Laws resigns
- 30 May 2010 18:1254145Just listened to a quote on the radio
Andrew Ransley thinks David Laws is an "Honourable person" Really?? Now one wonders what mister Ransleys definition of honourable is?? on the other hand I suppose he could be classed as honourable by tory standards . After all our dear friend the ex jail bird, the noble lord Archer sits in the lords representing the tories, or is it a case that I dont know my place and perhaps I need to be sent to live the tory life style to teach me a well deserved lesson
- 30 May 2010 18:2454151Bern we all have our weaknesses but you can rest assured that I have never indulged in dropping my pants ( apart from the army "COUGH"
) and most definately not gone out of my way to swindle any one knowingly, not bad for some one who left school with no certificates to my name,SMILEY but learnt the differance between right and wrong in the school of knocks called life. 
- 30 May 2010 18:3654152indeed james.
both david and nick also described mr laws as honourable.
totally out of touch with the thinking of ordinary people. - 30 May 2010 18:5954160Howard lets cut the crap,
We have seen just how quickly both Nick and David are prepared to swallow there so called principals when it is conveniant. They both spent years slagging each other off Just what in your opinion explains there sudden conversion to a state of unbridled happiness with each other?? Exactly what David Laws did when faced with the dilemma of "outing" himself, which I may add is not a crime today. Any decent person would have had the courage to admit his fallabilities (as we all have I think ?? with the possible exception of myself)
Have to say if your opinions are representitive of the ordinary people then it makes me very happy to be excluded from your opinions.
How many times do people like you have to be told THEFT is THEFT whatever the honourable excuse - 30 May 2010 19:2754163i can only bow to your words of wisdom jimmy.
i will contunue to give my forelock a regular tug though, if that is ok with you. - 30 May 2010 20:5654183I may be wrong but I thought Archer was expelled from the Tory Party?
- 30 May 2010 21:0154187he was sid.
- 30 May 2010 21:0954189But he is back in now and has been for some time.
- 30 May 2010 23:2154199Methinks the the excellent Rod Liddle has the funniest take on the whole thing:-
http://www.spectator.co.uk/rodliddle/6041043/i-fought-the-laws-and-the-laws-won.thtml - 31 May 2010 08:4954210I dont think he is back in Vic.
very silly contrived anti-Conservative comments made by people who should know better.
After all have Labour people forgotten a certain Lord Mandelson with his repeated sackings and rehabilitations. The dealings involved with Laws (a LibDem, never forget) pale into insignificance compared to Mandy. The amount of bent dealings and sleeze that engulfed Labour far exceeded anything under the Major government. - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
31 May 2010 08:5754213of course they know better barry,dont undrestimate the power of the press in the written word. - 31 May 2010 13:3054252Quite simply, the nasty dealings have been going on for as long as there has been a parliament, it is just that we haven't always had the opprtunity to see it. The sleaze under Major was as concealed as his romps with Edwina despite the revelations.
- 31 May 2010 16:1054278As I WILL keep saying, all 3 parties are guilty
- 31 May 2010 16:4854286A agree with you Keith, except to say, the individual MP's who stuck to the rules were only morally wrong, not criminally. Those who were criminally wrong should be prosecuted. Hopefully, the Speaker and new Parliament will get the rules changes changed to make them morally acceptable to the public.