[Sussex] Microsoft fails to comply

[Stephen Williams]

On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 17:12 +0000, Geoffrey J Teale wrote:
> Steve Williams <sdp.williams at btinternet.com> writes:
> 
> > Now I don't need to re-iterate where my political loyalties lie, and I
> > suspect I'm in a minority of one in the SLUG. But I'm not one of those
> > who thinks the Conservative Party is the be all and end all, and,
> > whilst I will fight my corner, I won't ram it down anyone's
> > throat. (Well, unless it's for their own benefit - GEOFF! - :-P - you
> > know, stiff medecine and all that!)
> 
> Steve, I think it's well established that you and I are not going to
> see eye to eye on politics anytime soon.  That is however a good thing
> in my opinion.  As with software diversity in politics is a good
> thing.  
> 
> With the labour party and the conservatives now occupying the same
> political territory it's more important than ever that members of the
> left (obviously me) stand up and debate the points with members of the
> right (obviously you). 
> 
> > And please don't get me started on that utter buffoon Charles
> > Kennedy. Michael Howard may not be your cup of tea, but Charles
> > Kennedy - 
> > puhleeeeese!
> 
> I've met them both (Michael Howard twice in fact) and can only say
> that Michael Howard (who is the MP for the constituency in which I
> grew up) is the single least appealing person I've ever met in my
> life.  I can't say that Charles Kennedy is a great person or an ideal
> prime minister, but he leads a party that despite your claims has the
> only set of campaign promises that are actually well defined rather

I didn't say they were ill-defined, I said they were inconsistent. In
this sound-bite, attention span of a gnat world we live in, the promises
politicians make are usually pretty well defined and concocted to
satisfy the restless demands of the media. It's only when these are
subject to more than the usual scrutiny (i.e. when they get elected and
have to start implementing some of their promises) that they start to
fall apart. Besides,  no honest politician will ever stand up and say
how things really are - they'd never get elected.

> than vague promises and of the three parties his is the only one
> standing up and saying "we need to make unpopular decisions to sort
> this country out". 
> 
> It's easy to indulge peoples hatred.  It's easy to point out what is
> wrong with the country.  It's easy to point the finger at government
> workers and immigrants.  It's much harder to say that fixing things in
> this country is hard and expensive.
> 
> > So Geoff old chap, don't waste your vote on those idiots, vote for
> > someone else - please?
> 
> An what exactly makes you think I _am_ going to vote for them? I
> haven't said as much.  
> 
> 
> I'll have you know I didn't vote for them in the local elections.
> 

Well, that's reassuring. There's hope for you yet.

> 
> Actually I probably will vote for the Lib Dems, because voting green really
> won't get me far in this constituency.  At least the Lib Dems might
> actually make a convincing opposition instead of that bunch of
> washed-up dinosaurs in blue.

Actually, they don't oppose "New" Labour in 80% of Commons divisions - I
don't see how they could be regarded as opposition at all. Unless the
Conservatives happen to be in power.....

> 
> Britain was screwed in the 80's.
> Britain was screwed in the 90's.
> Britain's been screwed in this decade.
> 
> Both the conservatives and the labour party have been in power during
> that time.  Lets give the liberals a try so we can moan about someone
> else for a change :-)
> 

Well you certainly won't be doing anything else if they (god forbid)
ever get close to government.

> 
--