Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
would you vote for me and why/why not?
you may question me on my policies.
Because we have a prime minister so you're obviously a phony.
fell at the first hurdle.
too many dossiers* so I wouldn't vote for you.
have sexual relations with that dossier.
during his tenure.
There's no such title.
What's your policy on KFC? Peel the skin off and eat on its own, or just bite a chunk of meat and skin together?
but whats your stance on drugs?
I will legalise them and put high taxes on them.
all drugs legal including crack and heroin even though they are 'bad'.
I will not legalise the manufacture of such things. nor the dealing of them. nor the importation of them.
just the taking.
and sarkyfox stumbles down the debating ramp to remonstrate with you on your stated intent to tax everything.....she has this crazy idea you mean alcahol too.....when all of a sudden the sound of the everly brothers and 'when will i be loved' blair out.......everyone looks around expecting to see guntrip emerge from a cloud of dry ice at the top of the ramp but he is nowhere to be seen, whilst all eyes are diverted elsewhere guntrip darts from hiding behind a lecturn and gives sarky a peck on the cheek then escaping before security can aprehend him
fot those of you who are puzzled this is a continuation of my wwf style intro music for mps before debating fantasy.
you are now minister for drugs. I sense you have an aptitude for it.
but we dont want to split the vote.
I would vote for you as long as I had your ear.
sorry im not being helpful ill let the public speak now
i KNOW the UK doesn't have a president. I do not really live in australia despite what my profile says.
this is HYPOTHETICAL.
would you make the good people of DiS into important extended presidential family?
I'd like to be the Mighty High Duchess please
Would you change the national anthem to one of yer own?
you can be the might high duchess as long as you comport yourself in the manner expected of such a position.
the new national anthem would be 'fuck the french' by tracy is hot and the clap. which has the advantage of being a good deal shorter than the current national anthem.
'high duchess'? surely we were going to do away with such concepts
a ceremonial title. with no wage attached.
and maybe a tacky crown?
you'd have to make them yourself though. at no cost to the taxpayer.
or 'ring' and that the speaker can cue in mps with their 'theme' music like in wwf........e.g. if bobby grindrod gets elected and wants to challenge you on the cufflinks surcharge then he would have to approach the ring with 'sharp dressed man' by zz top playing.
I think this would increase the publics (initially shallow) interest in politics,,,,,,,we can subtly introduce more highbrow concepts into the razzmataz
and there can be 'ladder matches' where MPs debate by hitting each other with ladders.
would be quite popular.
Or 'paranoid android' radiohead
or 'always look on the bright side of life'
sorry ill start a thread for votin on this
i am putting my full weight behind restlessboy as and where we might later disagree we will make the you the public aware of our differences and how we think they might be solved, however before this happens we will discuss issues, the content of which we may reveal as it may help others see our reasoning better.
(Imagine I am backing him) (I havnt checked he wants this though)
and will give thoughtful consideration to you as a possible vice-president. pending offers from other candidates.
but.... but Id be prepared to bend over backwards to accomodate your policies
For all. Minimum illness - the flu
when/if I meet you on friday.
If Monpot et al still want to meet me for bristol's culinary delights beforehand.
but I'm in the same care as tosspot so I guess i'll be there too.
But I do.
you are essential to the mission.
would you be prepared to resign immediately and let me become emporer?
because to become emperor you must first be able to spell emperor.
I just have trouble spelling positions of authority.
What would your policies be with regards to the NHS? Scrap it? Are you going to allow cancer patients those HYPER-EXTREMELY expensivo drugs gratuit?
what the french do. cos their cancer patients have a much higher survival rate. I think it involves letting them have treatment of some kind when they need it.
novel i know.
The old "If you can't beat 'em, join em"/"Those who can, teach" approach.
Are you going to merge us with France?
it's a slippery slope to a United Kingdom Of France
we don't copy the music.
truth be told.
in the last elections was Viceroy of small nowhere English chalet village place that no ones cares about ...like Cornwall...and I didn't get a single vote.
But I've got to say I admire your audacity, restlessboy and for that you get my vote.
If I could vote, which I can't, but if I could ..you'd have it.
I just dont like the cut of your jibb, sonny.
a burden on society stealing our jobs and scrounging our benefits
a necessary part of the british economy filling gaps in the labour market that british nationals are too lazy, snobbish or unskilled to fill themselves
I'm not Gordon Brown. I want to actually do something to get elected.
Anymore vaguely inaccurate facts?
Consequently I look like a man with a beard.
A MAN WITH A BEARD!
Have you ever heard anything quite so ludicrous?
I was stuck for 3 hours in a strange fenland town. AND NOT the strange fenland town I live in!
It was very disconcerting.
I got to sit up front with the RAC man and discuss football though, so that made me feel a bit more manly.
and explain your reasoning
and i'd figure out how much it costs to have the troops over their and donate that much to the iraqi government to help restore peace on their own terms.
this would probably not work though.
I'm reading it at the moment and you should read it too
when I was a lad I was a champion wargamer. I'll sort it all out....just give me blanket powers..
minister for blankets.
.....at last a definate position, under you.
How will you manage to persuade a populace that is 'rather selfish and consumerist' to vote for you and your policies which may be 'good in the long term' but not condusive to just increasing apparent consumerist wealth.
Policies such as making provisions for coping with resource depletion and scaling down of large, expanssive and reckless transportation of goods etc.
Serious overseas aid and attempting to seriously attack negative environmental consequences and their causes, will not benefit the populace in the normal way that they are encouraged to measure 'successful government'
The media (papers) tend to determine the type of press you will get according to a few factors that the papers are well versed in..
Surely Mr President you will need to somehow change the publics perception of what is 'successful government' If you are to continue to 'get a mandate' for your policies which (I hope) will be substantially different from the present incumbant party political type.
How do you hope to achieve this?
you will also inherit a bad state of economic affairs where you will inherit the entirely justifiable accepted expectations that you have to . improve education/health/personal safety from violent crime.
Is it that, rather than just throwing more money at these areas (money you wont have) you will instead intelligently manage and fine tune the way in which these accepted 3 areas of service are handled.
Most recent governments seem to have argued merely about the method of funding of the health service, implying that it is doctrinal policy (private or public funding) that determines whether the health service is in good shape........surely this is all b*****S that a c*** government employed manager is not better or worse tham a privately employed c*** manager.....just a little cheaper.
I suspect that you will not leave the fate of the nations education and health an policing in the hands of party doctrinal divides and will instead appoint a large proportion of your administrations effort into getting these aspects to work better rather than looking over their shoulder at the opposition/next election........Is tha not so?
the national curriculum. Encourage schools to play to individual pupils' strengths. Not base school funding on exam results but on things like number of pupils to number of teachers ratio.
Exams would become a much less important aspect of schooling - their limitations being acknowledged. And pupils would receive a final statement based on both exam results, coursework, AND on a consensus of opinion from all their teachers.
PFI companies would be forced to repay, with interest, everything they ever made from the NHS under a new 'You knew it was going to fuck everyone over before it even started you greedy cunts' law. This money will go straight back into the health service. Targets will be abolished, instead hospitals will be scrutinised by a national inspectorate, made up of experienced healthcare professionals from at home and abroad, who will base their assesment on their professional opinion rather than a string of arbitrary ticked boxes.
the opposition will be invited to contribute to all policy discussions in a constructive way.
we will do precisely NO campaigning for the general election.
I hope to persuade people that the consumer wealth they cling to is:
- unsustainable in anything remotely like the long term (whatever anyone says)
- not actually making them happy in the first place
I will commission a series of TV advertisements advocating interpersonal relationships as the single most reliable source of happiness. I will introduce government sponsored programs to help lonely people, or people who are bored with their current friends, or feel that they are stuck in a social rut to find and make friends with people in their local area who are of a similar mind. Online equivalents will be available for people on the autistic spectrum.
I will put large amounts of money into youth schemes to cater for a variety of interests in young people, ensuring no children ever have to hang out on street corners swearing at people for fun. I will abolish 'No Ball Games' signs in public parks.
I will introduce government subsidised 'speed dating' which all citizens must attend twice yearly, married or not, in order that they can sample the grass on the other side of the fence and assess its greenness relative to their own.
I will give a message of individual personal responsibility of every single individual to care for their own family and friends. I will commission studies into what happens when people don't assume everyone they ever mean is going to fuck them over.
I hope the increased levels of contentment and mutual care will reduce many of our social ills.
People will be less concerned with piffling matters like having to make sacrifices for the environment because they will be happier in their interpersonal relationships and thereby less inclined towards bitterness and selfishness. Likewise they will feel a duty to those less fortunate who live overseas as my government will produce literature explaining precisely how the poverty of others props up our own economy and how this balance can be redressed without impairing our quality of life.
I will change the tax system so a person's income is taxed according to the value of the job they do. For example, doctors, nurses, and fireman will pay very small amounts of tax; and advertising executives, recruitment consultants and personal injury solicitors will pay very high taxes.
If this discourages people from taking these jobs then all to the good.
I will abolish the concept of 'corporate responsibility' meaning that the shareholders and excecutives of a company are personally responsible for things done in the company's name. Meaning, for example, they can actually be imprisoned, or have their taxes increased indefinitely, for corporate manslaughter or environmental damage. A similar system will be in place for politicians, including myself.
Newspapers which cover celebrity gossip, have competitions, or give away free cds and dvds, will no longer be legally allowed to report political news. They will also not be allowed to call themselves 'newspapers'.
Children will be taught how to analyse rhetoric in school, and introduced to the concepts of 'bias', 'peer reviewed scientific study', 'citing your sources', 'straw man arguments', 'non sequiturs' and 'reductio ad absurdiam'.
Politicians will be given a salary equivalent to the national minimum wage.
Dogs will be legally recognised as superior to cats.
until the last line.
a fundamental principle.
you can't encourage social interaction and mutual need and have people liking cats more than dogs.
it won't fly.
because cats can't fly.
dogs can fly, they just do it in private.
people who evade their mandatory speed-dating sessions and shun offers of help from the Interpersonal Relationship Improvement Counsellor and are generally unsociable will be referred to as "cats". They'll be made to wear cat ears and school children will make mocking meowing noises at them as they pass the schoolyard.
you are now minister for cats.
If you knock over a dog, legally, you have to report it to the police. You don't for a cat.
just the sort of things i hoped you would say.....uh oh a couple of problems though......
'Citing your sources'? What about people that dont run off and learn stuff from one book?
What about the idea of taking everything in from all sources and then (like a caterpillars metamorphosis digesting it all then amerging with your own ideas)
Can you just cite 'creakyknees' or 'life' or 'the whole world'?
Ive noticed there is a delight shown by 'experts' in a subject that they have 'studied' and obtained a 'hoop' certificate in, for citing some 'published' expert, yet it is very unlikely that all the thought in this publication was original it would have had a previous source......how do you find the original?
Also if i didnt cite people would that make my ideas less valid?
Of course I am only speaking for myself and am aware that nowadays people are able to lift huge chunks of discourse from the interweb or whatever...
I also like cats.
I realise this is a 'last news item cute/humourous shot' but it just goes to show that you are (underneath no different from all the present devisive lot......I hate you....you stink ...here have your sodding blanket back)
from the point of view of not making wild unsubstantiated claims.
like in the BNP leaflet I saw once that claimed the government had plans to build '5 new cities the size of birmingham' in 'the countryside' to 'house illegal immiigrants'.
that's the sort of thing I frown upon.
you're allowed to like cats, you must just recognise their empirically testable inferiority to dogs.
thats taken the wind out of my sails a bit.....have i burnt my bridges? does that mean that I cant keep the blanket?
but you have to pay to get it cleaned.
to the 'great' issues. Not to just follow 'cited' examples.
That is what it is to be sincere.......sometimes you can subjugate that which you sincerely feel because you know it would harm others....this is not insincerity, because you can still say what you feel and why you dont follow it.
Your life and what you learn should be able to be told truthfully as a testiment to other humans.
You shouldnt go round just learning to repeat that which is acknowledged and recognised.
When for instance I finally read neitzsche I found myself kind of agreeing with some stuff, but it was just as much he was agreeing with me......many people will also feel like this why should we acknowledge a source if it feels like well they're on the same track, but I feel that they're approaching it the wrong way (cos theyve had a different life)
Im going big on this point restlessboy because I do feel that one of the reasons we re in a bit of a pickle is because of the citing of sources of 'great men' or 'published learning'
It kind of gives a false impression to all (clever medium and not clever) as to where cleverness/wisdom can be found.
The advantage of citing acknowledged work, is that it establishes a safe common ground that people can all work from......if you believe that is necessary, it is MORE necessary to centralised governments that operates out of wanting to keep the status quo and not letting people be everything that they possible can (lets face it in this overcrowded world there is no room for everyone to 'realise' their full potential.....well thats what most people think.....you and I might think differently, but we could only manage to convince more people of this through the divine intevention of Ba'ast, and I think that youve kind of angered her.
my above point. I think the very act of citing sources puts people in a mindset of seeking to learn from others. that your own ideas are a continuum built on those of your predecessors.
the very act of citing acknowledges your limitations. don't neglect that 'citing your sources' was mentioned alongside "the concepts of 'bias', 'peer reviewed scientific study', 'citing your sources', 'straw man arguments', 'non sequiturs' and 'reductio ad absurdiam'". all of which together contribute to an understanding of the value of citing sources/evidence but also their limitations.
I have to ask what those last three concepts are exactly.....i am certain that I know what the concepts are (except that I would use several sentences to describe them, instead of short handy 'handles') so could you explain to me what they mean.
I just dont know what concepts these names/handles mean.
straw man arguments - are arguments where you set your opponent as an easy target. for example by exaggerating their beliefs to make them more ridiculous. or by implying that they would say something in defence of their own position, refuting this thing that they have not, in fact, said and claiming to have defeated their argument.
non sequiturs - is simply drawing a conclusion from something which does not logically follow. i.e. 'science cannot explain how the universe was created, therefore god must have created it'.
'reductio ad absurdam' - is basically taking something to it's (il)logical conclusion. or taking it to an extreme. so that an idea which might work in moderation is oversimplified and taken to a ridiculously impractical conclusion to imply that the moderate version originally proposed is equally ridiculous.
and I didn't use wikipedia once!
I guess that to use a straw man argument against president bush would be an oxymoron?
you're lovely, but i dont agree with you politically on lots of things. its nothing personal, honest.
if I buy you a krispy kreme?
many people used to laugh, saying that I looked like the picture on the front of 'the idiot' .....and it has the words 'the idiot' on the front......cue much unexpected finding of unexpectedly placed images of said album cover throughout the first year as a student
you dont reply to mails
my pm was a particularly long pm, laying bare my motivations.
I basically think ive convinced him that I should keep the blanket position for life.