Salmond's support for Fred Goodwin's actions

[Uncle Psychosis]

You need to remember this all came from your initial comment of:

This is why Orange Order, UKIP, BNP, etc got mentioned. It's not a pissing contest, but I think it's entirely right of reply to point out the obvious deviants that are lining up to drape themselves in a Union Jack for a cause that really has nothing to do with Scotland.

Well, yes. But Remember the second part of my initial comment:

However, it is also an uncomfortable truth for No that most of the key players in Better Together are just as deeply in bed with the same kind of people (in many cases the actual same people).

Nevertheless, I find it a slightly hypocritical argument that I've heard often repeated: Apparently because Better Together are "reliant" (whatever that means) on people who support the Orange Order that makes the whole No campaign a bigoted one, but even though the Yes campaign is in exactly the same way "reliant" on Scottish Nationalists these same people will tell you that Yes is absolutely not a Nationalistic campaign.

If it makes you feel any better, I've pulled up No supporters for exactly the same thing: they don't get to claim that Yes is all about Nationalism if Yes don't get to claim that No is all about bigotry.

[Banterous]

Well, yes. But Remember the second part of my initial comment:

However, it is also an uncomfortable truth for No that most of the key players in Better Together are just as deeply in bed with the same kind of people (in many cases the actual same people).

Nevertheless, I find it a slightly hypocritical argument that I've heard often repeated: Apparently because Better Together are "reliant" (whatever that means) on people who support the Orange Order that makes the whole No campaign a bigoted one, but even though the Yes campaign is in exactly the same way "reliant" on Scottish Nationalists these same people will tell you that Yes is absolutely not a Nationalistic campaign.

If it makes you feel any better, I've pulled up No supporters for exactly the same thing: they don't get to claim that Yes is all about Nationalism if Yes don't get to claim that No is all about bigotry.

I think this was what I was actually getting at. Alex Salmond's criticism of financial institutions is a bit rich considering his support for them in the past. The BT campaign is comprised of all sorts of people as is the Yes one. From a No perspective it is disappointing that reasonable arguments come from the Yes side like yours

However CB, Confidemus, Thumper and a few others undo your pragmatic inputs. Note that there are no posts which confirm your sensible and measured views?

[Casual Bystander]

I think this was what I was actually getting at.

Wait? What?

You are claiming you meant to try and push a case for not slinging mud, by starting a thread by slinging mud. You really should have got one of your alias to post that as you've just shat yourself once more.

I'm surprised you even logged back into the account considering the utter mess you made earlier. You've jumped the shark, you're dead in the water, you are done, dusted and over.

[Banterous]

Wait? What?

You are claiming you meant to try and push a case for not slinging mud, by starting a thread by slinging mud. You really should have got one of your alias to post that as you've just shat yourself once more.

I'm surprised you even logged back into the account considering the utter mess you made earlier. You've jumped the shark, you're dead in the water, you are done, dusted and over.

Nope. i was pointing out hypocrisy. Alias? No idea what you're talking about.

I didn't use the tragic death of a journalist to point score so my conscience is clear bud

[Confidemus]

I think this was what I was actually getting at. Alex Salmond's criticism of financial institutions is a bit rich considering his support for them in the past. The BT campaign is comprised of all sorts of people as is the Yes one. From a No perspective it is disappointing that reasonable arguments come from the Yes side like yours

However CB, Confidemus, Thumper and a few others undo your pragmatic inputs. Note that there are no posts which confirm your sensible and measured views?

Did Alex Salmond spurn your sexual advances at some point?

I have never witnessed a human being having such a level of fixation over another human being in my life. It's almost at stalker levels.

[Casual Bystander]

I was pointing out hypocrisy.

You clearly don't get irony do you?

[MassiveFanDan]

Who deregulated the banking system, thereby allowing a deal as shoddy as the RBS takeover of ABN Amro to go through in the first place? Gordon Brown.

Who was in control of the Treasury, and supportive of the deal, when it actually went through? Alistair Darling.

Who put Fred Goodwin forward for a knighthood? Jack McConnell.

Who had no regulatory powers over the deal whatsoever, but nonetheless wrote a short letter wishing Fred Goodwin luck, rather than calling him a fuckwit and wishing him abject failure (or whatever unionists must've expected him to do)? Alex Salmond.

Who do unionists blame for the entire fiasco? Alex Salmond.

Kind of like how they blame the SNP for the Trump deal, even though it went through in 2006 when Jack McConnel was still in charge at Holyrood. He clearly breached ministerial rules to push the deal through.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/how-jack-of-clubs-came-up-trumps-for-donald-1-1411884

Or like how they use the expense of the Edinburgh trams and new Scottish Parliament as examples of the SNP's financial irresponsibility, even though the Parliament was built on New Labour's watch, and the trams were pushed through by a Labour/Lib Dem coalition on Edinburgh council, with Tory support, and in the face of SNP opposition.

It is just embarassing now. It's been embarassing for ages. Please stop.