Join the Labour Party and save your country!

1…205206208210211…509

Comments

  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    He's a private individual now. No longer a politician but a retired politician who because of his experience gets called upon to comment on matters relating to the conservative party.

    I afraid he's off the same era as Kinnock and thatcher. Whilst one of those is still alive they both rarely come out of the shadows to comment. Sensible rant considering they're out of positions of power and politics inner workings to make a valued comment IMHO.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,556
    Pretty sure the House of Lords has something to do with politics. Interesting comment in that clip that he doesn't vote.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    rjsterry wrote:
    Pretty sure the House of Lords has something to do with politics. Interesting comment in that clip that he doesn't vote.
    If course, I forgot about the retired politician day care. It's Heseltine still active in there? I just assumed he'd put his feet up completely. I mean he was old when I first, vaguely heard of him (Westland thing IIRC) and that was 1985 I think.

    Just read wiki entry for his retirement. I really didn't know he'd been that busy since retirement from politics! :wink:

    I take that back. I think his comments carry weight. He's been busy this last decade working on reports and the like for the coalition then the following government. Majority of his recommendations seem to get taken up. Not many heavyweights in the house of commons these days. Where are the thatchers, Heseltines and Kinnocks of this political era?
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,556
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Pretty sure the House of Lords has something to do with politics. Interesting comment in that clip that he doesn't vote.
    If course, I forgot about the retired politician day care. It's Heseltine still active in there? I just assumed he'd put his feet up completely. I mean he was old when I first, vaguely heard of him (Westland thing IIRC) and that was 1985 I think.

    Just read wiki entry for his retirement. I really didn't know he'd been that busy since retirement from politics! :wink:

    I take that back. I think his comments carry weight. He's been busy this last decade working on reports and the like for the coalition then the following government. Majority of his recommendations seem to get taken up. Not many heavyweights in the house of commons these days. Where are the thatchers, Heseltines and Kinnocks of this political era?
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,556
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?

    Indeed. A what-have-we-got-to-lose attitude?
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,329
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?
    Haven't some of those policies been implemented by the current shower in power?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?
    Haven't some of those policies been implemented by the current shower in power?

    Hence my agreeing that we haven't got the government I would like to see.

    If adopting some of the policies makes them a shower, I assume adopting all of the policies would make them a complete shower.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    rjsterry wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?

    Indeed. A what-have-we-got-to-lose attitude?

    If that is the basis and thought process of how you arrive at your voting intention, that is up to you. Each vote is equally valid however much/little thought goes into it. See the referendum result for confirmation of this.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,329
    Ballysmate wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?
    Haven't some of those policies been implemented by the current shower in power?

    Hence my agreeing that we haven't got the government I would like to see.

    If adopting some of the policies makes them a shower, I assume adopting all of the policies would make them a complete shower.
    So, the problem with the current shower is that they are adopting risible policies?
    And the policies that they are not adopting are even more risible? Doesn't bode well for the future.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?
    Haven't some of those policies been implemented by the current shower in power?

    Hence my agreeing that we haven't got the government I would like to see.

    If adopting some of the policies makes them a shower, I assume adopting all of the policies would make them a complete shower.
    So, the problem with the current shower is that they are adopting risible policies?
    And the policies that they are not adopting are even more risible? Doesn't bode well for the future.

    I agree, it doesn't bode well. We have a weakened government (made so by its own making) with a wafer thin working majority. At the same time the opposition is totally unelectable. Not ideal in any circumstances, much less the present.
    But there we have it.
  • Jez mon
    Jez mon Posts: 3,809
    Anyone for the Lib Dems?
    You live and learn. At any rate, you live
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    Jez mon wrote:
    Anyone for the Lib Dems?

    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Ballysmate wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Milliband versus Cameron would be a step up from the current shower.

    Alas, I must agree.
    But for all the faults with the current government, Corbyn's Labour party is not the answer.
    What makes people his policies that were thought risible 12 months ago, sensible now?
    Haven't some of those policies been implemented by the current shower in power?

    Hence my agreeing that we haven't got the government I would like to see.

    If adopting some of the policies makes them a shower, I assume adopting all of the policies would make them a complete shower.
    So, the problem with the current shower is that they are adopting risible policies?
    And the policies that they are not adopting are even more risible? Doesn't bode well for the future.

    I agree, it doesn't bode well. We have a weakened government (made so by its own making) with a wafer thin working majority. At the same time the opposition is totally unelectable. Not ideal in any circumstances, much less the present.
    But there we have it.

    I am assuming you mean not capable of governing as they are very much electable. The problem is that people did not take him seriously and kept voting for him for other reasons. Now all he has to do is keep his mouth shut and he will probably win the next election
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,329
    edited November 2017
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    I am assuming you mean not capable of governing as they are very much electable. The problem is that people did not take him seriously and kept voting for him for other reasons. Now all he has to do is keep his mouth shut and he will probably win the next election
    From January 24th, 2016.
    PBlakeney wrote:
    mamba80 wrote:
    ...i cant for the life of me, see why Corbyn opens his mouth on these subjects...
    I've said it before and I'll repeat it again.
    The best thing Labour could do is keep schtum and let DC shoot himself in the foot.

    And May is nowhere the leader DC was. :cry: :shock: :cry:
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    mamba80 wrote:

    the union movement is no more to do with Labour than the CBI is to do with the Tory party...
    .

    Really? The unions founded the Labour Party and are still its main source of income. The union movement also campaigns directly and indirectly for the Labour Party via Momentum. The unions are inextricably linked to Labour.
  • graeme_s-2
    graeme_s-2 Posts: 3,382
    rjsterry wrote:
    Pretty sure the House of Lords has something to do with politics. Interesting comment in that clip that he doesn't vote.
    It is interesting, but it's not a stance of Heseltine's. Members of the house of Lords are not permitted to vote in UK parliament elections.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,416
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    heavyweights........Kinnock
    Not two words you often see together in the same sentence.

    Paging Pinno to the thread... :lol:
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,416
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Jez mon wrote:
    Anyone for the Lib Dems?

    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
    It's easier just to spoil your ballot paper and won't affect the overall result.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Jez mon wrote:
    Anyone for the Lib Dems?

    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
    It's easier just to spoil your ballot paper and won't affect the overall result.

    More MPs than the DUP...
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,329
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Jez mon wrote:
    Anyone for the Lib Dems?

    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
    It's easier just to spoil your ballot paper and won't affect the overall result.

    More MPs than the DUP...
    ...and cheaper.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    Shortfall wrote:
    mamba80 wrote:

    the union movement is no more to do with Labour than the CBI is to do with the Tory party...
    .

    Really? The unions founded the Labour Party and are still its main source of income. The union movement also campaigns directly and indirectly for the Labour Party via Momentum. The unions are inextricably linked to Labour.
    During campaigning for the GE they had a labour rally in my nearest city (really the size of a town IMHO like. I park to one side of the square it was happening and town where I wanted to shop the other side. So walking through the square I noticed that probably 60-80% of the ppl present and enthusiastically cheering the speakers had ID badges dangling around their necks. The straps had writing on them and they were almost all union straps. Unite was most common but there were some Labour straps too.

    I find it funny that Mamba does not think unions have anything to do with Labour party.
  • Lookyhere
    Lookyhere Posts: 987
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    Shortfall wrote:
    mamba80 wrote:

    the union movement is no more to do with Labour than the CBI is to do with the Tory party...
    .

    Really? The unions founded the Labour Party and are still its main source of income. The union movement also campaigns directly and indirectly for the Labour Party via Momentum. The unions are inextricably linked to Labour.
    During campaigning for the GE they had a labour rally in my nearest city (really the size of a town IMHO like. I park to one side of the square it was happening and town where I wanted to shop the other side. So walking through the square I noticed that probably 60-80% of the ppl present and enthusiastically cheering the speakers had ID badges dangling around their necks. The straps had writing on them and they were almost all union straps. Unite was most common but there were some Labour straps too.

    I find it funny that Mamba does not think unions have anything to do with Labour party.

    I read it differently, that Labour are in hock to the unions and the Tories are in hock to UK business, it is what he said.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/News/uk/po ... 79871.html
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    Lookyhere wrote:
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    Shortfall wrote:
    mamba80 wrote:

    the union movement is no more to do with Labour than the CBI is to do with the Tory party...
    .

    Really? The unions founded the Labour Party and are still its main source of income. The union movement also campaigns directly and indirectly for the Labour Party via Momentum. The unions are inextricably linked to Labour.
    During campaigning for the GE they had a labour rally in my nearest city (really the size of a town IMHO like. I park to one side of the square it was happening and town where I wanted to shop the other side. So walking through the square I noticed that probably 60-80% of the ppl present and enthusiastically cheering the speakers had ID badges dangling around their necks. The straps had writing on them and they were almost all union straps. Unite was most common but there were some Labour straps too.

    I find it funny that Mamba does not think unions have anything to do with Labour party.

    I read it differently, that Labour are in hock to the unions and the Tories are in hock to UK business, it is what he said.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/News/uk/po ... 79871.html

    Mamba will have to clarify what he meant then. It seemed pretty unequivocal to me but I'm happy to stand corrected if I've misinterpreted him.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    So while we have a deputy PM who watches porn at work, a former defence minister who can’t tell the difference between harassment and flirting, a foreign secretary who is so loose lipped he actually worsens prison sentences for Brits abroad by lying, and a minister who lies about meeting foreign leaders in an official capacity without letting the foreign office know being replaced by someone who made bare face lies about turkey joining the EU, we have a Labour Party who literally can’t shut down the increasingly virulent anti-semitism and actually chooses candidates who are openly anti-Semitic.

    https://twitter.com/dannythefink/status ... 9680775168

    I mean, why is anyone voting for either of these sh!tbag parties?



    Ffs.
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,556
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So while we have a deputy PM who watches porn at work, a former defence minister who can’t tell the difference between harassment and flirting, a foreign secretary who is so loose lipped he actually worsens prison sentences for Brits abroad by lying, and a minister who lies about meeting foreign leaders in an official capacity without letting the foreign office know being replaced by someone who made bare face lies about turkey joining the EU, we have a Labour Party who literally can’t shut down the increasingly virulent anti-semitism and actually chooses candidates who are openly anti-Semitic.



    Ffs.
    I was reading about the Australian Parliament where MPs are having to resign over dual nationality that they didn't realise they had. I thought, "well at least we don't have that to worry about". Clutching at straws, I know, but when straw is all that's on offer...
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    I wouldn't even know what the UK rules are on being an MP with dual nationality.
    _
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    I wouldn't even know what the UK rules are on being an MP with dual nationality.

    Boris only just junked his US citizenship.

    Talking of whom and in light of your besmirching of him higher up here is a thought for you. In the light of his original comment and his refusal to properly apologise or retract the statement should we not consider the fact that what he said was correct but not FO policy to admit it?

    The alternative is that he would rather somebody do five years in an Iranian jail than say "sorry I was wrong"

    Even if he was that much of a cvnt the rest of his family don't seem that bad.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,416
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So while we have a deputy PM who watches porn at work, a former defence minister who can’t tell the difference between harassment and flirting, a foreign secretary who is so loose lipped he actually worsens prison sentences for Brits abroad by lying, and a minister who lies about meeting foreign leaders in an official capacity without letting the foreign office know being replaced by someone who made bare face lies about turkey joining the EU, we have a Labour Party who literally can’t shut down the increasingly virulent anti-semitism and actually chooses candidates who are openly anti-Semitic.

    https://twitter.com/dannythefink/status ... 9680775168

    I mean, why is anyone voting for either of these sh!tbag parties?



    Ffs.
    If so then you also have to ask yourself why people aren't voting Lib Dem.

    Still down at 7% I see:
    http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    I wouldn't even know what the UK rules are on being an MP with dual nationality.

    Boris only just junked his US citizenship.

    Talking of whom and in light of your besmirching of him higher up here is a thought for you. In the light of his original comment and his refusal to properly apologise or retract the statement should we not consider the fact that what he said was correct but not FO policy to admit it?

    The alternative is that he would rather somebody do five years in an Iranian jail than say "sorry I was wrong"

    Even if he was that much of a cvnt the rest of his family don't seem that bad.

    what would it matter if he did say Sorry? the Iranian clerics have already seized on his remark, so its not 5 years, its a potential extra five years.
    He never met with the family in the previous 12months, Boris is interested in what Boris wants, he has zero interest in this womans plight.
    Too harsh? see how he changed his mind over brexit when he saw an op for power?

    One could never imagine an Owen, Hurd or Carrington behaving in such a way, Boris shames us all.

Categories