Kennedy resigns ... but so what?

[Fungus]

I think his problem is in part that he lacks gravitas. He's too likeable and the sort of person you could have a chat with at the local boozer.

I think that the reason why the Lib Dems did well at the last election was that the public was disillusionned with New Lier. But they could not bring themselves to vote Tory and so they opted for the 'politics-llite' brand instead. I think that some Liberals think that they should have done much better than they did given the distrust of Blair and the anger over the Iraq war (which the Tories supported).

Another problem with the Liberals is that no-one knows what they stand for. They know that they host comedy quiz shows well. But what else? 50% tax is all I can think of.

I'm not sure that the way they got rid of Kennedy has done them much good.

Fungus

[Churchill]

Based on personal experience, the Lib-Dems do seem to be quite good at "micro/local" politics... Not quite sure how they'd perform running the country, and not too sure if they'll ever get the chance!

[xoggoth]

Maybe that's no bad thing. Far too much decided by remote central governments that should be decided at local level. But is it still true? I was rather under the impression (what I have read, no personal experience) that the Liberal party establishment has somewhat abandoned the local participation theme, that Kennedy was rather autocratic.

[privateeye]

His illness my friend is entirely self induced. He does not have cancer for example - and you my friend are trying to put alcoholism on the same level as those who suffer from illness through no fault of their own.

Shows how little you know and how judgemental you are about something you know nothing about - which the same can be said about most of society on this issue. Alcoholism runs in my family - it is genetic and has been proven scientifically to be a fact. Becoming an Alcoholic is not self-induced but knowing you are and not doing anything about it is a different story. You will probably find that some of the most powerful and respected people in the world are recoverring acloholics - they just have not made it public due to the social stigma attached and you have justified why they should remain secret about it.

Try reading http://www.qis.net/~truth/t_h_i_q_.htm as an example then maybe do a google on THIQ and you will find that lots of medical research concludes that becoming an alcoholic is not self-induced but a genetic fact.

Will I be kicked off this board because alcoholism runs in my family now?

[BobTheCrate]

What the public saw of Kennedy, obviously was far, far different to what his fellow MPs did - at least 30 of those that worked with him anyway.

They obviously felt his alcoholism did impact his job.

Whether it did effect his job or not is neither here nor there. How could he continue when so many had threatened to either resign themselves or not work with him after Monday - whatever their motivation ?

[BobTheCrate]

With respect to your own experiences privateeye, I'm not persuaded enough by the studies you quote.

I have no difficulty in acknowledging genetics has a significant effect. But genetics has a significant effect on an enormous amount of our behaviour. Criminality for example, sexual deviation/violence another, uncontrolled gambling yet another. We each have to try living our lives within the parameters of our own genetics and take personal responsibility as and when we drift over the edge.

To say alcoholism is self induced sounds heartless and perhaps it is - but that does not necessarily invalidate the accusation in totality.

[privateeye]

With respect to your own experiences privateeye, I'm not persuaded enough by the studies you quote.

That is one of the main problems, dispite it being scientific fact it just gets brushed aside by the general public. The big problem we have is that most people think that everyone should be like them and because they can drink and get away with they will not accept that someone else can't. If someone decided not to drink you can be sure that others will try and manipulate them to do so that is why I'm so full of praise for those that don't drink - they have far more strength than anyone down the pub who is just weak enough to follow the crowd.

To say alcoholism is self induced sounds heartless and perhaps it is - but that does not necessarily invalidate the accusation in totality.

Very true, the point at which a person knows he is an alcoholic he is entirely responsible as there are several avenues for them to do something about it. Prior to the point that someone actually knows they are an alcoholic then although still entirely responsible for their actions I think there is a level of "diminished responsibilty" for want of a better term. It does not excuse them for example if they are involved in crime and I don't think they should get treated any more leniently because of it but there is more chance of rehabilitating someone if the real problem is recognised saving re-occurrence etc. Brushing it off as self-inflicted certainly has not worked.

[Mordac]

>You will probably find that some of the most powerful and respected people in the world are recoverring acloholics

George W Bush for example.

>He's too likeable and the sort of person you could have a chat with at the local boozer.

Quite a long chat by the sound of things...

[AtW]

>You will probably find that some of the most powerful and respected people in the world are recoverring acloholics

George W Bush for example.

He is not a decision maker - his advisors are real people who run USA, just like in Russia Eltsin's advisors run it, do you want the same for the UK? An alchogolic in a high position is a major security risk too.

[Mordac]

He's not respected much either.