Jacob Rees-Mogg Moves For Conservative Party Leadership.

Perhaps because this thread is about JRM

Lady Shami sent her son to an exclusive school two years ago.

It does not speak well of Corbyn that he put his marriage vows below a choice of schools , it shows he has no regard for a woman’s wishes. Maryeliza, you speak out strongly for a woman’s right to abort but defend a man dumping his wife because he cannot respect her right to choose a school for her son.

Going back to Lazigirls posting @ 10:00 today, should TM be told to go by the Tory Grandees or should she decide to "throw in the towel" (and who could blame her for that) then there are limitations on who could replace her.

In the above, Outside of Jacob Rees-Mogg we have Bungling Boris Johnson or the Tories leading political backstabber Michael Gove or perhaps the Conservatives leading incompetent Liam Fox.

Among that lot JRM must be in with more than an excellent chance. After all if he can make persons like anniebach laugh, he has to be home and dry with the rest of their small membership, so

Moggy, Moggy, Moggy, oy,oy, oy.

Granddad, an apology please? I am not a member of the Tory party

Hang on
Lady Shami sent her son to an exclusive school two years ago.
but I thought it was her ex-husband who decided (he was privately educated, she wasn't)
So you blame her for his decision and Corbyn for not letting his wife decide. Isn't that a bit conflicting?
Or isn't it simply that sometimes couples disagree, and sometimes one of them has to compromise, and sometimes those disagreements become so bad the couple have to part.
It must be incredibly difficult to decide on a child's education when you are in the public eye, have enough money to pay and want the best for your child.

Apologies ab I got my dates wrong about SC. But there is still the issue that trisher raises. SC couldn’t actually prevent her son going to Dulwich - neither could JC prevent his son going to the grammar school. It was part of the reason apparently that the marriage ended probably because it embodies a fundamental point of principle. What’s that got to do with marriage vows?

It has everything to do with marriage vows in Corbyn’s case, to speak out for women’s rights, equality for women yet couldn’t accept his wife’s choice of school for their son. She wouldn’t bow to his wishes so he dumped her.

But SC is to be criticised because she did accept her husbands choice of school? And can you imagine if JC had accepted the choice of school ....... you’d be praising him to the heights - oh wait a minute. When dh and me have a difference of opinion about something significant, I certainly don’t see his disagreement with me as a woman’s rights issue - that would be just plain silly

Trisher, I agree it must be difficult if you have the money and want your child privately educated .

Chakribaki , Abbott, Thornberry chose private education for their children, their choice, but what of the parents who want grammer schools, these three women are against them but chose schooling for their children.

I am sgainst grammer school, dislike the privalages bestowed on the privately educated, when I had the choice for my daughters to be privately educated I chose the local high school for them.

Isn’t it a bit early in the day for Grandad?

That’s very admirable of you ab because it was a real situation not a hypothetical one. And I agree that there is a huge issue about the choices politicians make about education for their children if politically the believe in and promote comprehensive education. But I still think you are wrong to criticise JC on this issue. You do have rather a thing about his marriages

What about the Tory women Grandad? Amber Rudd for one and Esther McVey could be sneaking up on the outside. Heaven help us.

Hypocrisy at all levels.
I found it difficult to accept that our Deputy Head removed her daughters from our 'good' primary school and had them educated privately at secondary level.
My ex H and I agreed that as teachers we were intrinsic parts of the local system and if it was good enough to pay our salaries it was good enough for our offspring.
Proved correct!

Anniebach, in regard to your post @ 11:44 today, I do apologize as I had forgotten that you have a fifty year membership of the Labour party.

It's just that you support the Tories so often and always sieve contempt for the Labour party on this forum i am sure that anyone can easily forget that you are a Labour party member.

Hope you understand my above mistake.

Anyway, just about to leave the office as we have been working this morning so, join the debate again sometime later on.

mcem what the hell was she doing running a school that was good enough for other people’s weans but not her own??

If you found out the chef refused to eat in his own restaurant you’d think he needed to get his establishment in better order!!

Because, when it comes down to it ( and there is enough money) people generally say to hell with principles and send their children to be privately educated.
Probably most Labour MP’s do it.
I admire those who don’t, mind you, not that it should be allowed to break up a marriage over!

No I do not have a thing about his marriages, I certaintly ‘have a thing about marriage vows. I do not refer to his first marriage. I believe to speak out for women’s rights, even men in a frock but refuse to stay in a marriage because a wife will not bow to your demands on schooling is hypocritical. His wife chose the grammar school for the same reason given by Abbott, the local state school was failing badly. He promoted Abbott and Thornberry who did the very thing his wife did yet he dumped her. How can you defend this ?

mcem, I think there is an argument for not having one's own children in the school in which one teaches. As I understand it it's not about the quality of the teaching in the school but about letting the child have some 'normal' separation and independence from their parents, and also letting the parents not be in the position of being accused of favouring their kids.

The deputy head at the primary school I attended as a child sent them to other schools when they got to the age where they would have been in her class for two years (small school; only three classes).

My post should have been addressed to others as well as to mcem.

None of us is party to what fully broke up JC’s marriage- I read an interview with his wife and she said the school issue was a part of it - but of course his intransigence about that might have been part of a wider issue. I still thinks it’s wrong to just keep banging on about that when other politicians have behaved much much worse to their wives and publically humiliated them - generally sex scandals of one kind or another I wonder what my red line would be in leaving my dh but I think that would be my choice and I wouldn’t thank people for making judgements on my reasons. It’s not as though JC keeps saying he believes in life long marriage is it? If you want sleazy tom catting around you could start with BJ - but he stays married so that’s OK?

I know that’s whataboutery but it’s also context

Thank you for your apology grandad. Again you are wrong, I do not support the tories, I do respect May and I find JRM amusing, my contempt as you choose call it, is for Corbyn who is a hypocrite , I always praise the great labour politicians on the back benches. So with respect I cannot accept your explanation that it was a ‘mistake ‘ I believe it was again a deliberate attempt to cause trouble.

I have given my opinions on Johnson, before you joined the forum. Johnson is not leader of the party I have always supported . My concern is the hypocritcal leader of the Labour Party and the detruction of that party.

Do you suppose it takes a hypocrite to know one?
I think politicians also have the problem of their job to contend with when choosing a school. Being an MPs kid could result in a lot of unwanted attention not solely from the children.