naturalized citizen. You have to be lawfully resident in the states for at least five years before you can apply for citizenship.
You have to be a citizen to vote. Don't worry though, they will still tax you all the same (actually more so )

Be honest with you, the prospect of trying to pick a winner in a US election is something I would gladly abstain from, their politics are a far bigger joke than ours.

Funny what you say though, my attoney reckons I need to become a US citizen. The main reason that I've not moved over there full time as yet is because I am doubtful as to his advice. Apparently I'm supposed to go over there on the Visa waiver and then make my application and just not come back to England. Now another lawyer I spoke to told me that's Visa fraud. Needless to say the US Embassy are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard. I will be seeing this attoney when I go over next month but I reckon I'd be better off getting it done from this side of the Atlantic. I don't have a lot of faith in the US immigration autorities.