56 MPs face sexual misconduct claims
Discussion
b
hstewie said:
FTFY... I cannot imagine how you missed it...hstewie said:Vanden Saab said:
bhstewie said:
FTFY... I cannot imagine how you missed it...hstewie said:
56 MPs.
3 in the cabinet.
2 in the shadow cabinet.
All of the claims should be investigated.
Perhaps you should ask yourself when you're faced with the headline "Three cabinet ministers face sexual misconduct claims" why your first instinct isn't to think "blimey that doesn't sound great" but instead is to think "blimey I must check how many in the Shadow Cabinet have had claims made against them".
Like I said don't be weird.
3 in the cabinet.
2 in the shadow cabinet.
All of the claims should be investigated.
Perhaps you should ask yourself when you're faced with the headline "Three cabinet ministers face sexual misconduct claims" why your first instinct isn't to think "blimey that doesn't sound great" but instead is to think "blimey I must check how many in the Shadow Cabinet have had claims made against them".
Like I said don't be weird.
Vanden Saab said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: It's literally the headline the Times used.
Don't be weird.
I would expect it from the Times...they unlike you do not claim to be unbiased and need the clicks from their loyal sycophants Don't be weird.
Vanden Saab said:
I would expect it from the Times...they unlike you do not claim to be unbiased and need the clicks from their loyal sycophants
I don't think The Times have ever claimed to be unbiased politically, although obviously have been and are. Murdoch supported Blaire, with a significant degree of energy, although the Sun went the other way.To be fair to The Times, they are generally politically unbiased in the sense that they will support what is seen as good for Murdoch. That's why so many hopefuls for the top job in the tory party will dine with him pre elections and visit him often when voted in. Got to keep him sweet. Since Thatcher there have only been two PMs who've kept their distance: Major and Brown. What happened to them? In the first year of Cameron's short, but not uneventful, reign, he visited Mudoch more than any other person of similar position.
One thing that is rather odd is that we're not getting any reports of pretenders approaching Murdoch. There seems to be little in The Times in support of a particular person. That might suggest that they are holding back, just in case Johnson remains in situ.
But an unbiased Times - there's a thought.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Perhaps you should ask yourself when you're faced with the headline "Three cabinet ministers face sexual misconduct claims" why your first instinct isn't to think "blimey that doesn't sound great" but instead is to think "blimey I must check how many in the Shadow Cabinet have had claims made against them".
Alternatively, read the first line of the article.Biggy Stardust said:
Alternatively, read the first line of the article.
It’s quite normal to quote the article headline when linking to an article.We can’t click and paste the articles due to NPandE rules.
Are you suggesting we read the article and then design a link title that reflects the article rather than using the actual article headline.
That’s bound to be far more open to misrepresenting than using the actual article headline itself.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff