Page 96 of 97

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:50 pm
by Kreuzberger
crabcakes_windermere wrote:Because she says some mad stuff? Dictionary definition of mad:

(of behaviour or an idea): foolish, not sensible.
(informal): very angry

So when Mel says she thinks Ed Miliband is vile for not sucking up to Israel and showing concern for disproportionate action, she's saying something that's not sensible. Ergo, her nickname fits perfectly. She's angry and says things that aren't sensible.
Which is fair enough as would be a definition of mild temporary irrationality, ("Next door's dug is driving me mad."), but that isn't the meaning being used by Fenton and parroted on here, as Abernathy pointed out a fair few pages ago.

"Not just barking but half way to Upminster". It doesn't really get any clearer than that.
crabcakes_windermere wrote: I intent to tackle the problem by simply referring to her in future as shitbag philips.
An excellent solution! :)

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:55 pm
by Big Rob
I certainly have moments when I can be classed as barking fucking mad, which my wife gives me no sympathy for.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:07 pm
by The Red Arrow
Still at it. Mr Fenton's taken a comment on board, too.

Monday, 11 August 2014
Mel Says Killing 400 Children Is Humane
http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... umane.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 2:03 pm
by Kreuzberger
The Red Arrow wrote:Still at it. Mr Fenton's taken a comment on board, too.

Monday, 11 August 2014
Mel Says Killing 400 Children Is Humane
http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... umane.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Bloody 'hell. That first Anon comment wasn't me, either!

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 2:29 pm
by crabcakes_windermere
Should anyone care, it was me.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:05 pm
by Gentlefish
A bit late to this discussion due to being away for a week, but I've always felt uneasy about that particular nickname. Sadly it is short, punchy and alliterative so it sticks in the memory. Still think that it is worth avoiding though. Shitbag Philips definitely works for me! Especially since I can't think of anything more pithy (a quick attempt at thinking up an alternative produced nothing better than 'Melevolent" which is, well, pretty bloody awful).
crabcakes_windermere wrote:Should anyone care, it was me.
I care! Good on yer.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 4:10 pm
by Kreuzberger
+1

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 1:06 am
by The Weeping Angel
Remember according to Mel if you oppose Israel your a Nazi

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... nazis.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:17 pm
by Gentlefish
Yes, I saw that. I think that she is reaching that point where she is basically worth ignoring. She's lost her job multiple times now (I know that the Spectator have rehired her but I can't see it lasting long). She is like Burchill: too much trouble to publish even as a bit of clickbait.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 10:51 pm
by The Weeping Angel
Jewish leaders who talk about peace are stupid according to angry Mel.

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... tupid.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:02 am
by crabcakes_windermere
Now that was just an absurd piece of work (Mel, not Zelo Street). Actually *opposing* peace and declarations that ordinary people want no part of the politically-motivated skirmishes.

This is the problem with ever-escalating rhetoric. Like Fox News, it rapidly becomes ridiculous unless you never step outside the bubble it exists in. And as soon as you do (or if you've always been outside in the first place), you see quite how ridiculous it is. Hell, even Glenn Beck seems to have realised he was coming out with some proper batshit stuff now he's off of Fox News. Shame Mel's frequent departures from various news organisations haven't led to a similar moment of clarity.

She's not mad. She's just in dire need of a reboot.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 8:44 pm
by Bones McCoy
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brita ... -vnf0c8nhx

Wingnut Welfare - where you never get sanctioned.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 1:26 pm
by karlt
She was on Moral Maze earlier in the week regarding virtue signalling. She was effectively running rings round people simply because they were assuming she was debating in good faith rather than playing blatant Bait and Switch. The funniest thing was when she was complaining that "leftists" think "left wing positions" are more moral than right wing ones. Well, duh, if "leftists" didn't think their positions were morally superior to right wing ones (e.g. egalitarianism is preferable to racism, people not being left to starve is superior to people being left to starve to death) then they wouldn't be on the left. She implied that she doesn't think right-wing positions are morally superior (ironically making a frankly barking claim to moral superiority because she doesn't think she's morally superior*). So on what basis does she actually advocate for them then?

*My brain hurts. Her thinking is like a corkscrew.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 1:43 pm
by Andy McDandy
There's a saying along the lines of "Don't play checkers when your opponent's playing chess". In the current climate I think that should be amended to "Don't play chess if your opponent's playing pie fight, because all that'll happen is you'll wear yourself out coming up with a strategy nobody but you will appreciate while they repeatedly hit you in the face with pies".

I kind of get her argument - in claiming I have moral superiority, I may be making so much noise about it that I forget to do anything moral while someone quietly plodding along does more good without really thinking too hard about it. But what she's actually doing is what my signature suggests - prove your opponents wrong (or tie them in such knots that some backtracking or compromise is inevitable) and then claim victory because they've just backtracked or contradicted themselves.

It's a bit like Sarah Palin in 2008 - promise nothing and then two years later when under Obama's leadership the world is not (surprise, surprise) perfect because things fucking happen castigate him for building up peoples' hopes. Or Trump. Or Cameron. Or May. Do/argue nothing positive, just point out your opponents' weaknesses. And in Mel's case, collect the appearance fee anyway.

Re: Melanie Philips

Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:33 pm
by youngian
Mad Mel doesn't like empiricism or realpolitik either. Watch her virtue signal about Israel's interests and human rights in Iran when Obama was practising detente with the aforementioned country. As there is no evidence that Brexit can raise living standards that was one whole round of virtue signalling nativism and self-righteous egotism.