Comments by "Cinderball" (@cinderball1135) on "Dominic Cummings says he 'behaved reasonably' after making two lockdown trips" video.

  1. I can just hear the clattering of the apologists' keyboards, and I want to get in ahead of them this time. - Excuse: He was afraid that he might fall ill and be unable to care for his child! Problem: So were countless other families who did not expose outsiders to the virus by undertaking 260 mile journeys at the height of the lockdown. - Excuse: What he breached was just guidance - not a law! Problem: The lockdown rules were set in place by Parliament. Sure, the punishment for violation is just a fine, but a law's a law. - Excuse: There was no clear rule for what he should do in his situation. Problem: Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives. - Excuse: Oh come off it, it's not like he killed anyone! Problem: Not for want of trying! He travelled 260 miles with symptoms in the family, to be closer to elderly relatives! The highest risk group for dying of Covid-19! - Excuse: Well it's not like the journalists covering this story are any better... Problem: They're not serving in Number 10. Cummings is. - If any of the above covers what you were about to say, please kindly save yourself the embarrassment.
    14
  2. And yet I am very much not entertained.
    8
  3. Mobilise the sockpuppets! We'll get this astroturf hashtag trending yet!
    7
  4. Telling the truth? Heaven above, somebody stop them already! Think of the children!
    6
  5. Nice try mate. The guidance that Lefties (like me) have been calling unclear is the new advice: Stay Alert. The guidance in place in April, when Cummings made his little adventure to the North, was by contrast very clear: Stay Home. I can only assume that you believe the readers in this comment section are goldfish.
    6
  6.  Brother Spartacus  Dominic Cummings is a senior member of the government, and had a hand in shaping these rules. We should be able to expect a higher standard of people in his position, so no, a fine will not suffice for him.
    3
  7.  @asyouwere553  What were the special circumstances here, that did not apply to hundreds of other families in the UK that did not make long journeys to stay with elderly relatives? Edit: also, "Goldfish" was my insult. Get your own material, you unoriginable twerp.
    3
  8. God save us all from King Dominic I.
    2
  9. ​ Brother Spartacus  When you can't answer the question, attack the person asking it - it's a tactic so desperate it almost does more damage to the person using it. Not that I had much respect for you to start with.
    2
  10.  Brother Spartacus  There appears to be no concept, no matter how straightforward, that you cannot fail to comprehend.
    2
  11.  Brother Spartacus  I think what I want is for you to kindly stop replying to me with these oafish, limp-wristed comebacks. It's kind of embarrassing to watch.
    2
  12.  Brother Spartacus  Non sequitur - when you quote a fact or statistic which is true, but has no bearing on the conversation.
    1
  13.  Brother Spartacus  Your "argument"? Don't flatter yourself.
    1
  14.  Brother Spartacus  Lol. I presume that was your internal monologue leaking out, because it certainly doesn't seem to pertain to anything said in the above thread so far. :)
    1
  15. ​ Brother Spartacus  I don't suppose there's anything I can say that will persuade you to stop with the childish "GOTCHA" comments - so here, have this tacky, worthless trophy. I hope it validates your small, small existence. Meanwhile, I'm going to find something more important to do.
    1
  16.  Brother Spartacus  Yes. Senior members of the government should set a better example - I would expect a Police Commissioner not to drink and drive, for example - but I would not expect a McDonald's worker to be sacked for the same offence. This is a concept known as "context" - have you heard of it?
    1
  17.  Brother Spartacus  Just because you treat two people differently does not make it a "double standard", you oaf. Otherwise, it would be a double-standard that we don't throw innocent people into jail, along with the criminals. Kindly get off the internet before you embarrass yourself any further. :)
    1
  18.  Brother Spartacus  Spartacus, go and have a lie down. You're repeating yourself, and what's more disturbing, you're repeating me. I don't think you're quite well. Perhaps you can reflect on the idea that some jobs come with greater responsibility than others. Unless you need me to explain the concept of responsibility to you as well?
    1
  19.  Brother Spartacus  Believe me, that some nutjob rightwinger misappropriating academic terms would start an interminable "debate" at me on a C4 comment section is hardly surprising.
    1