[Football] Jacob Rees-Mogg.

[alfredmizen]

It is incredible that all that money spent on a very expensive education ends up producing such a cretin.

who would shred you within about a minute in a one on one debate.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Do me a favour HT youre a cut above such unfunny ernestesque bollox !!

 

[drew]

You are as bad as that idiot shouting “You’re not worth debating”. I honestlly see no intent in her being hit (it looked like an accident and not a deliberate/pre-meditated attack). All the time that people like you choose to twist things to try to gain ‘political advantage’ there will never be sensible and reasoned debate. It’s you and your like (on both sides of the spectrum) who cause the yah-boo politics we sadly have top endure.

Actually that's quite interesting. On LBC this morning there was a caller on the Nigel Farage show who wished to remain anonymous and he stated that he felt Rees Mogg was under threat so he went into 'to protect' him. A little to enthusiastically it would appear. I agree that it doesn't look like a full blown punch but he certainly is reckless. Not surprised he didn't want to give his name.

Personally I think he's currently undertaking a well orchestrated PR exercise to get him into the pecking order to replace May. Some suggestions that he will run with Johnson as the PM and him as the chancellor but I suspect he'll do a Major and pretend to be an ally and then when Johnson's campaign falls apart they'll turn to him.

As articulate as he is, he has some 19th century views on life which would not serve us well.

 

[Sirnormangall]

Given Ress-Mogg’s violent and threatening supporters I’d say it’s pretty obvious why they feel a need to conceal their identity.

Thanks for clarifying. I had thought their need for disguise was to do with their pre-meditated and uninvited attendance at an event that they intended to disrupt because they are unable or unwilling to enter into reasoned debate. Obviously I was mistaken and they simply stumbled into this event accidentally on their way to a “ come as a para military” fancy dress party.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

who would shred you within about a minute in a one on one debate.

I somehow don't think so (although my education was somewhat cheaper, but more expansive).

 

[alfredmizen]

I somehow don't think so (although my education was somewhat cheaper, but more expansive).

Judging by the standard of your input on here , i disagree.

 

[Gritt23]

I'm not a religious man myself, but I am getting more than just a little bit uncomfortable with the outcry against anyone who does have a religious belief. I would hope we are a more tolerant society than that.

This, is an example, but far from the only one, where I don't believe Rees-Mogg has ever suggested he would, should he ever become leader , bring the views of his religion on homosexuality and abortion into is political policy making. If he was, then I would hope the majority would vote against any such policies. But at the moment, it's purely religious views, and while I don't share them, I don't like the road of intolerance towards someone having a different religious view. It does seem that we as a society are moving away from debate, and towards just anger and name calling at people who have a different view.

That is all. As you were.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I know lots of people who liked him before the students twats tried roughing him up.

The Mogg, he's alright.

Are you one of the blue-rinse Conservative Party member brigade.

Everything I've read seems to say he's the darling of the ever shrinking membership of the party (about 70,000), so he would have a good chance if he were one of the final two put forward to the membership in any leadership election.

But that he would be very unlikely to get that far because the members of the Parliamentary Party know that he would make them unelectable.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Can't stand them either as all are brainwashed young and incredibly anti British....Just goes to show that when you're young you believe everything they tell you at universities and act in an idiotic way.
At least the righties have life experience and can make their own minds up about politics and what's happening !!!

Why do they always get it wrong, then?

 

[Ernest]

The fascist Tories now trying to use the Rees Mogg confrontation to ban FREE speech for protesters, gets more like 1930's Germany every day

 

[Ernest]

Rees Mogg supporters show their true 'Nazi' colours, wonder if Brandon Lewis will suspend Mogg from the Tory Party as per his respect pledge

[tweet]960462446585614336[/tweet]

 

[Ernest]

Why would a Tory dress up as a Nazi

 

[scamander]

the cynic in me thinks this was a set-up, book in some 'activists' to react to you and hey presto. A very old trick but a good one.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Why would a Tory dress up as a Nazi

It's a strange one. Even Amber Rudd supporters are up to it:

AMBER RUDD IN COVER UP OF SEIG HEILING TOFFS PAID TO CANVASS IN HASTINGS

http://www.hasol.org.uk/press-release-rudd-cover-seig-heiling-toffs-paid-canvass-hastings/

 

[Ernest]

And Labour are the anti Jewish party

 

[Mellotron]

There are a couple of flaws with your reasoning. His religious view in this context is that the commandment "Thou shall not kill" is important and non negotiable. This is entirely in keeping with the views of the majority of the society, our society has law as a crucial foundation, and it's against the law to kill. Where society and JRM differ is in whether on not abortion is killing, but that is a scientific and factual distinction, it's not a moral one. On the moral question (is it wrong to kill?) everyone agrees (even you I would have thought?).

I agree strongly with the principle that people should be able to live their lives as they chose, and make decisions for themselves. In almost all cases I am opposed to telling others how to live or being told how to live myself.

However the protection of life is a bit different though, if you accept the premise that abortion is the taking of a life.

We don't live in a society which says if you don't agree with killing then don't kill, but don't stop others from doing it.

Well put. And I'm a lefty.

If you believe that life begins at conception, then you're not going to be comfortable with what you see as murder, nor would feel it should be an individual's choice to murder, and none of the public's business.

These are not my own views by the way, just explaining why the viewpoint is a logical one if you understand that someone else believes life begins at conception.

 

[rippleman]

I don't agree with his views on abortion either, but that is not the point, as you well know. He sticks to it, and let's be honest, he is not alone in his belief. But internet trolls like you won't rest until he is silenced, will they?

Maybe not, but in these enlightened days, his views on abortion would only be supported by a tiny minority. Mainly those indoctrinated with perverse religious views.

Abortion is, and always should be, a woman's right to choose. How can JRM with his privileged upbringing and family millions possibly understand the fears and emotions of a woman who has got pregnant as a result of rape. There are no "arguments" to support his views on abortion.

 

[Mellotron]

Maybe not, but in these enlightened days, his views on abortion would only be supported by a tiny minority. Mainly those indoctrinated with perverse religious views.

I'm sorry, but you're just incorrect here. For example, 52% of Americans believe life begins at conception. I'm not sure what the stat is for the UK - no doubt lower - but to suggest it is a tiny (i.e. 0-5%) minority is nonsense.

 

[melias shoes]

And Labour are the anti Jewish party

Seems that way.

 

[Buzzer]

Maybe not, but in these enlightened days, his views on abortion would only be supported by a tiny minority. Mainly those indoctrinated with perverse religious views.

Abortion is, and always should be, a woman's right to choose. How can JRM with his privileged upbringing and family millions possibly understand the fears and emotions of a woman who has got pregnant as a result of rape. There are no "arguments" to support his views on abortion.

That is rock logic.

There's very little about the abortion debate that can be considered universally objective which makes it so difficult to debate.

I'm not taking any side here other than to say that your comment about it always being a woman's right depends on when you think life begins. If you think it begins at birth then I understand why you would support abortion, if you think it begins some time before then, then I understand why you would be pro-life.

Chucking in arguments about class or gender are irrelevant because there are plenty of poor women who also hols the same views as JRM and for exactly the same reasons as him.