Russell Brand v The Sun
Discussion
Is it easier for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, or for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle?
Discuss..
Brand and the Sun - a decent match - let the bell sound.
My speelin is shoking toodai!
Discuss..
Brand and the Sun - a decent match - let the bell sound.
My speelin is shoking toodai!
Edited by Ali G on Tuesday 9th December 14:46
Edited by Ali G on Tuesday 9th December 14:50
Guam said:
Nope not that easy, you threw the accusation out there and claimed to have some insight into my ideology and claimed impact on my views re Brand, come on spit it out man, not afraid of looking even more of an arse surely?
Quite happy to debate the issues to your debit...again, but your credibility is zero, since every response contains an insult. Why not stick to the subject & drop the personal attacks? Why should I bother with someone who goes out of their way to personalise a debate?It's incredibly unbecoming of someone who apparently wishes to be taken seriously, Mr. Polemic
Guam said:
KareemK said:
Nope and I'm told that even as a subscriber to the Sun's website you won't get that information - just the so-called 'result'.
You subscribe to the sun? 
I'd tear my eyeballs from their sockets, fry and eat them before I'd subscribe to that used tampon.
Abagnale said:
I'll be like Guam & say I've given the answer clearly. But I'll concede Ideology & maybe go with irrational polemic.
Get back to me when you can contradict it AND stay above personal insults. It's the grown up way to go & unfortunately your shocking behaviour does have a way to go with that.
Well, he has to hit back somehow, doesn't he? Get back to me when you can contradict it AND stay above personal insults. It's the grown up way to go & unfortunately your shocking behaviour does have a way to go with that.
His attempt to divert attention towards the the statistics, when the substantive argument was about the nature of the questions, was bad enough. But then, when it was pointed out that the sampling of the statistics was terminally skewed against the young demographic, both his lines of argument lay in tatters. It must be hard on a chap who spends most of his time on here bigging up his statistical expertise. I think we can expect a lot of diversionary flack and insults over the next few hours...
I still want to know just what it is about Brand that gives all these right-wingers the heebie-jeebies. They do seem jolly worried about him.
Must admit I am no big fan of The Sun, however in this case I think they have a point, but have used completely the wrong thing to prove it. Rather than go after his living arrangements (which admittedly do raise an eyebrow when campaigning for fair rent prices) it would be much easier to investigate the tax affairs of his publishing company, or the fact that all his creative work is available at a very reasonable price from an online retailer always at the forefront of tax discussions.
Must admit if I was taking a moral stand about the big corporates, first thing I would do is make my work available for free so they didn't get a cut.
Must admit if I was taking a moral stand about the big corporates, first thing I would do is make my work available for free so they didn't get a cut.
Guam said:
Right winger
As for the Skew and their weighting take it up with You Gov that was not the gist of the b
ks raised on the thread as you full well know.I don't need to take the skewing of the stats up with YouGov. You're the one who repeatedly held them up (despite them being totally beside the point) as valid and constantly referred to your statistical expertise to back them up, so you're the one who should be able to defend them.
King said:
said: Yes, we all know you used to be "a Marxist". But seeing as you've never explained which interpretation of Marxism - out of the hundreds available - you adhered to, it's easiest to assume you just picked up the word from Woolfie Smith and thought it'd be clever to try it on for size. What sort of marxist were you then? Was it Young Marx or Old Marx that did it for you? Or was it Hegelian Marxism? Or Leninism? Trotskyism? Stalinism? Humanist Marxism? Lukasian Marxism? Gramscian Marxism? The Frankfurt School? Habermas? How about a Sartrean Existentialist Marxist? Or an Althusserian? A Structural Marxist? Or did you just invent a special Marxism all of your own, a bit like having an imaginary friend?
mybrainhurts said:
King said:
said: Yes, we all know you used to be "a Marxist". But seeing as you've never explained which interpretation of Marxism - out of the hundreds available - you adhered to, it's easiest to assume you just picked up the word from Woolfie Smith and thought it'd be clever to try it on for size. What sort of marxist were you then? Was it Young Marx or Old Marx that did it for you? Or was it Hegelian Marxism? Or Leninism? Trotskyism? Stalinism? Humanist Marxism? Lukasian Marxism? Gramscian Marxism? The Frankfurt School? Habermas? How about a Sartrean Existentialist Marxist? Or an Althusserian? A Structural Marxist? Or did you just invent a special Marxism all of your own, a bit like having an imaginary friend?
But of course, you knew all that, didn't you?
King said:
said:mybrainhurts said:
King said:
said: Yes, we all know you used to be "a Marxist". But seeing as you've never explained which interpretation of Marxism - out of the hundreds available - you adhered to, it's easiest to assume you just picked up the word from Woolfie Smith and thought it'd be clever to try it on for size. What sort of marxist were you then? Was it Young Marx or Old Marx that did it for you? Or was it Hegelian Marxism? Or Leninism? Trotskyism? Stalinism? Humanist Marxism? Lukasian Marxism? Gramscian Marxism? The Frankfurt School? Habermas? How about a Sartrean Existentialist Marxist? Or an Althusserian? A Structural Marxist? Or did you just invent a special Marxism all of your own, a bit like having an imaginary friend?
But of course, you knew all that, didn't you?
King said:
said: Good call. Reeves and Mortimer were greatly influenced by the Surrealist movement and you had to be a Marxist to be a member of the original Surrealist group. It was only after the group had split up - and that great self-publicist, Dali, had managed to become the first Surrealist to reach the US - when the critical influence of Marxism was downplayed so as not to frighten the Yanks.
But of course, you knew all that, didn't you?
Yeah, and the sBut of course, you knew all that, didn't you?
t pile of cash he was making that he didn't feel like sharing out amongst the proles.Guam said:
Nice rant but significantly wide of the mark as usually
Firstly on you gov where did I defend them
In fact if you knew squat about statistics and the reputation of you gov
You would have picked up on the weighting comment
Something they are criticised for in online polling and telephone polling
The suggestion that someone should contact them over that Issue
Should have been a large neon sign as to what my opinion may be where the poll was concerned
Most laughably though was the fact folk were banging on about the demographics and "skew" without understanding the pertinence of weighting in that context
As for my left credentials I have posted my family connections previously when called out by young pseudo leftist a like you over the years
Tell you what go buy South Shields the failed revolution and see if you can figure out whose uncle Tony Benn refers to in his comments
With my background and upbringing as well as my activism like pounding the pavements for the Libs against thatcher back in the day in the NE I don't need to prove anything to some internet warrior who thinks anyone who disagrees with hypocrites like brand is right wing.
Now about your stats credentials and inability to grasp
the difference between processes involving discrete variables as opposed to those involving continuos data such as temperature?
Oh, I see. You were a genetic Marxist: You don't need to understand anything about Marxism because you inherited the Marxist gene from your family. Firstly on you gov where did I defend them
In fact if you knew squat about statistics and the reputation of you gov
You would have picked up on the weighting comment
Something they are criticised for in online polling and telephone polling
The suggestion that someone should contact them over that Issue
Should have been a large neon sign as to what my opinion may be where the poll was concerned
Most laughably though was the fact folk were banging on about the demographics and "skew" without understanding the pertinence of weighting in that context
As for my left credentials I have posted my family connections previously when called out by young pseudo leftist a like you over the years
Tell you what go buy South Shields the failed revolution and see if you can figure out whose uncle Tony Benn refers to in his comments
With my background and upbringing as well as my activism like pounding the pavements for the Libs against thatcher back in the day in the NE I don't need to prove anything to some internet warrior who thinks anyone who disagrees with hypocrites like brand is right wing.
Now about your stats credentials and inability to grasp
the difference between processes involving discrete variables as opposed to those involving continuos data such as temperature?
And then, you saw the light and became a Liberal...
And then, you saw the light (again) and became someone who "doesn't support UKIP" (but sticks to the thread like poo to a blanket).
I do see where you're coming from, though. I bet Che Guevara would have followed the same kind of trajectory from the revolutionary left had he lived. It was only a matter of time before he'd have realised that David Steele was the true embodiment of Historical Materialism. "Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your cable knit cardigan!" Only to be followed by his becoming a champion of those who find breast feeding in public a bit icky...
Now that I think about it, I can only marvel at your lifetime of selfless and heroic contribution to the political culture of the UK.
To repeat: The crushing your argument had nothing to do with the interpretation of stats but everything to do with fixing the result in advance. You may find that hard to remember but others won't.
Does it matter all that much? A leading question in The Sun's "research" on "public opinion" would be the icing on the cake for debunking their poll, but if the past few pages of discussion (tiny sample / selection bias) hasn't convinced you that their "research" was trash then I doubt the addition of a suggestive poll question will.
CamMoreRon said:
Does it matter all that much? A leading question in The Sun's "research" on "public opinion" would be the icing on the cake for debunking their poll, but if the past few pages of discussion (tiny sample / selection bias) hasn't convinced you that their "research" was trash then I doubt the addition of a suggestive poll question will.
Nope. It's just another blind alley pursued by the spectacularly ungrammatical Brand hater having had his arguments demolished everywhere else. HTH 
mybrainhurts said:
So much love for Russell Brand, he who richly deserves concrete boots and a hot slurry pit for crimes against comedy and right thinking people.
Amazing.
Not really.Amazing.
I suspect its more to do with defending somebody who's clearly been attacked for his political views by a publication that has neither a reasoned argument in this (particular) case or anything but a history of deeply disturbing/disgusting actions far in excess of anything Mr Brand has ever done.
Prior to this I was pretty ambivalent about Russell, he was an armchair anarchist with a few fair things to say about society - but nothing more.
But, for THE SUN, to call him a hypocrite for something he knew nothing about and go on to produce a poll claiming that the majority of the UK were behind them in that assumption well, my flabber was ghasted.
Well done The Sun - You've almost single handedly raised Mr Brand up to 'hero' status amongst a lot of people similar to myself.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff