To never want anyone to champion Jack Monroe again?

[SuperScrimper]

After what she has tweeted about David Cameron. here

Like him or loathe him to describe the way he talks about his deceased son as 'misty eyed' and used for political gain is disgusting.

The greatest loss any of us can imagine is the loss of a child. Shock horror, even politician have real feeling. It's just awful that she would say that about another parent.

I don't care what she can do with a bloody lentil. Something's are just too low.

"You really think DC would stoop to those levels?"

Yes.

He has. Several times.

I'm no fan of JM. I'm no socialist. Nonetheless I'm shaking my head in amazement at someone's comment above that she's had "very limited experience of poverty".

What is this? A comment by someone who has no fucking idea of severe, debilitating, petrifying financial hardship themselves or is this a game of "Competitive Poverty"?

Do you, any of you, fancy going where she has? Let me tell you this - you don't. You really, really don't.

Does her "limited experience of poverty" give her no right to an opinion? To distress? To call for change? The woman attempted suicide over it FFS.

Cameron is a disgrace and anyone who can't see it, who can't see what he's doing, worries me to be honest.

And Duh, of course people are discussing his dead son. That's what this fucking thread is about, his alleged misty eyed exploitation of Ivan. Which is nasty bollocks used to support a political agenda (ironic) quite frankly.

If there was an effective leader of the opposition , DC wouldn't be able to 'shut down debate', ffs.

" the posts in support of Jack Monroe have the weakest non arguments ever."

What - pointing out that she's right?

Meech

I just find it funny you think DC is an effective leader. None of the party leaders are ringing endorsements for their parties.

I had no idea who Jack Monroe was when she sent that tweet. Though I do agree with her. Re her losing her contract with Sainsburys...that's no different to the consequences for any other type of employee if they are on a social networking site and are found to have said something the employer doesn't like. So I can't get excited about that.

glad you find it funny.
I'm sure Milliband doesn't.

Chund, it's got everything to do with Milliband. People are accusing Cameron of 'shutting down debate' but he does this literally every fucking day with Milliband because the 'opposition' have somehow forgotten how to oppose. Which is kind of their raison d'etre. Wouldn't you agree? I'd the opposition leader had.any clue how to debate they wouldn't allow any alleged 'shutting down' to happen. They'd pursue the subject relentlessly like Tony Blair (war mongering arse but good in debate) did.

But meechimoo, that means you agree with what Jack Munroe said - that Cameron shuts down debate.

I didn't particularly like her wording, but she is correct in that he shuts down debate on the privitisation of the NHS by using Ivan as a way of saying "don't tell me about the NHS, Ivan was treated by them before he died"

Maybe he was, but I'm dammed sure that Cameron wasn't relying on the NHS as his only support, he didn't even know how hard it was for the parents of disabled children to get adult sized nappies FGS - and when he DID know, he didn't do a damn thing to improve it.

He gets angry about it.
Not just angry. Furious red faced incandescent rage. He shoots back and says how he feels and then the opposition do: NOTHING.Sweet fuck all. That's their choice. But it's not the behaviour or job description of an effective politician. Cameron doesn't shut down debate. Perhaps the opposition fail to keep the debate going. Perhaps they don't understand how to debate? Well, to be fair, we already know this last bit is true. We currently have possibly the least effective opposition leader in recent history. He doesn't oppose anything.

and bollocks that Milliband couldn't have carried on the debate without doing a Monroe and being accused of callousness.
Bollocks.

He's a politician not a food blogger.
If he can't engage in debate on the NHS after Cameron mentions his son, because he's scared or feels 'shut down' he's in the wrong job.

Cameron is able to shut down debate time and again because he is prepared to cynically exploit the death of his son and in the main the people with whom he is debating are better than him (being decent humans instead of disgusting) and refuse to engage with such low tactics. Cameron's behaviour on these occasions is repulsive.

Miliband is in the wrong job

Rabbit, you are wrong.
And how very presumptuous of you to know exactly how Cameron's mind operates. If I believed what you wrote, I'd imagine that DC had a word with himself prior to the debate and thought "I know, I'll just mention Ivans' s name and that will shut the bastards down. I'll make sure I'm so angry the veins on my neck stick out and I'll tell Sam to weep a bit in the audience and that will close those bastards down"
I really don't think that happened and to presume what his intentions are and to presume it was premeditated: that's repulsive.

Miliband could just say that it's his job to debate policy on the NHS on behalf of the whole country. This is a responsibility he takes seriously and he will continue to ask the hard questions.

Meechimoo I agree that Milliband is useless but that isn't the point. The recent example that people have quoted was about a govt minister claiming that disabled people aren't worth the minimum wage. DC was clearly getting flustered so came out with the line that he knows all about looking after disabled people so he didn't want to hear any more about it which had absolutely nothing to do with what they were debating. How could Milliband have carried on challenging him without being accused of being callous?
I think that to be PM, you need to possess a particular kind of ruthlessness which means you'll exploit anything if you think you can turn it to your advantage.
I have never heard a single person claim that DC didn't love his son or genuinely grieve his death. However, it is not incompatible to believe that but also to believe that he uses Ivan's death for political gain or to shut people up.
Losing a child is a tragedy no matter how much money you have. However, as the leader of the country, you cannot use it as some kind of Get out of Jail Free Card to avoid answering legitimate questions about how your policies have adversely affected disabled people.
Wrt the recent thread about this and the multiple deletions, there is a very long thread in site stuff where MNHQ were challenged about their stance on that thread and seemed to be saying that maybe they got it wrong.

The most recent debate which was completely derailed by Cameron's reoulsive behaviour wasn't even about the NHS. It was about whether disabled people are entitled to the minimum wage and whether a government minister with responsibility for that area should say public ally that they aren't. The minister was sacked/resigned. But Cameron ducked debate about it by raising the issue of his dead child. Which had NOTHING to do with the issue. I believe that there may even now, some years down the line and with the NHS in a very different position (crippled) as a result of Cameron's subsequent campaign to destroy it, be some point to him raising the fact that he is not unfamiliar with the way things were under a properly funded NHS in appropriate debates. But he often raises the issue when it is both irrelevant and inappropriate.

I'm not wrong. And I certainly don't understand how Cameron's mind works, I can't imagine how a human being could be so disgusting as to behave the way he has. And his wife wasn't 'in the audience'at PMQs. I don't think you are even familiar with the situation most of us are referencing, from your posts. Perhaps you should educate yourself a little? Cameron uses the death of his child as a get out of jail free card and it is vile and unseemly.

Have heard rumours that Sainsbury's have dropped Munroe. If that's the case then I'm dropping Sainsbury's.

Oh quit with the patronising superiority rabbit. We both know DC has mentioned Ivan in a number of debates and speeches. I referenced the one where Sam wept in the audience. But you knew that.

Whatever Cameron does or doesn't do - the truth is that there needs to be an effective opposition.

Honestly why does no one ever stand up and say that the issue is bigger than DCs personal trauma , that it's too important to the people who have elected them and who pay their salary, to refuse to debate it?

I wish Miliband would show some flipping backbone

Someone mentioned that JM attempted suicide. How do we know this? Because she chose to put it out there.

NO fan of DC tbh, but her tweet sits uncomfortable with me for some reason.

The backlash against her is rather extreme though, so I have sympathy there.

Mixed feelings still.

I think AndyWarhol and Rabbit are both absolutely right. I'm sure Cameron loved Ivan and I'm equally sure he's exploiting his death to shut down debate.

I think perhaps the reason people were upset at Jack Monroe's tweet was her use of the term "misty-eyed" which implied he wasn't sincere in his grief. She could probably have come up with a better phrasing - but that's the perils of Twitter, unfortunately.

But of course one unfortunate phrasing and now the full guns of the Daily Mail are trained on her and people on Twitter are hoping her child dies. Vast over-reaction based on hurt feelings appears to have replaced any semblance of rational debate.