Waaay OT: Brown - what am I missing?

always_tyred

In a rare piece of honesty, a politician has branded an ignorant bigot an ignorant bigot for appearing to blame pretty much all of the woes of the nation on Eastern Europeans, and the politician is being crucified for it.

What am I missing here? The woman essentially said, "Pensions, blah, blah, tax, blah blah, tuition fees - and what about 'em eastern Europeans - and the deficit, blah..."

Go back a couple of steps - please could someone fill in the steps between tax policy and them Eastern Europeans? Why isn't ANYONE in the press pointing out that GB was in fact correct? If you substitute "Indians, "Jews" or any other minority into her rant, its clearly bigoted.

Is is okay 'cos they is white?

Is it okay because so many people think that way and they all vote?

You'll note that the other parties are being very quiet about this and aren't exactly supporting this poor lady.

always_tyred

Paging DDD....

will3

Possibly the:
to her face: nice to meet you etc etc
behind her back: awfull bigot etc etc

Why would you believe anything he ever says?

cjw

Always Tyred wrote:

Why isn't ANYONE in the press pointing out that GB was in fact correct?

Two words....

Rupert Murdock

DonDaddyD

I think you are right, it's a shame Gordon doesn't have the testicular fortitude to simply stand up and say "yeah an'wot biatch is a bigot yo!"*

*Adjust syntax, dialect, grammar to your liking.

Edit: I don't think Gordon did anything wrong, he constructively answered her questions and then in privacy aired his private view of her personally. 'Pillar of professionalism' if you ask me.

kelsen

will3 wrote:

Possibly the:
to her face: nice to meet you etc etc
behind her back: awfull bigot etc etc

Why would you believe anything he ever says?

He isn't exactly going to call her a bigot to her face is he?

always_tyred

will3 wrote:

Possibly the:
to her face: nice to meet you etc etc
behind her back: awfull bigot etc etc

Why would you believe anything he ever says?

Cyclist gets cut up by driver - says, "w@nker" under their breath.

What a two faced liar for not telling the motorist exactly what they thought.

In answer - (a) so what, and (b) that's precisely the gloss you have been told to take from the story and under no circumstances consider for yourself whether it is in any way realistic, given that he did in fact disagree with her at the time, politely, to expect him to call her a bigot to her face and end up in a stand up row.

gtvlusso

It's not bullying if they can't hear you.......

UndercoverElephant

gtvlusso wrote:

It's not bullying if they can't hear you.......

Is it bullying if it is, in fact, true?

always_tyred

DonDaddyD wrote:

I think you are right, it's a shame Gordon doesn't have the testicular fortitude to simply stand up and say "yeah an'wot biatch is a bigot yo!"*

*Adjust syntax, dialect, grammar to your liking.

Edit: I don't think Gordon did anything wrong, he constructively answered her questions and then in privacy aired his private view of her personally. 'Pillar of professionalism' if you ask me.

He did do something wrong. He went back to apologise. He didn't stand up for himself and explain why she was a bigot.

always_tyred

gtvlusso wrote:

It's not bullying if they can't hear you.......

If you are in politics and you are bothered by "bullying", you are in the wrong profession, surely?

It would be like Peter Schmeichel complaining that people kept kicking a ball in his face.

will3

Always Tyred wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I think you are right, it's a shame Gordon doesn't have the testicular fortitude to simply stand up and say "yeah an'wot biatch is a bigot yo!"*

*Adjust syntax, dialect, grammar to your liking.

Edit: I don't think Gordon did anything wrong, he constructively answered her questions and then in privacy aired his private view of her personally. 'Pillar of professionalism' if you ask me.

He did do something wrong. He went back to apologise. He didn't stand up for himself and explain why she was a bigot.

Precisiely.
To add to my previous post

Possibly the:
to her face: nice to meet you etc etc
behind her back: awfull bigot etc etc
to her face/on radio etc: I didn't mean it really

Why would you believe anything he ever says?

W1

He's proven himself to be two faced.

It's another example of the general arrogance of the MPs in power.

But the worst thing about it all was not that he called her a bigot, but that he complained that she was "put" in front of him at all - proving completely what a show and a sham all this "meet the people" nonsense is.

You can see the agony on his face as he smiles. He doesn't want to, but his PR team have spent months making him look understanding and friendly. And he's proved that he's neither.

Time to get them out. Please.

asprilla

Must admit, I've not seen the whole of the discussion, but I got the impression that she wasn't blaming the poor economy, etc on Eastern Europeans, but was just raising the subject that immigration was an issue, just in a slightly less than articulate way.

Not sure how that makes her a bigot, but then I don't read the Guardian any more.

I could be wrong though, it has been known.

always_tyred

W1 wrote:

He's proven himself to be two faced.

It's another example of the general arrogance of the MPs in power.

But the worst thing about it all was not that he called her a bigot, but that he complained that she was "put" in front of him at all - proving completely what a show and a sham all this "meet the people" nonsense is.

You can see the agony on his face as he smiles. He doesn't want to, but his PR team have spent months making him look understanding and friendly. And he's proved that he's neither.

Time to get them out. Please.

Is there a party you would vote for without a PR team, which aren't a tad two faced and who don't stage manage TV appearances?

Please let me know and I'll see if there is a candidate local to me.

mickbrown

Always Tyred wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

It's not bullying if they can't hear you.......

If you are in politics and you are bothered by "bullying", you are in the wrong profession, surely?

It would be like Peter Schmeichel complaining that people kept kicking a ball in his face.

Indeed.

Frankly I'd be disappointed if Brown didn't slam some snotty minister up against a wall every now and again.

always_tyred

Asprilla wrote:

Must admit, I've not seen the whole of the discussion, but I got the impression that she wasn't blaming the poor economy, etc on Eastern Europeans, but was just raising the subject that immigration was an issue, just in a slightly less than articulate way.

Not sure how that makes her a bigot, but then I don't read the Guardian any more.

I could be wrong though, it has been known.

That's very charitable, but my read was that she was just very "human" in the sense that things are not right with the world.... who is there to blame?

This month's acceptable persecution target is Polish! Yay - victimless discrimination!

gtvlusso

Always Tyred wrote:

W1 wrote:

He's proven himself to be two faced.

It's another example of the general arrogance of the MPs in power.

But the worst thing about it all was not that he called her a bigot, but that he complained that she was "put" in front of him at all - proving completely what a show and a sham all this "meet the people" nonsense is.

You can see the agony on his face as he smiles. He doesn't want to, but his PR team have spent months making him look understanding and friendly. And he's proved that he's neither.

Time to get them out. Please.

Is there a party you would vote for without a PR team, which aren't a tad two faced and who don't stage manage TV appearances?

Please let me know and I'll see if there is a candidate local to me.

I believe Lord Buckethead was incorruptable and had very little PR - Think he stood for Westminster or something!

W1

Always Tyred wrote:

W1 wrote:

He's proven himself to be two faced.

It's another example of the general arrogance of the MPs in power.

But the worst thing about it all was not that he called her a bigot, but that he complained that she was "put" in front of him at all - proving completely what a show and a sham all this "meet the people" nonsense is.

You can see the agony on his face as he smiles. He doesn't want to, but his PR team have spent months making him look understanding and friendly. And he's proved that he's neither.

Time to get them out. Please.

Is there a party you would vote for without a PR team, which aren't a tad two faced and who don't stage manage TV appearances?

Please let me know and I'll see if there is a candidate local to me.

Eeveryone now knows it's not labour.

I think it's fair to say that Cameron has been approached and spoken to a number of "contrary" people on his walkabouts - including someone trying to make him into an omlette. If that is being staged managed, either is a massive double bluff or they're not very good. None of that, of course, detracts from Brown being found out. The mask slips on him once again.

el_presidente

Whether you like it or not, immigration is a big issue for a lot of voters in this country. It is a fact that Labour have presided over an increase iMrs Duffy, although not particularly articulate, raised the issue without any offensive or unacceptable language. For Brown to rspond as he did gives an insight into the contempt in which the general public are held.

If you actually listen to the tape, Brown's tone of voice and attitude to his staff is utterly poisonous. If my boss spoke to me like that on a regular basis I wouldn't hang around very long.

zanes

el_presidente wrote:

Whether you like it or not, immigration is a big issue for a lot of voters in this country. It is a fact that Labour have presided over an increase iMrs Duffy, although not particularly articulate, raised the issue without any offensive or unacceptable language. For Brown to rspond as he did gives an insight into the contempt in which the general public are held.

+1. Classic labour tactic of "If you disagree with us on immigration, you must be a racist* bigot"

*By implication

jonny_trousers

I won't be voting for Brown (nor Cameron), but I do agree that the whole situation is ridiculous. Firstly, the old bat probably is a bigot; secondly, it was a private conversation that we have no right to be party to. It was a huge invasion of privacy for Sky News to broadcast it. We all say derogatory things about people behind their backs that we would not want them to hear, it's just human nature. And thirdly, enough already! There are surely more important matters to be discussing rather than whether one man reckons one woman is a bigot or not.

asprilla

Always Tyred wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

Must admit, I've not seen the whole of the discussion, but I got the impression that she wasn't blaming the poor economy, etc on Eastern Europeans, but was just raising the subject that immigration was an issue, just in a slightly less than articulate way.

Not sure how that makes her a bigot, but then I don't read the Guardian any more.

I could be wrong though, it has been known.

That's very charitable, but my read was that she was just very "human" in the sense that things are not right with the world.... who is there to blame?

This month's acceptable persecution target is Polish! Yay - victimless discrimination!

Or alternatively there could be a lot of Eastern European immigration into her area, thus making them her reference point for immigration issues.

She didn't say they were evil or inherently bad people or that they were sub human pigs whom work will set free.

I think I'm pretty liberal (not in the full on tofu eating hair shirt way, but more in the checking that not too many of the products in my Ocado delivery are prodced by slave labour way) but it does sadden me that any discussion of immigration is instantly categorised as hateful.

Course, she might have been raised by Nazi's who sneaked into the country after the war (bloody illegal immigrants), I don't know.

Edit: Jebus, that didn't take me long to get to a Godwin, did it?

always_tyred

el_presidente wrote:

Whether you like it or not, immigration is a big issue for a lot of voters in this country. It is a fact that Labour have presided over an increase iMrs Duffy, although not particularly articulate, raised the issue without any offensive or unacceptable language. For Brown to rspond as he did gives an insight into the contempt in which the general public are held.

If you actually listen to the tape, Brown's tone of voice and attitude to his staff is utterly poisonous. If my boss spoke to me like that on a regular basis I wouldn't hang around very long.

No she didn't, she raised it entirely out of context.

For sure its a big issue, and I have no objection to debating immigration. But she wasn't talking about unemployment or pressures on housing, was she? No, she brought it up as part of an unrelated discussion about tax on her pension and tuition fees, indicating to me at least that she regards them as a segment of society responsible for something or other, not quite sure what, but we don't like them.

That's at the very least ignorant and bordering on bigoted.

Like I say, substitute another minority into what she said and have a ponder.

zanes

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

, it was a private conversation that we have no right to be party to.

Erm, you do know this governments view on surveillance, don't you? Own.medicine.taste.of.

always_tyred

zanes wrote:

el_presidente wrote:

Whether you like it or not, immigration is a big issue for a lot of voters in this country. It is a fact that Labour have presided over an increase iMrs Duffy, although not particularly articulate, raised the issue without any offensive or unacceptable language. For Brown to rspond as he did gives an insight into the contempt in which the general public are held.

+1. Classic labour tactic of "If you disagree with us on immigration, you must be a racist* bigot"

*By implication

My daughter has high tuition fees and my town is full of foreigners and I don't like them.

Is that bigoted?

Alternatively: there is a housing shortage in my area and high immigrant populations.

Is THAT bigoted?

W1

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

I won't be voting for Brown (nor Cameron), but I do agree that the whole situation is ridiculous. Firstly, the old bat probably is a bigot; secondly, it was a private conversation that we have no right to be party to. It was a huge invasion of privacy for Sky News to broadcast it. We all say derogatory things about people behind their backs that we would not want them to hear, it's just human nature. And thirdly, enough already! There are surely more important matters to be discussing rather than whether one man reckons one woman is a bigot or not.

Absolutely don't agree. It's a window onto how our Prime Minister thinks and acts in reality, not when he's on show with a parade of gushing supports being wheeled out in front of the press.

zanes

Always Tyred wrote:

zanes wrote:

el_presidente wrote:

Whether you like it or not, immigration is a big issue for a lot of voters in this country. It is a fact that Labour have presided over an increase iMrs Duffy, although not particularly articulate, raised the issue without any offensive or unacceptable language. For Brown to rspond as he did gives an insight into the contempt in which the general public are held.

+1. Classic labour tactic of "If you disagree with us on immigration, you must be a racist* bigot"

*By implication

My daughter has high tuition fees and my town is full of foreigners and I don't like them.

Is that bigoted?

I'd probably say "no".* That doesn't imply a direct blame between the high tuition fees and foreigners. The last part is someone's opinion. What we need to do is either say;

"Hey, this is a free country. People are entitled to have their own opinions, and other people are free to challenge them",

or,

"This isn't a free country, Disagree with the government and it's off to the gualags."

And often it's quite a subtle distinction between the two, depending on what side of the prevailing wisdom you're on.

Alternatively: there is a housing shortage in my area and high immigrant populations.

Is THAT bigoted?

Does "who's" occupying the housing make any difference to people complaining about a shortage of housing ? That's a genuine question, I don't know.

*Which, no doubt, makes me a bigot **. Yadda, yadda, yadda :roll:

**

cjcp

will3 wrote:

Possibly the:
to her face: nice to meet you etc etc
behind her back: awfull bigot etc etc

Why would you believe anything he ever says?

+1. And that ridiculous smirk whilst standing outside here house. Awful. The most genuine reaction seemed to be the one in the studio whilst on Radio 2.

tailwindhome

Always Tyred wrote:

For sure its a big issue, and I have no objection to debating immigration. But she wasn't talking about unemployment or pressures on housing, was she? No, she brought it up as part of an unrelated discussion about tax on her pension and tuition fees, indicating to me at least that she regards them as a segment of society responsible for something or other, not quite sure what, but we don't like them.

Surely the context was the opportunity to talk face to face with the Prime Minister on whatever was important to her.

I confess I didn't hear this woman's comments so I don't know if they were 'bigoted' or otherwise. However we seem to have come to a point where the very discussion of imigration brands one a racist bigot. That's not right.

If GB thought this woman's comments were bigoted he should have explained why. Or have I been watching too much West Wing.

tomb353

context is important, if you go to Rochdale or any former mill town in yorkshire you are going to be asked about immigration. Race relations are not good in these towns, this does not make everyone who lives there and wants to discuss immigration or race a bigot.