Jump to content


Move Forward MP weeps during debate in parliament


webfact

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Dodgy Member said:

Don't besmirch the board name you've adopted. Reach down, clutch the place where your testicles used to be and try to remember what it was like to be a non vegan man.  If your father was still alive he would slap your sissy face until you woke up and smelled the coffee. 

:cheesy:  :thumbsup:

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, smedly said:

a travesty - the country you love is still in the hands of the military and crooks, no wonder you are emotional,  i cry with you Sirilapas, you won the election - why are you not running the country, the people voted ?

Submarines are more important.

  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, charleskerins said:

 

"life goes on no matter who is in power"  What an asinine comment -did life go on for the Jews in Germany when the Nazis came to power?  Did it go on for the Native Americans  when the English?Americans came to power? How about the Armenians ? etc,etc,etc,etc,etc,etc,etc.  

How is life in Scandinavia ?  The highest standard of living in the world,the highest quality of life -who is in power  THE F ING PEOPLE!  Not corporations,not religious zealots ,not the Fascist military.          I weep   for Democracy dying 

I'm referring to life in the present era, not to outliers in the past. Democracy doesn't really exist anyway, for that you would need a community of less than 5,000 people who could vote on every major decision, even the ancient Greeks didn't achieve that. Power belongs to those who control the means of production and the flow of money and they are the powers behind the throne, Liz Truss found that out rather quickly. If any one party or council ever produced results that were satisfactory to the vast majority of the population they would be in power for multiple decades. The day to day running of the country, any country, lies in the hands of the unelected civil service ('yes minister' is apparently a realistic view of government). It was Churchill, who though agreeing that 'democracy' was the best sorry choice of method of government, said (I paraphrase) " One could be led to dismiss democracy when speaking with the average voter" (look at the support that Trump has in the USA). So no, in this era it doesn't matter which party is in power, nothing fundamentally changes for the average person.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tropicalevo said:

I disagree.

This lady is a 'repaired' mental patient and she probably understands what they go though and what is needed to help them.

Very brave of her to stand up in front of this group of non-caring, mostly male chauvinist pigs and to make a stand.

To weep when trying to make a point in parliament raises the question of how 'repaired' is she. Mental health is the step child of all monetary allocations in every health organization world wide, in the UK the police complain that they are having to act as an arm of the mental health service because people don't have adequate access to treatment. It is obvious why priority is given to drug users, they cause the most harm to society. Mental health treatment (if done correctly) is costly and governments don't have unlimited amounts of money, in the UK even getting treatment for 'normal' illnesses is a disaster, even people with cancer can wait a year or more before getting treatment.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

She reminds me of the female members of our Thai sales team. 

 

Attractive well spoken and well dressed. Charming but utterly incompetent. 

 

Scary that she could become an MP. In defense of Thailand at least she's attractive we had Diane Abbott as an MP who was equally stupid, had zero charm and looked like Yoda.

  • Sad 4
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

Democracy doesn't really exist anyway

That is true in some way ...

In many countries ( look at the US ) , the one party that wins the elections with a tiny majority means that the vote of the electorate is nearly evenly split in half .

What abut the 49% ( or so ) of voters whose party did not win ?

In a real democracy they should be somehow represented in the governing body as well .

In that way, only coalitions formed between the biggest parties , ( who , together , represent most voters ) , are really democratic .

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, NextG said:


Drug users causing the most harm to society? Do you have any published data to back that up? Perhaps we can then compare with people who use alcohol or even prescription medicine. Then perhaps to other ‘groups’. 
I think you just made that up. 

Alcohol and prescription medicines are drugs. Drug addicts are more likely to commit crimes to fuel their drug habit than say someone who is silently suffering from depression. My cousin is bi-polar, when he has a depressive phase he retreats from the world, he has therapy treatment only because he is well off and can afford to pay for it himself.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, charleskerins said:

Democracy does exist   .   You don't need a community of less than 5,000 people .This is a common refrain in right wing circles in America  "we aren't a Democracy we are a Constitutional Republic "  they are so arrogantly sure of themselves. Here's a question for you  Would you ever make a comment  that  that isn't a dog it's a Golden Retriever?  Sounds silly doesn't it ?      America is a Democracy -a Representative Democracy  the members of Congress are not  appointed they are voted in by the people -hence a Democracy  -  as exists in many other advanced countries of the world.  And in Democracies the people fare much better in their everyday lives than do the billions under the thumb of Fascists.

I'm talking about TRUE democracy here which entails everybody in the community having a say in every major decision, that can only be done in a community of less than 5,000 people. Voting every 4 years for a party to handle all decisions (which could have an impact on their reelection if they decided on necessary but unpopular measures) isn't democracy, it's handing over responsibility for which there are no consequences. Many people who aspire to politics are borderline sociopaths, those who should be in power (responsible, intelligent, empathetic people) have no interest in the filthy business. Listen to your members of congress speaking, they certainly aren't intelligent but rely on their advisers who are but who apparently have no conscience, a bunch of sycophants. As Mark Twain once said, " Imagine you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of congress, but I repeat myself". People vote from a limited choice of power hungry candidates and I dare say that if a suitable well read, intelligent candidate was available he/she wouldn't be chosen, as the saying goes, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public".

Certainly, by good luck, this system has proven to be more beneficial to the people than under a dictatorship of one power hungry man but only because free speech has proven to be a deterrent.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

I'm talking about TRUE democracy here which entails everybody in the community having a say in every major decision, that can only be done in a community of less than 5,000 people. Voting every 4 years for a party to handle all decisions (which could have an impact on their reelection if they decided on necessary but unpopular measures) isn't democracy, it's handing over responsibility for which there are no consequences. Many people who aspire to politics are borderline sociopaths, those who should be in power (responsible, intelligent, empathetic people) have no interest in the filthy business. Listen to your members of congress speaking, they certainly aren't intelligent but rely on their advisers who are but who apparently have no conscience, a bunch of sycophants. As Mark Twain once said, " Imagine you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of congress, but I repeat myself". People vote from a limited choice of power hungry candidates and I dare say that if a suitable well read, intelligent candidate was available he/she wouldn't be chosen, as the saying goes, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public".

Certainly, by good luck, this system has proven to be more beneficial to the people than under a dictatorship of one power hungry man but only because free speech has proven to be a deterrent.

Americans vote every two years for their representatives ,every 4 years for President and every 6 years for Senator. The United States and other Western societies  are Democracies. There are also referendums on the ballots where everyone votes on a single issue. Just because you have a personal definition(it's known as Direct Democracy) of Democracy doesn't negate the fact that the United States (so far) is a Democracy.        

Edited by charleskerins
nm
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, traveller101 said:

And what exactly is your reason of qualifying her "utterly incompetent".

Is it because she came across as an emphatic human being or pointing to the ridiculous amount of money set aside for the treatment of mental illnesses? 

Intelligent articulate attractive women scare him

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, charleskerins said:

Americans vote every two years for their representatives ,every 4 years for President and every 6 years for Senator. The United States and other Western societies  are Democracies. There are also referendums on the ballots where everyone votes on a single issue. Just because you have a personal definition(it's known as Direct Democracy) of Democracy doesn't negate the fact that the United States (so far) is a Democracy.        

Yes all Western nations have the classification 'democracies', no argument there, they are however imperfect democracies but function because there is free speech and rule of law (the courts are especially necessary these days). Remember during the Soviet era Eastern countries were referred to as communist societies although they were nothing more than dictatorships, East Germany even called itself democratic while Russia called itself a socialist republic, just names without meaning.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are always exceptions - Switzerland is a community of over 8 Million citizens, who have a say in all proposals of the federal as well as provincial government. Via the instruments of Referendums they have the power of amending government proposal subject to the result of a vote on the matter and can even themselves propose laws and measures via Initiative which is then put to a vote by the citizens.

In 2022, the people were asked to cast their vote on 3 different occasions regarding a total of 11 bills proposed by the federal government.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, charleskerins said:

 

"life goes on no matter who is in power"  What an asinine comment -did life go on for the Jews in Germany when the Nazis came to power?  Did it go on for the Native Americans  when the English?Americans came to power? How about the Armenians ? etc,etc,etc,etc,etc,etc,etc.  

How is life in Scandinavia ?  The highest standard of living in the world,the highest quality of life -who is in power  THE F ING PEOPLE!  Not corporations,not religious zealots ,not the Fascist military.          I weep   for Democracy dying 

Thank you, unfortunately there is a percentage of the population these days that abhors truth and will do anything to deny and obfuscate reality with what they consider to be clever intellectualism.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only is Sirilapas smart and caring but he is also brave.  She took Chalerm's son in their family stronghold and won.  She has also been sentenced to prison for LM.  Last but not least, she is also not bad looking.

 

image.thumb.png.ae46f7b9b41601be892a5a60c6ec8396.png

  • Love It 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/6/2024 at 4:18 PM, traveller101 said:

And what exactly is your reason of qualifying her "utterly incompetent".

Is it because she came across as an emphatic human being or pointing to the ridiculous amount of money set aside for the treatment of mental illnesses? 

 

If you can't keep your emotions in check when you are discussing such issues you are ill equipped to be an MP. I've experienced the same thing working in Thailand, attractive females who think they'll get whatever they want if they stomp their feet and turn on the waterworks. Incompetent and unprofessional. You sound like the sort of simp who would fall for it.

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.