Question Time
- Thread starter EC1
- Start date
OK, I realise you've put the caveat in, as the Daily Mail have been caught quite a few times now making stories up, and I'd prefer it if they actually sourced their facts rather than saying things like "official figures". Certainly an academic paper (or even a proper policy report) would never be allowed to get away with the standards that journos do.
I think there is a wider issue here about the 'family' of causes that Brand is adopting though. The week previous on a nasty cold and wet evening he was supporting some tenants of a housing development who were presenting a petition to Downing Street. The story is that these people were being evicted from their supposedly secure tenancies because the property management had been transfered to an American private equity firm who wanted to evict them, and concentrate on luxury apartments for rich people.
Some journo tried collaring Brand for being a hypocrite because he lived in a rich apartment, with the clear insinuation that this absolves him from being able to support people less well off. A spat broke out, but the journo pretty well got slapped down by the campaigning woman who'd written to Brand asking for help. As she pointed out, Brand responded (nice to know he reads his correspondance himself) and even though he didn't need to, he felt suitably moved to lend his support and in doing so knew they'd get a higher media profile. There are plenty of rich people of means equal and above Brand's, but they do nothing to help defend the more vulnerable in society. Do you not think there is something perverse about a society that when one of its material 'haves' tries to speak up from a position of comparative wealth he's branded (to pun) some kind of hypocrite. What does that tells us about ourselves. Are we really being asked to condone a system that suggests that societies haves shouldn't do anything for the have nots, and that they should concentrate instead on fluffy issues pertinent to them like illegal wildlife trade
Personally I have to say fair play to Russell Brand in this instance. He had no stake in these peoples homes. He could easily have passed up their call for help and walked by on the other side of the street, and pretend that he just didn't see. Instead he decided to try and do something and called David Cameron out. The journo got a pretty good verbal kicking I thought for his stupid line of questioning. Instead he should have been looking into the background of what's really happening to these folk instead of trying to demonise Brand
I'm also reminded of the stage version of Yes Prime Minister when a nervous Jim Hacker is trying to get some contentious environmental policy through a reluctant cabinet. He bursts into the room waving a press release about and says "fantastic, Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie have just announced their support for me. The cabinet won't dare oppose me now"
This is where I do disagree with EC about Brand though. A lot of the causes he's taking are going to make him deeply unpopular. I think you'd be hard pressed to really argue that its all some publicity stunt designed to make him more popular. Quite opposite. It reminds me very much of how those few celebrities who dared to speak up in support of the miners in the mid 80's were reviled
EC1
On a break
Warb
those pictures in the house of commons weren't taken when the captions say..they discussed this on the daily politics one day..some of those pics are 10 years old as well
Brand..is reBranding himself imo
He had to do something to raise his public profile..by pretending to be "down with the crowd"..is an easy and lazy thing to do..qualities i'm sure he has
i think Brand doesn't care about being "popular" with the elite or shallow celebrity set.....he's mixed with them..doesn't really like them..will shag em obviously,,,but like?....so is now playing the lower end where he can be "a working class hero" very easily with the gullible masses that drink in Twatter for breakfast
those pictures in the house of commons weren't taken when the captions say..they discussed this on the daily politics one day..some of those pics are 10 years old as well
Brand..is reBranding himself imo
He had to do something to raise his public profile..by pretending to be "down with the crowd"..is an easy and lazy thing to do..qualities i'm sure he has
i think Brand doesn't care about being "popular" with the elite or shallow celebrity set.....he's mixed with them..doesn't really like them..will shag em obviously,,,but like?....so is now playing the lower end where he can be "a working class hero" very easily with the gullible masses that drink in Twatter for breakfast
Last edited:
No warbler. Those are nailed on facts about the firemen
ec Is right. Its self publicity. Nothing more. If he was serious then he would do some basic research or at least take advice. His small retarded brain is admittedly a handicap but he undermimes the cause by being basically stupid
His flat was an issue because its part of a tax dodge.
ec Is right. Its self publicity. Nothing more. If he was serious then he would do some basic research or at least take advice. His small retarded brain is admittedly a handicap but he undermimes the cause by being basically stupid
His flat was an issue because its part of a tax dodge.
EC1
On a break
the issue of hypocrisy was why the press got involved..rightly so..he's a fake of the highest order..10 years ago would have been dismissed quickly as such..now with social media..he has apparently got folk duped ..a lot by sounds of it..a very sad indictment on the general menatlity of the country..a bit like the brainwashing with UKIP..a party devoid of policies apart from playing to little britainers ...and people do fall for it
Last edited:
Journalist never mentioned it as i recall, but just kept asking him how much it was worth. Brand retorted that he rents, and the journo then changed his line to how much do you pay? Never mentioned tax once
simmo
Senior Jockey
Aah ha context is everything - pity - would have been an arresting image if it were genuine, and what is potentially quite galling is that I wouldn't have thought it was too difficult to put together to be honest. One suspects we'll see a genuine version in the next 12 months. The only one I was suspicious of was the expenses image as there was clearly a vote taking place, but then MP's vote on the expenses bill, so I gave it the benefit - not to worry
It'll take more than a montage of pictures to convince me that MP's aren't crooked bunch of charlatans, but people using social media to create these kidn of things aren't doing anyone any favours, especially as those no shortage of ammunition to line up on our political classes
It'll take more than a montage of pictures to convince me that MP's aren't crooked bunch of charlatans, but people using social media to create these kidn of things aren't doing anyone any favours, especially as those no shortage of ammunition to line up on our political classes
This about sums my thoughts up on those 3.
The Tory woman is an embarrassment.
The labour MP has the nice ability to make a point without raising her voice or slagging someone else off, which is rare.
Articulate? Were you stoned/drunk watching this? His grammar is APPALLING...
She should have been sacked as MP for such a thing. I'm not exaggerating!
She is exceptionally stupid. If you re-watch the programme, you'll see she, without intending to, failed to answer the question she was asked - she is almost as stupid as Brand.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
He speaks in a strong accent - an intrinsic part of his stage persona - and you shouldn't mistake his use of the vernacular, with lack of perspicacity.
WrOng.
that was the story. He is party to a tax dodge.
but probably too thick to understand
No. You can have a very strong accent and not talk like a retarded school leaver.
If he was as well read as he claims (he isn't... He may not even be able to) then he simply wouldn't communicate as if he's not recovered from a blow to the head.
morduant was truly terrible. Lazily promoted ion looks only by that showing.
If he was as well read as he claims (he isn't... He may not even be able to) then he simply wouldn't communicate as if he's not recovered from a blow to the head.
morduant was truly terrible. Lazily promoted ion looks only by that showing.
Last edited:
To give an example of what a simpleton he is..
as I said before he chose probably the most cosseted of public sector workers as an example of "poverty" . £500k pension pot at 55. being asked to "work"until 60. How cruel is that. Stupid cnt
it took a right wing journo to point out it was care workers that were the genuinely badly treated. Completely kicked the chair from under him (pity neck wasnt in a noose mind)
how embarrassing was that? Can't even manage his own causes. So boneheaded that he couldn't even google the simple facts with which questioner could have had him in tears
as I said before he chose probably the most cosseted of public sector workers as an example of "poverty" . £500k pension pot at 55. being asked to "work"until 60. How cruel is that. Stupid cnt
it took a right wing journo to point out it was care workers that were the genuinely badly treated. Completely kicked the chair from under him (pity neck wasnt in a noose mind)
how embarrassing was that? Can't even manage his own causes. So boneheaded that he couldn't even google the simple facts with which questioner could have had him in tears
Last edited:
GH,
No offense, but you don't seem to understand what articulate means.
I wasn't referring to his accent, but his failure to be 'articulate' (your own term) and his use of grammar.
Have to agree. I'd didnt see the news night interview but by most accounts he was totally lost (interviewer.."I am trying to take you seriously") . he genuinely struggled for the right phrase. In fact it's even worse because he was being spoon fed issues that he supposedly cares about (stop laughing at the back).
Billy Connolly has a strong accent doesn't he? Ok he's genuinely very smart but no one would ever describe him as inarticulate. Danny baker has a genuine south east London accent and again is bright as a button and as articulate as anyone you would hope to encounter.
Billy Connolly has a strong accent doesn't he? Ok he's genuinely very smart but no one would ever describe him as inarticulate. Danny baker has a genuine south east London accent and again is bright as a button and as articulate as anyone you would hope to encounter.
Last edited:
True though
Well the journo never once mentioned tax, he only seemed to be insinuating that Brand couldn't campaign on poverty because he was rich (same logic would apply to Geldorf of course). If he were going to broaden the whole thing out into a tax snare he never got round to doing it, albeit quite ironic given that the location for the set piece was Downing Street
Talking of tax evasion, has Cameron ever come clean yet from his time at Carlton Communications? He keeps telling us he was preparing the documents (or shredding them) but that was years ago now. I suppose he's hoping we forgot (which we have of course) but his Dad did make a substantial part of his personal fortune advising clients on tax avoidance/ evasion. It seems inconceivable to me at least that a politically motivated greedy individual like DC would have paid the full amount to a Labour government when his father is an expert in the field of avoiding it. In fact, if I were earning that amount and a close friend of mine said you don't have to pay the Tories all that you know, let me show you how, I wouldn't confident enough to say that I'd decline!
Last edited:
I watched it and thought that Russel Brand was finally exposed . Really credible question from a disabled guy in the audience. Earlier Brand had made a big deal of supporting elderly and disabled and then a disabled guy confronts him and says well why don't you stand . Brilliant (His answer was pathetic that he worried he'd become like them and he was roundly booed