John Bercow - right or wrong?

drdel said:
Not in my book - yes you can learn by mistakes and move forward but this is not that sort of situation.

Surely you can admit it is pretty clear that Bercow's comments were opportunistic grandstanding and nothing more.

Had he truly had a change of mindset and considered his values he would have followed normal protocol and liaised with Lord Fowler as is the established mechanism before speaking from the chair.
Click to expand...

I believe he has simply followed his conscience on this. The USA is not China or any other (more than) dubious regime. We love and respect the USA for it's peoples, history and what it has contributed and continues to contribute - but we clearly tell Trump that what he is, and what he says and does, is not what we expect of the one person who is supposed to represent and embody the ideals and values enshrined in the constitution of the USA.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
I believe he has simply followed his conscience on this. The USA is not China or any other (more than) dubious regime. We love and respect the USA for it's peoples, history and what it has contributed and continues to contribute - but we clearly tell Trump that what he is, and what he says and does, is not what we expect of the one person who is supposed to represent and embody the ideals and values enshrined in the constitution of the USA.
Click to expand...


Why are you deflecting my observations to an argument over Donald Trump? I'm not crossing swords or otherwise on your views about the POTUS. This thread is about Speaker Bercow and the correctness of his making biased political comments in the HoC (on which he did not consult in advance as the protocol requires).
 
drdel said:
Why are you deflecting my observations to an argument over Donald Trump? I'm not crossing swords or otherwise on your views about the POTUS. This thread is about Speaker Bercow and the correctness of his making biased political comments in the HoC (on which he did not consult in advance as the protocol requires).
Click to expand...

I just think he acted as his conscience and duty of care to the HoC demanded.
 
I think we possibly have the wrong attitude to many things these days.
We have become the threee wise monkeys.
We can't stand to see the suffering around us, like in Aleppo so we close our eyes and see no evil. Sadly the suffering goes on.
We daren't say what needs to be said in case we offend the professionally offended and it's not PC, so we speak no evil. Sadly these things still need to be said.
And now we are afraid we might not want to hear what the President of the United States has to say, so we close our ears and hear no evil. Sadly this won't solve anything. The policies his detractors despise will still be in place.

Many of the problems of the world can be solved if everyone kept talking and listening. Nothing good is achieved when you stop doing so. Yet 3 weeks into his Presidency we have already made up our minds. We don't want to hear anymore. In fact we are so desperate not to listen we are making it clear we will not invite him to an event that never even existed.

Human nature is a funny thing. When you refuse to listen to people they usually react by not listening to you. Yet still we will turn our backs, close our eyes and ears and pretend it will all go away. It won't. Maybe there is another way. The three wise monkey approach is not going to solve anything.
 
Bercow is a grade A knob... Getting one thing right in his life doesn't change the fact of him being a total utter waste of space...

It's totally down to folk [like him], who reside within the political classes, we are in the mess we are...

Bring on the revolution...
 
MegaSteve said:
Bercow is a grade A supercilious knob... Getting one thing right in his life doesn't change the fact of him being a total utter waste of space...

It's totally down to more knobs [like him], who reside within the political classes, we are in the mess we are...

Bring on the revolution...
Click to expand...

Corrected that for you 👍
 
Sweep has nailed it... when I was in Uni we had a debating Society... now if you are deemed "inappropriate" to the acceptable profile you get banned. They won't engage in debate as they cant argue...

The term "whatabootery" has been used in several places in similar threads.. (love the expression!) but it misses the central point... for example... Bercow hosted Kuwait... gay rights NIL, womens' right nil. travel ban based on relgion YES! etc etc (and are they another country who has taken zero Syrian refugees too? not sure!)

.... Offense taken? Zero. Trump? Oooh he's horrid! BAN!

Let him come and make a big twit of himself!
 
Oh the Daily Mail makes me laugh sometimes - and despair - and todays Leader Comment combines both...

In banning Donald Trump from addressing Parliament, without any authority from MPs or consultation with the Lords, the exhibitionist Mr Bercow has set himself up as the master of the Commons, not its servant.

And this coming from the same newspaper that ranted endlessly and furiously over Gina Miller, the High Court and the Supreme Court forcing the government to seek parliamentary approval for Art50

and it goes on to rant...

Leave aside Mr Bercow’s hypocrisy in welcoming visitors from totalitarian North Korea and China, while snubbing the elected representative of our freedom-loving ally, the US.

oh the hypocrisy...oh yes - the hypocrisy.

And some ask why I make links...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...queak-Bercow-embarrassment.html#ixzz4Y6ltWWz6

If the DM really cared about our special relationship then as I posted earlier

...we clearly tell Trump that what he is, and what he says and does, is not what we expect of the one person who is supposed to represent and embody the ideals and values enshrined in the constitution of the USA.

Because our special relationship is based upon shared values and respect of law and the judiciary in our governance - and Trump's performance to date just does not stand up to any scrutiny - and he should be told very clearly as Speaker Bercow has now done - but that the government has spectacularly failed to do (and we know why) that by his words and actions he absolutely undermines that special relationship.
 
Last edited:
IanM said:
Sweep has nailed it... when I was in Uni we had a debating Society... now if you are deemed "inappropriate" to the acceptable profile you get banned. They won't engage in debate as they cant argue...

The term "whatabootery" has been used in several places in similar threads.. (love the expression!) but it misses the central point... for example... Bercow hosted Kuwait... gay rights NIL, womens' right nil. travel ban based on relgion YES! etc etc (and are they another country who has taken zero Syrian refugees too? not sure!)

.... Offense taken? Zero. Trump? Oooh he's horrid! BAN!

Let him come and make a big twit of himself!
Click to expand...

Nobody is stopping him coming...and he will make a big twit of himself - but if we have learned nothing from the last weeks and months - we should have learned that he will spin whatever reaction he gets in the UK to his benefit - even at the expense of the UK and our parliament if needs must.

Because Trump's constituency is America - America First!, America First! America First! was his chant at the inauguration. And if we have learned nothing else about Trump since January 20th we must have learned that he means what he says.

May and Fox can speak as much as they like with Trump - our parliament should keep at long spoon distance.

Well done Speaker Bercow
 
Last edited:
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Oh the Daily Mail makes me laugh sometimes - and despair - and todays Leader Comment combines both...

In banning Donald Trump from addressing Parliament, without any authority from MPs or consultation with the Lords, the exhibitionist Mr Bercow has set himself up as the master of the Commons, not its servant.

And this coming from the same newspaper that ranted endlessly and furiously over Gina Miller, the High Court and the Supreme Court forcing the government to seek parliamentary approval for Art50

and it goes on to rant...

Leave aside Mr Bercow’s hypocrisy in welcoming visitors from totalitarian North Korea and China, while snubbing the elected representative of our freedom-loving ally, the US.

oh the hypocrisy...oh yes - the hypocrisy.

And some ask why I make links...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...queak-Bercow-embarrassment.html#ixzz4Y6ltWWz6

If the DM really cared about our special relationship then as I posted earlier

...we clearly tell Trump that what he is, and what he says and does, is not what we expect of the one person who is supposed to represent and embody the ideals and values enshrined in the constitution of the USA.

Because our special relationship is based upon shared values and respect of law and the judiciary in our governance - and Trump's performance to date just does not stand up to any scrutiny - and he should be told very clearly as Speaker Bercow has now done - but that the government has spectacularly failed to do (and we know why) that by his words and actions he absolutely undermines that special relationship.
Click to expand...

Respect for the judiciary - just in...


http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/08/trum...ce-claims-courts-seem-to-be-so-political.html
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Oh the Daily Mail makes me laugh sometimes - and despair - and todays Leader Comment combines both...

In banning Donald Trump from addressing Parliament, without any authority from MPs or consultation with the Lords, the exhibitionist Mr Bercow has set himself up as the master of the Commons, not its servant.

And this coming from the same newspaper that ranted endlessly and furiously over Gina Miller, the High Court and the Supreme Court forcing the government to seek parliamentary approval for Art50

and it goes on to rant...

Leave aside Mr Bercow’s hypocrisy in welcoming visitors from totalitarian North Korea and China, while snubbing the elected representative of our freedom-loving ally, the US.

oh the hypocrisy...oh yes - the hypocrisy.

And some ask why I make links...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...queak-Bercow-embarrassment.html#ixzz4Y6ltWWz6

If the DM really cared about our special relationship then as I posted earlier

...we clearly tell Trump that what he is, and what he says and does, is not what we expect of the one person who is supposed to represent and embody the ideals and values enshrined in the constitution of the USA.

Because our special relationship is based upon shared values and respect of law and the judiciary in our governance - and Trump's performance to date just does not stand up to any scrutiny - and he should be told very clearly as Speaker Bercow has now done - but that the government has spectacularly failed to do (and we know why) that by his words and actions he absolutely undermines that special relationship.
Click to expand...
Oh Dear! Can you not see the gerrymandering similarity between someone trying to frustrate the democratic decision of the people and Bercow deciding personally to frustrate the relationship between the UK Government and the POTUS.

I guess my question is wasting a few minutes that I will never get back though.
 
SocketRocket said:
Oh Dear! Can you not see the gerrymandering similarity between someone trying to frustrate the democratic decision of the people and Bercow deciding personally to frustrate the relationship between the UK Government and the POTUS.

I guess my question is wasting a few minutes that I will never get back though.
Click to expand...

The Speaker is doing his duty protecting the HoC from being abused. What is difficult to understand about that? But if you don't want to understand that then fair enough.

And I was actually posting about the DMs rant and it's rank hypocrisy in respect of consulting parliament - though you neatly (or not) avoided addressing that.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
The Speaker is doing his duty protecting the HoC from being abused. What is difficult to understand about that? But if you don't want to understand that then fair enough.

And I was actually posting about the DMs rant and it's rank hypocrisy in respect of consulting parliament - though you neatly (or not) avoided addressing that.
Click to expand...

Not a question of doing his duty so much as posturing and grandstanding. Had he been doing his duty he would have first consulted the other relevant parties.
 
As i asked the question, and havent commented as of yet, my view is

Bercow is a total knob, he is hated in the HOC by large sections, he should NOT have spoken out of turn without the people who decide such matters agreeing the decision first and as bad, or worse than Trump, have addressed the House and as the POTUS he should be welcomed to speak and quite possibly make a fool of himself.

Id also add that how one voted in the referendum has absolutely no bearing on people's views on Bercow!
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
The Speaker is doing his duty protecting the HoC from being abused. What is difficult to understand about that? But if you don't want to understand that then fair enough.

And I was actually posting about the DMs rant and it's rank hypocrisy in respect of consulting parliament - though you neatly (or not) avoided addressing that.
Click to expand...

A professional respects the protocols and mechanisms associated with his position. If Bercow held his views as firmly as we are to believe they did not come from out of the blue yonder; he could have followed the correct process.

Admit it he was wrong to do what it did in the way he did it - this is the core and the rest of your arguments are fluff and flannel.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
The Speaker is doing his duty protecting the HoC from being abused. What is difficult to understand about that? But if you don't want to understand that then fair enough.
Click to expand...

Do the members of the HOC need "protecting", i should imagine that they're all used to dealing with abuse. Bercow hasnt read Trump's speech so has no idea whether it is good, bad or indifferent
 
Doon frae Troon said:
It is pretty obvious to me that the HoC and the HoL is no longer 'fit for purpose' in a modern UK.
We desperately need an English [or English regional] parliament.

The devolved Country, Principality and Provence clearly do not not supportive the Tory party whilst England seems to be embracing it and it's further right wing UKIP. party.
Density of population will ensure that there will be little change for the next 25 years.
Click to expand...

It became unfit for purpose when it devolved and formed all these little state chambers where irrelevant people made themselves soooo important and started costing the tax payer a fortune and became a drain on the economy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Talesfromtheclubhouse
Tales from the Tartan Pro Tour with John Gallagher
Replies
0
Views
295
Talesfromtheclubhouse
Talesfromtheclubhouse
N
Camera advice
Replies
14
Views
654
Taz
Taz
SwingsitlikeHogan
Rental Rights Act
2
Replies
24
Views
2K
jim8flog
jim8flog
BazPlummerGM
Ask The Expert - PGA Pro Q+A Hour
Replies
15
Views
862
Crazyface
Crazyface
BazPlummerGM
Ask The Expert - PGA Pro Q+A Hour
Replies
2
Views
266
BazPlummerGM
BazPlummerGM
Top