Brexit 5

Dear oh dear. The hypocrisy leaves me breathless.

So who reckons we will be contributing financially to the EU -David Davis does.

Very kind of Theresa May to let the three Brexiteers give different ideas on Brexit. I wonder which one of them is the closest to hers. Does she actually just sit there saying Brexit is Brexit at all these meetings they have, or do they just toss coins to see who is going to make the next idiotic comment?

Julia Hartley-Brewer talks to the new Richmond Lib-Dem MP, Sarah Jolney about what a majority vote means. 4 mins.

Such a snobby interviewer.

"If I tell you that nearly a third of Tory voters from the last election who voted leave in June voted Liberal Democrat yesterday, you will see that this is not just about a remain versus leave rerun, it’s about people trying to say to Theresa May: we do not like the extreme version of Brexit outside the single market you are taking us down.”

Well, they didn't have a Conservative candidate to vote for, did they?

So they voted Libdem instead? That's just stupid thinking. Zac Goldsmith voted to leave. The leavers should have voted for him if they still wanted us to leave the EU.
Obviously a third of those who voted leave did not want to any more.
I read an email saying that there will not be a sudden election, because Maidenhead is very similar to Richmond as far as politics is concerned.

I wouldn't know, dj. I'd never heard of Julia H-B before today. Also, her snobbishness or otherwise doesn't make any difference to the point she was making rather well against SarahJ's argument. Silly, therefore, to mention it.

Thanks for the link to the 'God will help me' article and comments DJ. As a non-believer it concerns me greatly when someone purports to have God on their side and implies that we should all be comforted by that. I wonder if God knows she thinks he has her back.

I had wondered how she squares what her Government is doing especially to the weak, sick and vulnerable with her religious beliefs.

'Love thy neighbour', ... especially the poor and disabled; 'Suffer little children to come to me',...especially the little ones from Aleppo.

'faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity' ... especially to the homeless.

My belief is that we are here to care for one another, that the strong should support the weak; that we should love our neighhour as ourselves and that we should make sure that no one goes hungry or is forced to sleep on cold pavements or in dirty doorways.

There is more than one form goodness and you don't have to have faith to be a caring human being.

thatbags Thanks for the link to the Julia Bradbury interview, brilliant!!
I had no idea that Julia was so ballsy. The heavy sarcasm went right over that Sarah Js head, wonderful.
Julia was never like that on country file

She's not snobbish. That's just stupid thinking.

And irrelevant.

It is a good, squirmy four minutes, isn't it, petra?

Squirmy in the intellectual sense of squashing your opponent's (in the
is case the Lib-Dem take on a second EU referendum) ridiculous argument.

Disclaimer: Squashing bad arguments is not nasty. We should do more of it, e.g. when presented with tosh like de-platforming someone just because you disagree with them, or providing "safe spaces" for Snowflake Generation university students so they don't have to read or hear anything that might upset them, poor dears.

After listening to that, I think she's a match for Paxman. The embarrassment got worse ( as if it could) when one of Sarah's flunky's came on the line and said that Sarah had another interview: Julia replied: oh that's funny, she's booked in with me.

I think Julia is missing the point completely that a bye election vote is till the end of the Parliamentary term - less than four years in this case and there will be a re run of the election - whereas a Referendum is for good - quite a difference.
Sarah was quite clear on how she would vote if the Commons eventually get to vote on the terms.
During the campaign the Leave camp simply dismissed all statements by the Remain side as scaremongering but it would now seem that Julia agrees they were in fact telling the truth !!

Except, Petra, it's not Julia Bradbury. You ought to get your Julias right.
Julia Hartley-Brewer writes for the Express.

I am surprised you did not notice, bags, you're usually so on the ball.

Excellent post, Ginny. I completely agree with you. Much more important than a snooty reporter being nasty to a new MP.

Julia Hartley-Brewer is an excellent speaker, and clear and forthright.She is often on the Andrew Marr Show on Sunday morning.

The new MP doesn't have much experience.....it will be a learning curve for her!

Indeed so, roses. I actually felt rather sorry for her thrown in the deep end like that. Perhaps the 'flunkies' had not done sufficient homework and found out how incisive Julia HB could be. Ah well. Good luck, SarahJ.

I don't think I understand the argument that a democratic vote that can be overturned in four years is different from a democratic vote that can't. Anyhow, who's to say there won't ever be a similar European federation that the UK could join in future? Nothing is forever. Change happens.

There was a delay in posting this because MrBags found that his bestest headphones had been chewed by a mouse. ?

Of course the PM is a vicar's daughter isn't she. Maybe she was the other one (apart from the new member for Richmond) who believed the nonsense about her being on the side of the just managing classes.
Like Cameron probably believed that his would be the greenest government ever. Instead of the least green, as it turned out.

David Davies says he would consider a contribution to the EU in order to stay in the single market. (Hope he ran that one past May first.)

Bang goes the £350 million a week.

So what do they want to get out of by leaving the EU?
Workers rights?
Human Rights?

Daphne: My dictionary definition of 'sovereignty' will do for me. My approach to analysis is to use different sources to educate myself. Here, I have used Full Fact to test some statements said to be fact and found that they are not. Of course, Full Fact could be wrong but it was suggested here as being unbiased and so I used Full Fact.

I will look at other sources but perhaps give this thread a rest. It has been stimulating but the same people now seem to be churning over the same ground. That is not a criticism, just not something I am interested in doing.