Rangers staff risk stoking sectarianism hints Glasgow council boss Susan Aitken

[Gaffer 1,665]

I'll try this one again, in hope that I can get an answer.  For those opining that the SNP is anti Rangers, who should we vote for instead?  As you probably already knew, I'm waiting to have some fun with your answers because I am almost certain I can show you examples for every party.  Politics may be interesting to many people, and it seems to stir a lot of emotions, but although many individual politicians are definitely anti Rangers, there isn't a party that would even think about football, never mind have an anti Rangers agenda.

 

Having said that, I'm more than happy to support anyone who takes action to remove corrupt politicians from their posts.  And with regards to this thread, I am hopeful that the offenders in this situation at GCC are dealt with appropriately.  It would then send a clear message to others that we will not accept this treatment.  Support who you want as politicians, and by all means hold onto your strongly held beliefs, but do your job, which is to represent all of your constituents.  The clue is in the name afterall ..... public servants!

[Scott7 6,963]

I am not going to read the SNP constitution but I expect there will not be a clause stating the destruction of Rangers is an aim of the party. I believe, however, that many of the party members and probably even more of their followers are left of centre (the Party certainly is, according to the marxist, Salmond) republican and by definition, anti-UK.  Their perception is that Rangers are royalist and British and politically and religiously an ally of the Orange Order.  Accordingly, it is unlikely that there is much goodwill in the SNP towards Rangers. The same applies to Labour. Liberals (or, if they insist on the politics of the nursery, Lib-Dems) are always in favour of the oppressed underdog so they will disdain Rangers who are of course still top dogs. Check the title count if you’re not sure.

What’s left? Greens? I think not. They are an amalgam of all of the foregoing. Lesser parties? Waste of time. So, then, the Conservatives. Again I will not read their constitution but it’s a safe bet there is no pro-Rangers clause in it. I believe, however, that not many of the party members and probably even fewer of their followers have any notable antipathy towards Rangers.

There you go. Conservatives may not do Rangers much good but they are unlikely to do targetted harm. The least of the evils. What a way to vote, eh? But that’s politics.

A word of caution. As Gonzo has said, the well-being of your football team should not be too high on your list of priorities when you mark your fateful cross on the ballot paper.

Have fun, Gaff.

[der Berliner 4,287]

Having experience Socialism first hand for 20 odd years, Capitalism ever since, and being rather clued up on anything Fascism since being a German, I would hope people would not throw some words in too lightly into any debate. IMHO patriotism is oftentimes mistaken for nationalism while nationalism is quite often mistaken for Fascism or the like. There are a lot of gray areas and oftentimes you see politicians cater to a certain spectrum of society to gather votes and acceptance. Which is not to say that quite a few politicians do actually stand for what they say. Some SNP folk are apparently steeped in grey-green and once in power, were probably amongst those most responsible to make "hun" an "accepted/tolerated" word while "f-enian" is been given the utmost no-no treatement.

[Bill 13,717]

I doubt if the SNP constitution focuses on hating England... but the clearly do.

 

Wriggle all you like but on the whole the SNP is vehemently anti-Rangers and those who profess to be Rangers fans while also voting SNP are damn fools.

Edited September 2, 2018 by Bill

[Soulsonic5791 408]

Here's a question.

 

Can you be considered a real/proper Rangers fan if you think that Scotland should be an independent country, taken in isolation regardless of politics?

 

 

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,976]

14 minutes ago, Bill said:

I doubt if the SNP constitution focuses on hating England... but the clearly do.

 

Wriggle all you like but on the whole the SNP is vehemently anti-Rangers and those who profess to be Rangers fans while also voting SNP are damn fools.

Think we are going off topic here but how are the SNP anti-English?

Edited September 2, 2018 by BlackSocksRedTops

[der Berliner 4,287]

IMHO, Scotland should have a strong Scottish party catering for the interests of the Scots and their country ... within the U.K..

 

EDIT: All Scots, that is.

Edited September 2, 2018 by der Berliner

[Elisioth 8]

1 hour ago, Gaffer said:

I'll try this one again, in hope that I can get an answer.  For those opining that the SNP is anti Rangers, who should we vote for instead?  As you probably already knew, I'm waiting to have some fun with your answers because I am almost certain I can show you examples for every party.  Politics may be interesting to many people, and it seems to stir a lot of emotions, but although many individual politicians are definitely anti Rangers, there isn't a party that would even think about football, never mind have an anti Rangers agenda.

 

Having said that, I'm more than happy to support anyone who takes action to remove corrupt politicians from their posts.  And with regards to this thread, I am hopeful that the offenders in this situation at GCC are dealt with appropriately.  It would then send a clear message to others that we will not accept this treatment.  Support who you want as politicians, and by all means hold onto your strongly held beliefs, but do your job, which is to represent all of your constituents.  The clue is in the name afterall ..... public servants!

I'd vote Labour as they are socialist and for the working class generally. The party as a whole doesn't have so many instances of  discrimination towards rangers or elected politicians who make a fool of themselves by being bias against us on social media or being pro-republican with tri colours and the like the way the snp mps do, its a farce these people are politicians yet stirring the pot of division which fits their anti-unionist stance, unlike labour.  The biggest club in scotland which generates a lot of money for scotland are sent down to the third division yet when it happens to other clubs the government make statements looking to help etc. done fuck all for us because we're big bad rangers as per usual.

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,976]

8 minutes ago, Elisioth said:

I'd vote Labour as they are socialist and for the working class generally. The party as a whole doesn't have so many instances of  discrimination towards rangers or elected politicians who make a fool of themselves by being bias against us on social media or being pro-republican with tri colours and the like the way the snp mps do, its a farce these people are politicians yet stirring the pot of division which fits their anti-unionist stance, unlike labour.  The biggest club in scotland which generates a lot of money for scotland are sent down to the third division yet when it happens to other clubs the government make statements looking to help etc. done fuck all for us because we're big bad rangers as per usual.

Labour in Scotland are dead.

[Gaffer 1,665]

52 minutes ago, Scott7 said:

I am not going to read the SNP constitution but I expect there will not be a clause stating the destruction of Rangers is an aim of the party. I believe, however, that many of the party members and probably even more of their followers are left of centre (the Party certainly is, according to the marxist, Salmond) republican and by definition, anti-UK.  Their perception is that Rangers are royalist and British and politically and religiously an ally of the Orange Order.  Accordingly, it is unlikely that there is much goodwill in the SNP towards Rangers. The same applies to Labour. Liberals (or, if they insist on the politics of the nursery, Lib-Dems) are always in favour of the oppressed underdog so they will disdain Rangers who are of course still top dogs. Check the title count if you’re not sure.

What’s left? Greens? I think not. They are an amalgam of all of the foregoing. Lesser parties? Waste of time. So, then, the Conservatives. Again I will not read their constitution but it’s a safe bet there is no pro-Rangers clause in it. I believe, however, that not many of the party members and probably even fewer of their followers have any notable antipathy towards Rangers.

There you go. Conservatives may not do Rangers much good but they are unlikely to do targetted harm. The least of the evils. What a way to vote, eh? But that’s politics.

A word of caution. As Gonzo has said, the well-being of your football team should not be too high on your list of priorities when you mark your fateful cross on the ballot paper.

Have fun, Gaff.

Very happy to agree with that one!  And with that, I am going to now go off and hopefully enjoy what we are all here for .... the start of 55.  I've got an acute case of the battle fever.  I'm sure you guys do too.