Gosh, what have you been reading lately?
>> So who "really" runs the Country? 11 old geriatrics of the Judiciary or Parliament? -
The Government runs the country in accordance with the law. So the Judiciary does not rule on anything except the question of legality. I don't know why the comment "geriatric" is at all relevant, presumably just a disparaging remark in place of any actual knowledge copied from some rabid internet group.
But since in your own words the Judiciary and "most of the 600" MPs do not agree with Boris Johnson, then your love of democracy will carry you through.
Or do you think it should be run by one person doing what he wants? What happens when it is something you don't agree with?
>> Some MP's spouting that Boris acted illegally and mis-led the Queen, how?
Really? You don't know how? Read the link Bromp posted. It's got big words and no sound-bites suitable for certain audiences, but it will tell you exactly how.
>>when B declared it (prorogation) there was no law about it ,or that it wan't legal,
There was a law about it. There was some disagreement between Johnson and others about whether or not his move had been legal. As is the law of our country it went to the courts for them to decide according to the existing law.
>> until the "geriatrics" decided it was and ruled that way!
Again, why the use of "geriatrics"? It just makes this sound like some rabid rant rather than a collection of coherent points.
There's probably a reason for that, I guess.
>>- at least it ""looks" like Boris is actually trying to deliver on the referendum,
Does it? Really? How is he doing that?
>> which is what 17.5 mill folk voted for,
And therefore 45.0 mill folk [sic] did not.
>> most of the 600 odd + MP's are more bothered about their own backsides
Probably true. But you do understand that "most" is a democratic majority, right?
>>and are rubbing most of the Countries noses in them!
Oh, yet more emotive, uneducated rabid ranting.
>> Utter disgraces - all of them, none should see inside Parliament again after an election!
Here's the thing; They were each voted for. And each of them achieved the appropriate majority from their electorate. Surely most of your rant concerns the "will of the people" in which case according to your own standards you should shut up and accept these MPs, whatever you think of them, and however times have changed, however much things not are not as they appeared then, because that's the democracy you bang on and on about.
Or do you just mean democracy should be supported when it does what you want?
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 14 Oct 19 at 10:32
|
