Ad Lib Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 The Cameron option is still on the table. Cameron has refused to participate. End of story. This is like me saying I can't meet someone for coffee on Sunday because I've offered to let American Airlines send me on an all expenses paid trip to Washington DC for a week. They aren't going to accept. I'm free for coffee. Any reason why he should let Blinky dictate the when and where? Who is the First Minister and who is the shadow back bench mp? I don't believe anyone is "dictating" to anyone here. Their constitutional positions are really irrelevant. The question is one of substance: why is Alex Salmond free on 16th July if David Cameron is in the room, but not free if Darling is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Cameron has refused to participate. End of story. This is like me saying I can't meet someone for coffee on Sunday because I've offered to let American Airlines send me on an all expenses paid trip to Washington DC for a week. They aren't going to accept. I'm free for coffee. I don't believe anyone is "dictating" to anyone here. Their constitutional positions are really irrelevant. The question is one of substance: why is Alex Salmond free on 16th July if David Cameron is in the room, but not free if Darling is? Why is Darling NOT free for the STV debate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Why is Darling NOT free for the STV debate? What STV debate? When? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Cameron has refused to participate. End of story. This is like me saying I can't meet someone for coffee on Sunday because I've offered to let American Airlines send me on an all expenses paid trip to Washington DC for a week. They aren't going to accept. I'm free for coffee. I don't believe anyone is "dictating" to anyone here. Their constitutional positions are really irrelevant. The question is one of substance: why is Alex Salmond free on 16th July if David Cameron is in the room, but not free if Darling is? Look again at your own analogy. Maybe Eck has the option of having a massage or debating Cameron. He is willing to forgo the massage for a debate with Cameron but not for a no-mark like Darling. Life is all about priorities, you'll find this out once you have to exit the taxpayer funded cocoon that you currently reside in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Cameron has refused to participate. End of story. This is like me saying I can't meet someone for coffee on Sunday because I've offered to let American Airlines send me on an all expenses paid trip to Washington DC for a week. They aren't going to accept. I'm free for coffee. Yeah that's what its like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFLKING Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Cameron has refused to participate. End of story. Like when Alex Salmond refused to debate Darling. Was that "End of story"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wirez Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 After months and months of Darling giving it the big man talk, Eck finally turns, rolls the sleeves up and this is Darling's response What a shitebag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 The question is one of substance: why is Alex Salmond free on 16th July if David Cameron is in the room, but not free if Darling is? Because Salmond has offered to debate Cameron on 16th July. However, Salmond already has an invite from Darling to set the time and location of the debate Look at Darling's quote in the Birmingham Mail of September 18th 2013 "I will debate him any time, anywhere" http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/scotlands-referendum-independence-the-opportunity-6057365 or Danny Alexander's letter of January 30th 2014 "Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign, has said he is willing to debate with you, as leader of the pro-independence campaign, anytime, anywhere." http://www.dannyalexander.org.uk/news_detail.asp?newsID=372 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 What STV debate? When? August 12 ? Duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 BT have been made to look utterly foolish. This was their debate that they wanted to kill off Cameron v salmond. But they pick up their ball and walk off the park, not even having a swipe at salmond, but moaning about stv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamaldo Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 There's really nothing that can be said about this that hasn't already been said about Darling and the Better Together lot at other times. This just sums them up. We all knew that it was mind games from them. They have never wanted a debate with Salmond. They simply assumed that Salmond would not entertain the idea of debating Darling, only wanting Cameron, and have to decided to crow about Salmond running scared on a monthly basis while demanding a debate. To their horror, he's called their bluff and they are now shiteing it. There really isn't a way out for them here. If Darling refuses to take part in a debate he repeatedly called for then it just makes him look like an utter clown. And Salmond has now nullified the argument that he was running scared of a debate with Darling by agreeing to take part in one with him. No criticism can be levelled at him in this regard now (although no doubt people will try their best to). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Because Salmond has offered to debate Cameron on 16th July. However, Salmond already has an invite from Darling to set the time and location of the debate Look at Darling's quote in the Birmingham Mail of September 18th 2013 "I will debate him any time, anywhere" http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/scotlands-referendum-independence-the-opportunity-6057365 or Danny Alexander's letter of January 30th 2014 "Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign, has said he is willing to debate with you, as leader of the pro-independence campaign, anytime, anywhere." http://www.dannyalexander.org.uk/news_detail.asp?newsID=372 Yeah, because by that Alistair Darling definitely meant that he'd be happy to hold a televised debate at 4am on a Wednesday in a pond. I think it's pretty clear to anyone with, you know, a brain, like you, that "anytime, anywhere" is a figure of speech that doesn't actually mean "pick any date and location you feel like." What is apparent here is that they agreed in principle to have "a debate". STV then approached them with a date, which Darling accepted. Salmond declined that date, for whatever reason he personally has (which may or may not be a legitimate reason; he hasn't given any reason) despite the fact he has made himself available for another debate that will not happen on the same date because David Cameron has declined to debate him. August 12 ? Duh. Wrong. Darling has accepted an invitation to participate in a debate on 12th August on the BBC. He has not withdrawn from this debate. STV did not offer to host a debate on 12th August. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Yeah, because by that Alistair Darling definitely meant that he'd be happy to hold a televised debate at 4am on a Wednesday in a pond. I think it's pretty clear to anyone with, you know, a brain, like you, that "anytime, anywhere" is a figure of speech that doesn't actually mean "pick any date and location you feel like." What is apparent here is that they agreed in principle to have "a debate". STV then approached them with a date, which Darling accepted. Salmond declined that date, for whatever reason he personally has (which may or may not be a legitimate reason; he hasn't given any reason) despite the fact he has made himself available for another debate that will not happen on the same date because David Cameron has declined to debate him. Wrong. Darling has accepted an invitation to participate in a debate on 12th August on the BBC. He has not withdrawn from this debate. STV did not offer to host a debate on 12th August. No, when you say "I'll take you anytime anywhere" that's exactly what you mean, unless you don't actually mean it of course. You can't give up the time and venue than bleat about the other combatant getting preferential treatment regarding the time and venue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Yeah, because by that Alistair Darling definitely meant that he'd be happy to hold a televised debate at 4am on a Wednesday in a pond. I think it's pretty clear to anyone with, you know, a brain, like you, that "anytime, anywhere" is a figure of speech that doesn't actually mean "pick any date and location you feel like." Did Salmond suggest 4am on a Wednesday in a pond? I understand that he was amenable to holding the debate after the Commonwealth Games, at a location in Edinburgh, with 500 members of the public present & hosted by Bernard Ponsonby on prime-time STV. That seems a bit more reasonable than your ridiculous suggestion. Why would someone that (in your words) was using a "figure of speech" to denote their availability find this objectionable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Yeah, because by that Alistair Darling definitely meant that he'd be happy to hold a televised debate at 4am on a Wednesday in a pond. I think it's pretty clear to anyone with, you know, a brain, like you, that "anytime, anywhere" is a figure of speech that doesn't actually mean "pick any date and location you feel like." What is apparent here is that they agreed in principle to have "a debate". STV then approached them with a date, which Darling accepted. Salmond declined that date, for whatever reason he personally has (which may or may not be a legitimate reason; he hasn't given any reason) despite the fact he has made himself available for another debate that will not happen on the same date because David Cameron has declined to debate him. Wrong. Darling has accepted an invitation to participate in a debate on 12th August on the BBC. He has not withdrawn from this debate. STV did not offer to host a debate on 12th August. Good for you. So he is still doing it? Or will he shit that one too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Did Salmond suggest 4am on a Wednesday in a pond? I understand that he was amenable to holding the debate after the Commonwealth Games, at a location in Edinburgh, with 500 members of the public present & hosted by Bernard Ponsonby on prime-time STV. That seems a bit more reasonable than your ridiculous suggestion. Why would someone that (in your words) was using a "figure of speech" to denote their availability find this objectionable? STV didn't offer to host an event after the Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh, with 500 members of the public present hosted by Bernard Ponsonby on primetime. What problem did Salmond have with holding a similar such event on 16th July? What is "unreasonable" about that? STV offered it. He isn't "not free" for it. Darling had already accepted STV's offer. Why didn't Salmond? "I am free for a debate with David Cameron on 16th July" is not an answer to this question unless he knows something about the space-time continuum that we don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 STV didn't offer to host an event after the Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh, with 500 members of the public present hosted by Bernard Ponsonby on primetime. What problem did Salmond have with holding a similar such event on 16th July? What is "unreasonable" about that? STV offered it. He isn't "not free" for it. Darling had already accepted STV's offer. Why didn't Salmond? "I am free for a debate with David Cameron on 16th July" is not an answer to this question unless he knows something about the space-time continuum that we don't. Stop putting words in my mouth. I would expect better from you. I repeat "I understand that he (Salmond) was amenable to holding the debate after the Commonwealth Games, at a location in Edinburgh, with 500 members of the public present & hosted by Bernard Ponsonby on prime-time STV." Now please answer my question: Why would someone that (in your words) was using a "figure of speech" to denote their availability find this objectionable? In addition, can you also explain why you consider that the First Minister should have his schedule set by STV's wishes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Stop putting words in my mouth. I would expect better from you. I didn't say you said that. I was saying what Salmond did or did not offer is irrelevant if STV didn't offer it. I repeat "I understand that he (Salmond) was amenable to holding the debate after the Commonwealth Games, at a location in Edinburgh, with 500 members of the public present & hosted by Bernard Ponsonby on prime-time STV." STV didn't agree to this, did they? Why should their programming timetable be dictated by Alex Salmond? Now please answer my question: Why would someone that (in your words) was using a "figure of speech" to denote their availability find this objectionable? Darling didn't say he found that objectionable. There was an in principle agreement that the two men would debate each other, and STV offered to host the said debate on primetime on 16th July. Darling accepted; Salmond declined. In addition, can you also explain why you consider that the First Minister should have his schedule set by STV's wishes? I didn't say that. Salmond can set his schedule however he likes. It doesn't mean the substantive aspects of his schedule can't be thought bizarre and illogical. It's funny how you've accused me of "putting words in your mouth" then proceeded twice in the same post to imply that I've said or argued something that I haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 I didn't say you said that. I was saying what Salmond did or did not offer is irrelevant if STV didn't offer it. STV didn't agree to this, did they? Why should their programming timetable be dictated by Alex Salmond? As far as I'm aware, Salmond suggested "after the Commonwealth games". Are you seriously suggesting that there's no available timeslot in the STV schedule between then & September 18th? Darling didn't say he found that objectionable. There was an in principle agreement that the two men would debate each other, and STV offered to host the said debate on primetime on 16th July. And Salmond made it clear that he was not available to debate Darling that evening. As Darling is on record as stating "Any time, anywhere", that is obviously Salmond's perogative. You even confirm that "Salmond can set his schedule however he likes." It doesn't mean the substantive aspects of his schedule can't be thought bizarre and illogical. I'm sure that this will be a minority opinion both on this site & in real life. Maybe the MSM will agree with you and BetterTogetherNoThanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 As far as I'm aware, Salmond suggested "after the Commonwealth games". Are you seriously suggesting that there's no available timeslot in the STV schedule between then & September 18th? I'm not remotely suggesting this. Stop inferring things into what I'm saying that do not necessarily follow from the words I have typed. And Salmond made it clear that he was not available to debate Darling that evening. But he isn't unavailable. He's not got any prior commitments towards things actually happening on the evening 16th July. David Cameron has already told him he will not debate with him, and the only event the knowledge of which is public which is even remotely provisionally in the diary of the First Minister is his invitation to David Cameron to have a debate. As I said earlier, Alex Salmond's evening on 16th July is no more "not free" than my Sunday is "not free" because I have invited American Airlines to fly me out to Dulles and give me an executive suite near Dupont Circle at their expense. As Darling is on record as stating "Any time, anywhere", that is obviously Salmond's perogative. It's Salmond's prerogative to do what he wants with his evenings irrespective of anything Darling has said, figuratively, or otherwise. That doesn't exempt Salmond from scrutiny* when a perfectly reasonable proposition is made by STV which he declines. *Observe, scrutiny is not the same as criticism in the "disapproving" sense. You even confirm that "Salmond can set his schedule however he likes." Yes, because this is demonstrably the case and no one is questioning that. I'm sure that this will be a minority opinion both on this site & in real life. Maybe the MSM will agree with you and BetterTogetherNoThanks You think it impossible for it to be thought illogical or bizarre that Salmond claims to be unavailable for a debate with Darling but available for a debate which isn't even happening with Cameron on the same day at the same time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.