The General Election Thread

[Schoolmarm]

The hunt near me blatantly provided their own foxes for hunting. This means that all reasons for and against fox control are meaningless. :?

It isn't just fox hunting though is it? (unsure) I thought it was "hunting with dogs".

Which means deer amongst others.

And it also means once again, animals being pushed down the list of priorities. So we have animal experimentation "for the greater good of humans". Hunting with dogs, "for the greater good of the economy". Why can't DC just leave it alone like many other things they will leave alone that they have disagreed with Labour introducing.

Sorry for my non backed up post am a bit :? today.

 

[Feltwell]

I agree with you Joce, foxes are a nuisance and there are double-standards inherent in both the pro and anti-hunting arguments - but that's not the point I was making.

By stating publicly that they will quickly repeal the "hunting with dogs" law the Tories will please a few, but risk alienating many. If those individuals are right or wrong in their moral conviction is irrelevant - they are still voters they are potentially turning away. Doesn't seem a very well thought out strategy when you're in a situation where every vote counts - which makes me wonder what hold the pro-hunting lobby have over the party. The only one I can think of is that the pro-hunting lobby are affluent and are a good source of donations - is there another reason?

I would be very surprised if the number of voters in the actively pro-hunting lobby outweighs the number who have an objection. If you're wavering anyway then it could be enough to make voters move away from the Tories - which would be a shame :wink:

 

[Schoolmarm]

By stating publicly that they will quickly repeal the "hunting with dogs" law the Tories will please a few, but risk alienating many. If those individuals are right or wrong in their moral conviction is irrelevant - they are still voters they are potentially turning away. Doesn't seem a very well thought out strategy when you're in a situation where every vote counts - which makes me wonder what hold the pro-hunting lobby have over the party. The only one I can think of is that the pro-hunting lobby are affluent and are a good source of donations - is there another reason?

I would be very surprised if the number of voters in the actively pro-hunting lobby outweighs the number who have an objection. If you're wavering anyway then it could be enough to make voters move away from the Tories - which would be a shame :wink:

This is what I mean. It all seems very odd and is creating a surge against them, facilitated by the internet especially facebook. We didn't have anything like it years ago and it needs considering.
It is so easy to unite and drum up support via the net.

 

[JoceAndChris]

It's all very interesting.

Sorry for my non backed up post am a bit today.

Don't worry I never feel I back my stuff up much!

Which means deer amongst others.

I really wonder what the poll would be, if you asked every person in the land to vote for or against fox-hunting. I'm not at all sure it's as pro-fox as you think. However, Feltwell may be right that there is something shady going on here with trying to please people in the right places.

 

[skier-hughes]

I'm pro fox hunting, and shoot my own on a regular basis, having lost many chickens over the last couple of years.

 

[Matt Green]

I'm pro fox hunting, and shoot my own on a regular basis, having lost many chickens over the last couple of years.

Hey, I'm pro fox shooting, but lets not kid ourselves that playing dress up and taking a load of dogs and horses for a romp through the countryside to maybe kill a single fox is effective pest control. It's not the what, or the why, it's the how. :wink:

 

[Flyfisher]

to repeal a law in order to please a privileged few,

I think that sums up the fox-hunting debate; it's characterised as a class issue, often along with other country pursuits such as fishing and shooting, whereas the reality - in my experience anyway - is that people from all walks of life engage in such activities. Unfortunately, there is a "tyranny of the majority" aspect to the whole thing.

I agree with Joce's post about the wider aspects of animal cruelty. I know many people who think that dogs killing a free-living wild fox, or shooting free-living wild birds, or catching free-living wild fish is a terrible thing yet think absolutely nothing about the dreadful conditions endured by their £2.50 supermarket chicken. Out of sight, out of mind I suppose.

I also agree with Moo about priorities. I thought banning hunting with dogs should have been way down the list of government priorities and think the same way about reversing the ban. I recall reading that Bliar spent more parliamentary time on fox-hunting than on the Iraq war. I think that says it all.

Anyway, has Cameron actually stated he will reverse the ban or just give the opportunity for a free vote?

 

[Nigel Watts]

 

[Nigel Watts]

I can scarcely believe it - yet another Clegg U turn! Apparently he WILL work with Gordon now.

Any corrleation between what Cleggy says and which way the wind is blowing I wonder? Or perhaps its the phases of moon?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...ver-hung-parliament-threat-to-gordon-brown.do

 

[Feltwell]

to repeal a law in order to please a privileged few,

I think that sums up the fox-hunting debate; it's characterised as a class issue, often along with other country pursuits such as fishing and shooting, whereas the reality - in my experience anyway - is that people from all walks of life engage in such activities.

It's the "privileged few" with the cash that I suspect they are trying to please! Which is not necessarily the same thing as class. Fox hunting is characterised as being a class-based activity I agree - as is shooting, fishing I would argue much less so - certainly coarse fishing seems to attract all walks of life.

 

[LadyArowana]

I can scarcely believe it - yet another Clegg U turn! Apparently he WILL work with Gordon now.

Any corrleation between what Cleggy says and which way the wind is blowing I wonder? Or perhaps its the phases of moon?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...ver-hung-parliament-threat-to-gordon-brown.do

What I really want to know is whether you got your chairs .......................

 

[JoceAndChris]

:lol:

dreadful conditions endured by their £2.50 supermarket chicken. Out of sight, out of mind I suppose

What makes me so sad and angry is when I see the fat pasty looking mums queueing to buy Kentucky Fried Rat for their kids and I just want to scream at them think about your waistline and your heart! Think about those poor birds! And think about how much cheaper and healthier 2 slices of wholemeal bread would be at home, a bit of lettuce and tomato - perhaps some tinned veg soup. Our needs are so simple really. We have made such a perverse world.

I'm pro fox hunting, and shoot my own on a regular basis, having lost many chickens over the last couple of years.

I am so sorry to hear it. I never imagined how bitter the moment was when you turn the corner and see the slumped bodies of your flock, all that effort totally wasted, the fox perhaps having made off with one or none. Poultry keeping is not some lightweight Country Living-esque idyll, it's trips in the dark, the rain and the mud, hundreds of pounds on equipment and stock, hours and hours put in for very little, or no, financial return. The desire for retributive justice against those that threaten your endeavours is perfectly natural.

When I think how BC and the surrounding land was managed by its gamekeeper 200 years ago I feel nostalgic regret that we have come so far from that. There was no fancy electric fencing, and no way the residence of foxes would have been tolerated in such proximity to the hens. The hunt would have ridden out from at least 3 nearby country houses. Perhaps the gamekeeper shot and killed foxes too. As well as that the rabbit population was strictly controlled. The hooks are downstairs where they were hung. How simple, how economical, how healthy, how much cleverer than our KFCs and fox hunting bans.

 

[LadyArowana]

fat pasty looking mums queueing to buy Kentucky Fried Rat for their kids

Someone will be along shortly to castigate you for your "offensive streotype" I expect. :lol:

 

[Feltwell]

Kentucky Fried Rat

I think you mean "Unlucky Fried Kitten" :wink:

 

[JoceAndChris]

:evil:

 

[Nigel Watts]

.

 

[Nigel Watts]

What I really want to know is whether you got your chairs .......................

No I didnt. These are the chairs:

I left an absentee bid but they went for several grand more than both my maximum and the estimated range, in spite of their condition:

http://www.sothebys.com/app/live/lot/LotDetail.jsp?lot_id=159585885

 

[LadyArowana]

No I didnt.


I left an absentee bid but they went for several grand more than both my maximum and the estimated range, in spite of their condition:

Someone really wanted them, maybe they were trying to match pieces they already had. I am sure you will find something else that is perfect.

 

[Flyfisher]

fat pasty looking mums queueing to buy Kentucky Fried Rat for their kids

Someone will be along shortly to castigate you for your "offensive streotype" I expect. :lol:

Colonel Sanders perhaps?

 

[Nigel Watts]

Someone really wanted them, maybe they were trying to match pieces they already had. I am sure you will find something else that is perfect.

Dealers, I suspect. £10,250 + £2,000 for restoration +100% mark-up = a £25k pair of chairs. Trying to pick them up for less than a third of this was worth a go I suppose.

The same sale had some really quite nice Georgian chairs, all of which went for well over their estimate:

http://www.sothebys.com/app/live/lot/LotDetail.jsp?lot_id=159590145
http://www.sothebys.com/app/live/lot/LotDetail.jsp?lot_id=159582446
http://www.sothebys.com/app/live/lot/LotDetail.jsp?lot_id=159581021
http://www.sothebys.com/app/live/lot/LotDetail.jsp?lot_id=159581334