“Lord Hailsham: But to try to turn it into a party issue, is really beyond belief contemptible.
Robert McKenzie: Do you feel that the others that have spoken out, the Bishops, The Times and so on, have tried to turn it into a party issue?
Hailsham: I think you have!”

—  Quintin Hogg, Baron Hailsham of St Marylebone

Conclusion of the same interview.

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Lord Hailsham: But to try to turn it into a party issue, is really beyond belief contemptible. Robert McKenzie: Do you…" by Quintin Hogg, Baron Hailsham of St Marylebone?
Quintin Hogg, Baron Hailsham of St Marylebone photo
Quintin Hogg, Baron Hailsham of St Marylebone8
British judge, politician, life peer and Cabinet minister 1907–2001

Related quotes

Walter Cronkite photo

“I have never voted a party line.I vote on the individual and the issues.”

Walter Cronkite (1916–2009) American broadcast journalist

Free the Airwaves! (2002)

“In fact, an information theory that leaves out the issue of noise turns out to have no content.”

Hans Christian von Baeyer (1938) American physicist

Source: Information, The New Language of Science (2003), Chapter 13, Electric Information, From Morse to Shannon, p. 121

“I could not in good conscience vote for a party that thinks protecting the most vulnerable people in society, those who are yet to be born, issues around euthanasia, other pro-life issues and indeed generally people who have a faith and want to practice it, I couldn't vote for a party that thinks that is somehow incompatible with the modern world.”

Rob Flello (1966) British politician (born 1966)

Source: 'This is blatant discrimination': Christian politician deselected by Lib Dems says it was because of abortion and gay marriage views https://premierchristian.news/en/news/article/this-is-blatant-discrimination-christian-politician-deselected-by-lib-dems-says-it-was-because-of-abortion-and-gay-marriage-views (13 November 2019)

Jacinda Ardern photo

“I preside over a government that is made up of three independent parties who have built consensus around the issues we will collectively pursue. The fact that we will work together collaboratively does not diminish the identities of those parties. There are a number of reasons why confidence and supply is a form of arrangement that will suit the needs of particular parties and why others will prefer coalition. I have no trouble, and I do not question my role or authority simply by allowing a party to speak to that issue themselves.”

Jacinda Ardern (1980) Prime Minister of New Zealand

On why the Greens are outside of cabinet.
Interview with Lisa Owen at Newshub Nation, 21 October 2017

Paul LePage photo

“It's really one thing to have one party behind you, it's another thing not to have any party behind you.”

Paul LePage (1948) American businessman, Republican Party politician, and the 74th Governor of Maine

In a radio interview. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/us/paul-lepage-maine-governor.html (August 31, 2016)

“Measuring people and issues in terms of political parties has turned out to be philosophically fallacious if not totally misleading. This is because the platforms or positions of political parties are often superficial and structured on shifting sand. The platform of a political party of one generation can hardly be recognized by the next. Furthermore, Communism and Fascism turned out to be different names for approximately the same thing ~ the police state. They are not opposite extremes but, for all practical purposes, are virtually identical.”

W. Cleon Skousen (1913–2006) ex FBI agent, conservative United States author and faith-based political theorist

The 5,000 Year Leap (1981)

Ann Coulter photo

“I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word "faggot", so I — so kind of an impasse — can't really talk about Edwards.”

Ann Coulter (1961) author, political commentator

Speech at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, Washington, DC (2 March 2007), as quoted in &quot;Coulter&#x27;s Slur Against Edwards Stirs Outrage&quot; at WNBC (4 March 2007) http://www.wnbc.com/politics/11168421/detail.html?rss=ny&amp;psp=news. <br class="br">2007

“It takes time, see. You finish painting the painting and then you turn it to the wall. I mean, you say, does it have it or doesn't it have it? If it doesn't have it, you throw it away, but if you think it has it, you turn it to the wall. And then when you have made some more work, then you turn them all over. And you, again, try to see exactly what it does mean and just exactly how effectively you have rendered this meaning.”

Agnes Martin (1912–2004) American artist

1974
1970's, interview, K. Horsfield & L. Blumenthal

Katharine Hepburn photo

“I don't feel the slightest interest in the next world; I think it's here. And I think anything good that you're going to do, you should do for other people here and not so you can try to have a happy time in the next world.”

Katharine Hepburn (1907–2003) film, stage, and television actress

Noam Chomsky photo

“The only question is how coalitions of investors have shifted around on tactical issues now and then. As they do, the parties shift to opposite positions, within a narrow spectrum.”

Noam Chomsky (1928) american linguist, philosopher and activist

Quotes 1990s, 1990-1994, Interview by Adam Jones, 1990
Context: In the United States, the political system is a very marginal affair. There are two parties, so-called, but they're really factions of the same party, the Business Party. Both represent some range of business interests. In fact, they can change their positions 180 degrees, and nobody even notices. In the 1984 election, for example, there was actually an issue, which often there isn't. The issue was Keynesian growth versus fiscal conservatism. The Republicans were the party of Keynesian growth: big spending, deficits, and so on. The Democrats were the party of fiscal conservatism: watch the money supply, worry about the deficits, et cetera. Now, I didn't see a single comment pointing out that the two parties had completely reversed their traditional positions. Traditionally, the Democrats are the party of Keynesian growth, and the Republicans the party of fiscal conservatism. So doesn't it strike you that something must have happened? Well, actually, it makes sense. Both parties are essentially the same party. The only question is how coalitions of investors have shifted around on tactical issues now and then. As they do, the parties shift to opposite positions, within a narrow spectrum.

Related topics