starbuck wrote:I actually like him as a politician, I don't agree with everything he says but he is at least principled and more importantly (and almost exclusively in todays House of Commons) scrupulous. He'd make a terrible PM though as he polarises peoples opinions as soon as he opens his mouth. Plus he has stated on more than one occasion he doesn't want the job.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24926 ... rset/votes
How Jacob Rees-Mogg voted on Social Issues
- Consistently voted against equal gay rights
- Consistently voted against smoking bans
- Consistently voted against allowing marriage between two people of same sex
- Generally voted against laws to promote equality and human rights
- Voted against allowing terminally ill people to be given assistance to end their life
Yes, Godwin's law, but "principled" is not really a mark of respect for an MP, to me. It's the principles themselves, not the act of being principled that are admirable. Hitler was remarkably principled, it's just that those principles were all shades of disgusting.
So I guess if you don't think that gay people should have equal rights, or that you don't think laws that promote equality and human rights, or you think that the elderly should be forced to live in their own lonely indignity, or you don't think the Iraq war should have been investigated, or so on then you can admire his principles - but you've already said that you don't agree with everything he says (who does agree with everything anyone says anyway?), so there's not a huge amount left to admire, is there?
I don't admire anyone just for the virtue of being principled in the same way I don't admire people for the basic ability to have an opinion. It's the quality of the opinion or the principles that matter.
But ehh... no-one cares about anything and everything's crap. It's easy for me - I just hate everything.
I mean no insult at you starbuck, I just see a lot of "well they are principled" comments from people as a mark of praise, and I've never really understood why, and that reminded me.
First off and just to be clear, I'm no supporter or apologist for JRM and I certainly don't agree with him on his views of the above which are mainly due to his very strong Roman Catholic beliefs. Beliefs that he himself acknowledges are probably out of touch with the majority of both Parliament and the British public and (and this is where he differs from the frustrated German painter mentioned previously - bit surprised that you went there to be honest Tommy) once he was defeated he accepted that the democratic process had played out and he was on the losing side. I guess it's primarily up to the conservative association of North Somerset and then his constituents in general to decide if his views or principles are representative of them or not.
On reflection I think that it was more the fact that he does at least seem capable of being able to reason, debate and construct an argument based on what he believes in, something I am not good at doing and I find admirable in those that can and something I find pathetically lacking in nearly every other MP whose arses are full of splinters from all the fences they sit on waiting to see what the mood of the public is.
I would rather my politicians were driving the bus and convincing me that their's was the destination I should be going, rather than me driving my own bus and politicians trying to climb aboard, asking me where I'm going and then when I tell them they say "brilliant - let me show you how to get there".
Back to JRM and the list you provided I was surprised to see the fact that he was against a ban on smoking in cars with children in so I did a bit of googling and came across the article below that he wrote in the Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... -cars.html
Now after reading the article I'm not sure I necessarily agree with him and it did strike me as being slightly hypocritical and contradictory in that he doesn't think that the state should intervene on peoples personal responsibilities and yet he thinks it is perfectly alright for a guy in a pointy hat and a dress carrying a big book to do so, but he does, for me at least, put across his point of view in an articulate intelligent way.
*Edited to add - those mentions of him being less than scrupulous with regard to the hedge fund are being a little disingenuous to say the least;
1. It's not his company, he is a partner (there are about 20 others from memory)
2. He works for them about 30 hours a year for which he declares his earnings. He gets a dividend worth millions every year as a partner all of which he declares.
3. The company he is on the board of, Somerset LLP are opening a fund in Dublin in addition to maintaining the operation in London and elsewhere around the world, it isn't moving to Dublin.
4. It's a hedge fund so rather unsurprisingly they are hedging on how Brexit will turn out. I would rather hope that the various funds my pension (and probably yours) is invested in would be doing the same if they haven't already, seems very prudent to me.