Jacob Rees-Mogg

[scooping]

At a complete loss about the so-called 'fury'. A staunch Catholic says he's against abortion and people are shocked? What next, Pope is a Catholic shock? Ridiculous, manufactured, insulting to Catholics. Tomorrow's front page: "Man found in bed with his wife"?

[andy-hughes]

Mamya - // That is in a way the premise of this thread, anyone knowing anything about Jacob could have told you his beliefs. //

And that can only be so because Jacob has made it his business to put his beliefs out there.

But no politician ever puts out a view once - they want to underline and enforce that view as often as possible, and I am sure Mr RM saw this as an opportunity to do just that.

Which is why your view that he was 'badgered' simply does not stand up.

[Mamyalynne]

So he should have refused to answer the direct question in your view - thank you.

[andy-hughes]

Mamya - // So he should have refused to answer the direct question in your view - thank you. //

I didn't have you down as an advocate of the 'So' Rule - but here you are using it - I did not say that he should have refused to answer a direct question, and it is not my view - you're welcome to be wrong about what I think and what I said.

If you watch the conversation -



you will see, as I did, that far from being 'badgered', MR RM is in typical perfect control of his own responses - and not prone to blurting out something which he may later regret because he can't defend it.

In the question of same-sex marriage, Mr RM was content to swerve the question with a catch-all response about following the teachings of the church.

In the question of abortion, he was perfectly willing to state his view without pause or prevarication. He could have side-stepped it, as he did with the same-sex question, he chose not to do so.

I would never advocate any politician refusing to answer a question, and I doubt that any politician deemed newsworthy enough to appear on morning television, would ever dream of doing so.

[zebo]

"I doubt that any politician deemed newsworthy enough to appear on morning television, would ever dream of doing so."
But would they answer honestly or would they trot out the pre-prepared 'right' answer to keep the majority happy?

Mrs R-M is apparently Anglican so I wonder where they stand on contraception? With 6 he seems to be winning that one so far.

[Mamyalynne]

I will happily retract 'badgered' as it is causing such a stumbling block - should he have given a catch all to every topic raised?

His call.

Nothing in the interview surprised me.

[Mamyalynne]

PS

I have never understood the so rule and have no intention of learning it, so expect me to flaunt it often.

[andy-hughes]

Mamya - // I have never understood the so rule and have no intention of learning it, so expect me to flaunt it often. //

It couldn't be simpler - you start a sentence with the word 'So ...' and then proceed to say something that the originator did not say, and then criticise them for saying it.

Your post at 15:43 is a perfect example.

[andy-hughes]

zebo - // But would they answer honestly or would they trot out the pre-prepared 'right' answer to keep the majority happy? //

That depends on the politician, and their level of comfort in responding.

//Mrs R-M is apparently Anglican so I wonder where they stand on contraception? With 6 he seems to be winning that one so far. //

There is a gap between the children's ages, so I suggest not.

[ummmm]

I really wish you's shut up about the 'so' rule. It's your rule...no one elses...

[douglas9401]

A common misunderstanding of the 'rule of so' given by the poster above.

'So' is bolted on to the front of any and all sentences much as politicians of the Blair era used 'look' to open a remark, possibly trying to give the same some added gravitas.

A strange slip from a scholar and frequent critic of the tic.

[ladybirder]

It's mamya's fault:-)) As soon as I saw her 16.40 post I just knew we would get it explained to us again. Jeez.

[naomi24]

Mamyalyyne at 16.38. You shouldn't retract 'badgered'. Interviewers often 'badger' those they're interviewing - politicians or not.

I agree with ummmm at 17.22. I wish andy-hughes would shut up about his ridiculous 'so' rule too.

[pixie374]

To be fair, it's true... I noticed it ages before Andy mentioned it. When people want to twist your words and argue with that instead, they nearly always start off with "so" and completely change what you put. The main two culprits don't post any more though.

[Mamyalynne]

As stated.

I have never understood the so rule and have no intention of learning it, so expect me to flaunt it often.

Delete things from my replies that don't suit according to your rule/s.

[jno]

yes, I think Pixie and Andy are right, "So" is customarily used to start a sentence that will quote something you never said. I generally notice it without bothering to comment on it.

[Mamyalynne]

Ladybirder -'It's Mamya's fault' - story of my life I'm afraid.

Born with guilt:-)

[naomi24]

Mamyalynne at 18:03. Good.

[ladybirder]

Jno. Thank you thank you thank you for noticing it with our bothering to comment on it. May a thousand blessings be upon you:-)

[andy-hughes]

ummm - //I really wish you's shut up about the 'so' rule. It's your rule...no one elses... //

The day people stop doing it, I will stop mentioning it.

As long as people deliberately see something that is not there, and then criticise the previous poster for something they have not said, I am going to call them on it.

You can ignore it, or comply, I am honestly not bothered which.

[Mamyalynne]

To tidy up what seems to have upset the applecart - I shall rephrase the offending reply.

Should he have refused to answer the direct question and been castigated for that instead?

I don't really require an answer but am ever the one to try and soothe ruffled feathers.