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.

The thing is, I'd be perfectly happy if this was a thread about not championing Jack because of her 'recipes'. I'd be agreeing. What has annoyed me is that she said a perfectly accurate, reasonable and decidedly NOT original thing (she repeated a criticism which has been made many many times) and the rabid right-wing Rottweiler brigade have jumped on her in an entirely predictable but still despicable way, because they are all acting as their leader does - deflect deflect shut down insult (and display lack of comprehension and language skills). Sarah Vine's disgusting article is just one example among many.

When you see people posting things like 'I employ lots of MW people and I would never employ her' you know which side of the debate is right and which stinks.

Having money absolutely does 'magic up services'

Yes rabbit. She said what most people on this thread have said: that Cameron invokes the ghost of Ivan to close down debate on his policies.

I don't know whether he does this by accident or design, but whatever the reason, I think he should stop.

It would be useful if the people condemning Monroe for her use of language, should take her out of the equation and address the point of this thread.

Do you think Cameron uses Ivan to shut down debate?

I do and so do many others. We have referenced occasions.

But if you don't, can you explain why?

And if you admit he does that, for entirely innocent reasons, do you think he should stop?

I asked this earlier, but the person didn't address it. Maybe she missed it. I'm not that important.

But, anyway: Do you?

I think he uses Ivan's story as part of debate. He is entitled to do that. Gordon Brown did the same. I don't think it 'shuts down' debate - how would that even work? It would only work if you could silence your opposition - which Cameron cannot.

Bereaved parents are entitled to get 'misty eyed' when talking about their deceased children.

Gordon Brown did not do anything of the sort. I know parents of kids with CF who would have been very pleased if he had taken the opportunity to highlight issues surrounding CF care etc but he never mentioned either his daughter or his son.

I don't believe you seriously think shouting 'I don't want to hear any more about that' is contributing to debate??? Especially when the debate in which they have raised the issue of their bereavement has nothing to do with either bereavement or caring for a sick child but is about the employment rights of disabled adults.

Gordon brown talked about his daughter and the NHS when campaigning in Scotland recently and when he was PM

Rabbit

You're wrong

Gordon Brown did talk about his daughter - albeit not while he was PM I alsmost dont want to post the link but to set the record straight:

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1189311/The-day-Jennifer-died-Gordon-Brown-speaks-heartwrenching-candour-pain-losing-baby-girl.html

I don't know why you continue to defend a vile woman who gains publicity from the human misery of others.

He doesn't deny her existence when questioned about her. His approach has been vastly different to Cameron's. This blog puts it much better than I ever could sturdyblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/we-need-to-talk-about-ivan/ and note - the blog was written two years ago. There have been loads more incidents since the blog was written.

I'm with the writer - Cameron's behaviour is distasteful and immoral and it's as good a reason as any (and a better reason than some) to think that he should go. Jack Monroe was spot on.

I don't know why YOU continue to defend a vile man who is cynically exploiting the death of his child in order to pursue reprehensible policies.

Unless you agree with his policies of course.

there is nothing wrong with DC ,Brown or anyone talking about the loss of their child. or talking about their greif.

but the PM using it to shut down debate about important matters is.
I do not understand why people struggle with that.
talking about all subjects is part of his job, he can not cherry pick them, and he should never use his loss to do it.

People aren't struggling with anything. they just don't agree.

You do love to sink low don't you Rabbit, suggesting I am defending Cameron because I like his policies when, if you had bothered to look, you would have seen that I explicitly stated on this thread that I don't share his political views. In fact I am a card carrying member of a different political party. that doesn't stop me having basic human feelings towards another human being.

And if you want yo focus on immoral acts, then Jack Monroes taunting of a bereaved father is just about as low as you can sink

I do not understand why people struggle with that.

It's because it's a highly effective tactic, sufficiently so that posters here are actually unaware of the way in which they've been manipulated. This thread is testament to how effective it has been.

and what exactly has Glenda Jackson contributed during this Parliament?. I was just surprised to remember she's still alive.

JM clearly wasn't taunting anyone. The only immoral act I can see is pretending that she was in order to score a political point. That's a nasty accusation which you have made repeatedly even though anyone with the meanest comprehension skills could see that it's completely unfounded.

Nauticant It's very sad.

Well - that's a bit of a non sequitor. I don't know what Glenda Jackson has contributed.

Gordon Brown spoke about Jennifer in the context of Scottish nationalism and I am not sure that was wise.

But we're not principally talking about Gordon Brown or Ed Miliband, are we?

We're talking about Cameron and his habit of angrily shutting down debate about his govt's policies, whether intentionally or not, by invoking the memory of Ivan.

I think this is disgraceful whatever the motivation.

He should know what this is an underhand debating tactic. If, he doesn't, then he should be told by his side.

If he doesn't take that on board then I wonder about his and their fitness for government.

BTW. I watched PMQs today and really wanted Miliband to bring it up. He didn't but scored some points.

No way Miliband would bring this up, at PMQs or anywhere else, and that is point - no one in parliament has been able to challenge Cameron on his use of Ivan in this way because it would be too incendiary and the press would have a field day.

Hopefully now JM has put it out there it will have given Cameron pause for thought.

All of you who think Jack Monroe should be sacked for words she said on twitter, which happen to be true - do you also think David Cameron should be sacked for making life more difficult for disabled people and their carers, and for using the memory of his lost son to try and shut people up when they point this out?

Well I hope sainsburys do sack her what a vile human being

Reallyraltheraffe?

They are an employer, obviously on a bigger scale than you, but an employer nonetheless.

This thing has undoubtedly embarrassed them and they've done nothing to provoke it.

In that respect, as an employer, I'd expect you to feel sympathy for them.

But you are implying that you'd make a stand, perhaps even break contract law over this rather than thinking:

'Oh fuck. What's happened here? Can we put out a damage-limitation statement and not renew her contract?'

Are you really expecting Sainsbury's to renege on a contract? Would you do that? That would be unwise.

I think Monroe was entitled to say what she did. I also think Sainsbury's are entitled to deal with her contract as they see fit within the law.

I think you are being silly on several counts.

It entirely depends on the terms and conditions of her contract with them. I have the power to take my employees down the disciplinary route if I feel they have brought my company into disrepute. If they are over 2 years service I would not be able to sack them as it is serious misconduct not gross misconduct. If they are short term I would do a probationary dismissal.

Archery I do not think what she has said about dc is true. You say it is and I disagree

I think Bobolaw said it all really. Maybe Jack Munroe was just voicing what others don't want to.

Losing a child, despite the horror of it, does not make you immune from criticism in your professional life and David Camerons professional life involves cutting the NHS he often refers to in relation to his son.