Skip to main content

Captain Ska



Obviously it would send a powerful message if this was number 1 at Xmas. 79p from itunes and profit goes to charity. Search "Liar liar" ska.

[P.S. I don't endorse every line of the song btw - it is a bit of hyperbole, obviously.]

Comments

Anonymous said…
"If you vote to the left and they turn to the right,/ Then it's your duty to put up a fight."

I'm sorry, but what were the Lib Dems supposed to have done? Gone into coalition with Labour, even though they still wouldn't have formed a majority? Stayed out of power, and condemned Britain to weak minority government when she most needed strong government?

Nick Clegg always said that he'd form a coalition with the party with the strongest mandate. In terms of both votes cast and seats won, that was clearly the Tories. Are you suggesting that he should have broken his promise and not went into government with them? That would be somewhat ironic in a video calling Clegg a liar.

One final thing: lots of people seem to be upset at the idea of the Lib Dems going into coalition with the Tories. If they were only allowed to coalesce with left-wing parties, they would essentially become a subdivision of the Labour Party. That being the case, why not just vote for Labour in the first place and stop splitting the left-wing vote?
December 15, 2010 at 11:09 AM
Tim Stephenson said…
"University students will incur debts for tuition fees of up to £30,000 ensuring only the elite can access education"

Who is doing the lying here? I come from one of the poorest areas in the country and was listening to the Labour Hull North MP on the radio today. She said that she had been speaking to a father on a council estate in her constituency who had told her that he had hoped his son could go to university but was now worried that he would not be able to afford it. The interviewer sensibly pointed out that the man's son would only have to start paying the money back, very slowly, if he obtained a good job (£21,000 is good for Hull - but it's cheap to live) on graduating, so he would be able to afford it.
Also, perhaps you should have a philosophical discussion about what a lie actually consists of.
December 15, 2010 at 7:50 PM
Stephen Law said…
I don't endorse every line of the song btw - it is a bit of hyperbole, obviously.
December 15, 2010 at 10:18 PM
said…
Now this would send a more powerfully meaningless message.
http://www.soundlift.com/band/music.php?song_id=82930
That has been #1 @ Omas, highest was #2 most recently past December, BUT only @ Sound Lift.

Stay on groovin' safari,
Tor
January 5, 2011 at 11:02 AM
said…
Well, Prof. Law, since it's highly unlikely moi’ll ever surf back into your blog, I may as well give you me wee take, a la musical parody, me wee take on The Truth concerning God/Devil thingys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m6qC6FCiY0

Stay on groovin' safari,
Tor
January 5, 2011 at 11:06 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...
159 comments
Read more

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...
446 comments
Read more

Sye show continues

I was sent a link to this , for those interested in the never ending saga of Sye TenBruggencate and his "proof" of the existence of God. Hit "sinner ministries' proof of the existence of god" link below or on side bar for 30+ earlier posts on this topic that I wrote during an extended interchange with him last summer (check the literally many hundreds of comments attached to these posts if you really want to get into how Sye thinks and argues). Sye's amazing intial "proof" is available here . PS. For those interested, my own "presuppositional" proof, parodying Sye's proof by his principle "the impossibility of the contrary" (which turns out to be the key to Sye's proof) is: My claim: Sye's mind is addled and his thinking unreliable because he was hit on the head by a rock. Prove this is false, Sye. Try to, and I will say - "But your "proof" presupposes your mind is not addled and you can recognise a pr...
250 comments
Read more