Censorship / Restrictions of freedom of the press

Slightly OT, I know, but Ug mentioning RLB's comment reminds me of the joke about Margaret Thatcher

Margaret Thatcher takes the cabinet out for dinner. The waiter comes along and asks her what she will be eating tonight. Margaret replies, 'I'll have the steak.' The waiter then asks, 'What about the vegetables?' To which Margaret says, 'They'll have the same as me.

(And, looking at the context of RLB's use of the word I don't see that it was so very bad. She was describing the effect of someone's medical condition. A condition she was trying to get altered. It would have been bad had she used it as an insult news.sky.com/story/labours-rebecca-long-bailey-sorry-for-calling-man-with-brain-damage-a-practical-vegetable-11925656 )

Nezumi Just stolen some time to watch the Room Next Door and Priti Patel. Laugh, cry? Probably both. Thank you.

There is such a thing as a 'vegetative state'. Not sure if that was what she was implying but if so why is she wrong?

Persistent vegetative state. Persistent vegetative state is the standard usage (except in the UK) for a medical diagnosis, made after numerous neurological and other tests, that due to extensive and irreversible brain damage a patient is highly unlikely ever to achieve higher functions above a vegetative state.

In the UK, the term is discouraged in favor of two more precisely defined terms that have been strongly recommended by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP). These guidelines recommend using a continuous vegetative state for patients in a vegetative state for more than four weeks. A medical determination of a permanent vegetative state can be made...

OTOH

Today, doctors and neuroscientists prefer to call the state of consciousness a syndrome, primarily because of ethical questions about whether a patient can be called "vegetative" or not.

From the same article!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_vegetative_state

I do pity prominent people being hounded to apologise for saying things that are very far out on the margins of 'acceptable'

But a Home Secretary who doesn't know the difference between terrorism and counter-terrorism is more than a trifle disturbing.

GracesGran - Michael Spicer is a good mood lifter when politics is getting too depressing. Boris with the police is hilarious. I think I was crying with laughter when I first saw it.

I really am tired of people constantly find something quite small and insignificant with which to counteract the vile things that this dictatorship of a government is doing. As if they can't bear to acknowledge that what is happening is wrong even when they, themselves have had to agree that it is. As for what Long Bailey said, I really don't think it was that bad [and I, personally can't stand the woman].

Got it Urm?

Nezumi65 If RBL ever becomes leader then labour will not be in government so whether or not she is stupid is unlikely to affect us. Priti Patel not being up to the job is relevant.
But if Labour had won the last election we would now have the disaster that is Diane Abbott as Home Secretary ? but you don't seem to think it matters whether Labour MPS are stupid. Let's just hope they never win an election!

But they didn’t - so now we have Priti Patel and her loose grasp of terrorism at the helm. Whataboutery doesn’t actually add anything to the discussion.

MaizieD ? the steak/vegetables was a very funny sketch from Spitting Image at the time.
I thought I had read that SI was making new programmes, I do hope so.

New rule for right wing GNers - thou shall not criticise any government minister for anything because it would have been worse if Labour had won the election. How intellectually bankrupt and blinkered is that? Actually, it says much about their desperation

Haven’t you heard suzie? It’s the official right wing benchmark now

"Whataboutery doesn’t actually add anything to the discussion."
-
Ah, good old Whataboutery again.

Whataboutery can at times add something to a discussion /debate if it raising matters of hypocrisy , opening the debate, etc. etc.

Whataboutery is a term usually used by those who don't practice what they preach, the ' Do as I say not do as I do' brigade.

Whataboutery is like the use of VAR in football, if it is used in a way that suits you no problem, if it used in a way that does not suit you then it is called out.

Not in this case though - obviously.

I do like your whatabout the whataboutery though

No need to be insulting suziewoozie. You're right, it would have been worse if Labour won the election, but I don't think anyone except Labour supporters are desperate.
There is no problem with valid criticism of any government minister so feel free. We don't need any rules (except perhaps not to direct nasty personal comments at other posters).

suziewoozie/Sir Chenjin

What constitutes :-

' intellectually bankrupt and blinkered' is in the eye of the beholder.

As for ' Actually, it says much about their desperation' I think that too is in the eye of the beholder and desperation can most certainly take the form of belittling or making rude personal comments to other posters, especially swearing at them .

Do not put words in my mouth POGS

Sir Chenjin

" I do like your whatabout the whataboutery though '

Thank. I thought it added to the conversation.

I’m sure you did

Whataboutery added nothing to the discussion at all. Pritti Patel was criticised for appearing to be ignorant of the meaning of something closely connected with her job as a government minister.

Ug countered with some whataboutery about RLB, not in government office using a word which, it turns out, was pretty much the term used by medical professionals to describe the state of the person she was referring to. She offended a snowflake or two but she didn't make a major vocabulary error.

No equivalence or useful addition whatsoever.

My disabled son’s life was far better under Labour so I would be quite happy for them to win (& I’m a Lib Dem).

But that is all irrelevant to the fact that our Home Secretary appears to not understand basic terminology that is relevant to her job.

The President peddled lies, bigotry, psychological warfare, prejudice, religious divisiveness and so much more during his State of the Union Address last night .. under the guise of this is the way he made America great- Not great again, mind you- That's old news- But because he is in office- And because he is in office, America is at its greatest historically-

He's influencing leaders and citizens around the globe with lies and financial, promissory strategies-

Speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi tore up her printed copy of his speech- She called it a manifesto of mistruths - She isn't being censored for saying so-

We've yet to have gotten to the point where the press wouldn't report accordingly- But it could be where we are headed?

It's interesting that this has happened just after all the criticism of the MSM (including here on GN) of press intrusion eg in the case of Meghan and Harry.

There seems to be a dichotomy of what should be acceptable and what is not.

If all sides are not invited to publish we can't form a balanced opinion.

I’m really not understanding the link between our government trying to exclude certain section of the press and the gossip rags laying into Meghan (& to a lesser extent Harry).

I don’t care whether Meghan rubs her bump (although interestingly she was also slaughtered for wearing a sleeveless dress & of course not wearing a hat) but I do want the government challenged as they steer us through troubled times.

"In response to her classless outburst, I've decided to introduce a resolution to censure & condemn Speaker Pelosi," the Arizona Republican tweeted Wednesday. "In a new low, she violated the Code of Official Conduct requiring Members 'behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.'"