FlyTheNest

RogerOThornhill wrote:

AngryAsWell wrote:

letsskiptotheleft wrote: Duly zapped, annoying little bastards.

A good 25 more on the members list and the one you just zpped is back

An awful lot of them begin with 'k'...

They're gone

ohsocynical wrote:Disabled Tory Party member pens furious letter to Cameron and Co

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/di ... ns-4354236

I feel desperately sorry for this lady's plight and can understand her being taken in by Dave using his little boy Ivan as bait in 2010, but I have this niggling feeling she'll still vote Tory in 2015.

I can only assume voting Tory is a form of self harm.

refitman wrote:

RogerOThornhill wrote:

AngryAsWell wrote: A good 25 more on the members list and the one you just zpped is back

An awful lot of them begin with 'k'...

They're gone

Well, they were but one's just returned...

ohsocynical wrote:Disabled Tory Party member pens furious letter to Cameron and Co

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/di ... ns-4354236

I feel desperately sorry for this lady's plight and can understand her being taken in by Dave using his little boy Ivan as bait in 2010, but I have this niggling feeling she'll still vote Tory in 2015.

Literally just finished reading and was about to post it - thank you

Channel 4 Fact Check on benefit claimants with hard drugs or serious alcohol problems.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fac ... icts/18989" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alcohol, about 4%, as IDS' pals said.

Drugs- about 6.6% as they said.

So not all that many. Wouldn't treatment or substitutes be a better use of the money?

I see gambling is also included in the IDS benefit card list.

RogerOThornhill wrote:

refitman wrote:

RogerOThornhill wrote: An awful lot of them begin with 'k'...

They're gone

Well, they were but one's just returned...

Both gone. I'll chat to Dan about some form of capture on membership applications.

letsskiptotheleft wrote:http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/fra ... ns-7860132

I hate him, makes me spit - spit (can we have a spitting smiley? )

“But we do need to set out where we would put a benefit cap so that the party doesn’t continue to trail in the Tory wake - £26,000 in benefits is the equivalent of a gross income of £35,000.
“This is two to three times the level of what most working people in Birkenhead earn, and this strikes most people as being unfair. Where should Labour set this cap?”

Yes it may well be more in monetary terms, but they don't get 26K the landlord takes a bloody whack - spit - idiot!

AngryAsWell wrote:

letsskiptotheleft wrote:http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/fra ... ns-7860132

I hate him, makes me spit - spit (can we have a spitting smiley? )

“But we do need to set out where we would put a benefit cap so that the party doesn’t continue to trail in the Tory wake - £26,000 in benefits is the equivalent of a gross income of £35,000.
“This is two to three times the level of what most working people in Birkenhead earn, and this strikes most people as being unfair. Where should Labour set this cap?”

Yes it may well be more in monetary terms, but they don't get 26K the landlord takes a bloody whack - spit - idiot!

So do I, I've just run out of things to say.. Hence the non comment.

Found a spitting smiley but don't know how to get it ?
http://www.sherv.net/emoticons/spitting.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB · 2 mins2 minutes ago
ComRes phone poll for Indy
CON 29
LAB 35
LD 10
UKIP 15

RobertSnozers wrote:

AngryAsWell wrote:I was going to try the embed thing but this is a bit big and I'd be bound to mess it up, so will just give the link

Tory's visit the hospital
And are disappointed

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry to see the old 'Labour were the same' meme on this. On the NHS, the difference between the two parties is night and day. Just because Gryffindor gets a few things wrong doesn't mean you should let Slytherin run Hogwarts.

I'd not read that far - thanks for pointing to it

“He’s blown it”: Tory MPs slam “painful” Osborne speech

http://labourlist.org/2014/09/hes-blown ... ne-speech/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting take on why the Tories are in trouble.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -it-again/

It is one thing to accept the need for further and faster and deeper cuts in public spending; it is quite another to boast that you’re so much tougher than your rivals. This might, in Westminster parlance, establish your credibility; it also fosters the suspicion that you’re happy to divide the country into camps labelled deserving and undeserving. There is a relish to Tory rhetoric on public spending that is unattractive. It hints at a small-tent conservatism that knows who belongs inside and to hell with anyone who lacks the fortune to be a member.

Yes, fortune. Freezing tax credits might be defensible; freezing tax credits while also opposing Labour’s proposed tax on houses worth more than £2m is a very different thing indeed. Doing so when you’ve already cut the rate of income tax paid by the richest 3% of Britons compounds the folly. If people are persuaded that this iteration of the Tory party is a party for the rich it is in large part because the Tory party has done far too little to disabuse them of that notion.

Well quite.

That bit where personal finance writers have twigged that getting rid of tax on pension pots can help for IHT which will benefit 3% of the population is another sign that the "we're all in this together" has simply been abandoned and they've reverted to type.

AngryAsWell wrote:

letsskiptotheleft wrote:http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/fra ... ns-7860132

I hate him, makes me spit - spit (can we have a spitting smiley? )

“But we do need to set out where we would put a benefit cap so that the party doesn’t continue to trail in the Tory wake - £26,000 in benefits is the equivalent of a gross income of £35,000.
“This is two to three times the level of what most working people in Birkenhead earn, and this strikes most people as being unfair. Where should Labour set this cap?”

Yes it may well be more in monetary terms, but they don't get 26K the landlord takes a bloody whack - spit - idiot!

He really is a dope. Here's a thought Frank, let's not follow the Tory narrative and framing attempts.
I work in Birkenhead. In fact the building was formally opened by him, and has a "founding stone" with his name on at the entrance!

Please someone confirm / tell me, this is not true - 10 year olds homework
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is an amusing but superficial article from Harris.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... mentpage=1

Nice half hour done on Twitter with some taunters of Andy Burnham.

Labour's £12bn all lost NHS computer systems, Mid Staff etc.

Eventually got "you can prove anything with statistics" which followed on shortly from "I'm not doing your research".

A Cybernat for some reason showed up, even though health is devolved.

Sent him the Nuffield report putting England comfortably in front of Scotland in 2010.

RogerOThornhill wrote:Interesting take on why the Tories are in trouble.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -it-again/

It is one thing to accept the need for further and faster and deeper cuts in public spending; it is quite another to boast that you’re so much tougher than your rivals. This might, in Westminster parlance, establish your credibility; it also fosters the suspicion that you’re happy to divide the country into camps labelled deserving and undeserving. There is a relish to Tory rhetoric on public spending that is unattractive. It hints at a small-tent conservatism that knows who belongs inside and to hell with anyone who lacks the fortune to be a member.

Yes, fortune. Freezing tax credits might be defensible; freezing tax credits while also opposing Labour’s proposed tax on houses worth more than £2m is a very different thing indeed. Doing so when you’ve already cut the rate of income tax paid by the richest 3% of Britons compounds the folly. If people are persuaded that this iteration of the Tory party is a party for the rich it is in large part because the Tory party has done far too little to disabuse them of that notion.

Well quite.

That bit where personal finance writers have twigged that getting rid of tax on pension pots can help for IHT which will benefit 3% of the population is another sign that the "we're all in this together" has simply been abandoned and they've reverted to type.

That's a bloody good article (written from I presume a right wing stance) which gets to the heart of Cameron's problem. Here's a quote:

"At some point Cameron – and Osborne – stopped explaining why spending cuts are necessary. Instead they simply crowed that Labour couldn’t be trusted to be tough enough. As though toughness was a cardinal virtue and not the kind of thing you boast about when you’ve run out of other things to say. It doesn’t reassure voters; it frightens them."

And it's so very true, and the author nails it so effectively that I'm surprised that the Speccy of all people printed it. A genuinely good read if you wish to look into the mind and psyche of a thinking conservative.

RogerOThornhill wrote:Interesting take on why the Tories are in trouble.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -it-again/

It is one thing to accept the need for further and faster and deeper cuts in public spending; it is quite another to boast that you’re so much tougher than your rivals. This might, in Westminster parlance, establish your credibility; it also fosters the suspicion that you’re happy to divide the country into camps labelled deserving and undeserving. There is a relish to Tory rhetoric on public spending that is unattractive. It hints at a small-tent conservatism that knows who belongs inside and to hell with anyone who lacks the fortune to be a member.

Yes, fortune. Freezing tax credits might be defensible; freezing tax credits while also opposing Labour’s proposed tax on houses worth more than £2m is a very different thing indeed. Doing so when you’ve already cut the rate of income tax paid by the richest 3% of Britons compounds the folly. If people are persuaded that this iteration of the Tory party is a party for the rich it is in large part because the Tory party has done far too little to disabuse them of that notion.

Well quite.

That bit where personal finance writers have twigged that getting rid of tax on pension pots can help for IHT which will benefit 3% of the population is another sign that the "we're all in this together" has simply been abandoned and they've reverted to type.

I believe I am on record as saying this conference will highlight to voters that the Tory offer is as attractive as a cup of vomit.

So far I have seen nothing to disabuse me of that notion. If anything it is even worse for them than I expected. I didn't expect Osborne to gleefully announce he was targeting making 10 million voters poorer.

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

RogerOThornhill wrote:Interesting take on why the Tories are in trouble.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -it-again/

It is one thing to accept the need for further and faster and deeper cuts in public spending; it is quite another to boast that you’re so much tougher than your rivals. This might, in Westminster parlance, establish your credibility; it also fosters the suspicion that you’re happy to divide the country into camps labelled deserving and undeserving. There is a relish to Tory rhetoric on public spending that is unattractive. It hints at a small-tent conservatism that knows who belongs inside and to hell with anyone who lacks the fortune to be a member.

Yes, fortune. Freezing tax credits might be defensible; freezing tax credits while also opposing Labour’s proposed tax on houses worth more than £2m is a very different thing indeed. Doing so when you’ve already cut the rate of income tax paid by the richest 3% of Britons compounds the folly. If people are persuaded that this iteration of the Tory party is a party for the rich it is in large part because the Tory party has done far too little to disabuse them of that notion.

Well quite.

That bit where personal finance writers have twigged that getting rid of tax on pension pots can help for IHT which will benefit 3% of the population is another sign that the "we're all in this together" has simply been abandoned and they've reverted to type.

I believe I am on record as saying this conference will highlight to voters that the Tory offer is as attractive as a cup of vomit.

So far I have seen nothing to disabuse me of that notion. If anything it is even worse for them than I expected. I didn't expect Osborne to gleefully announce he was targeting making 10 million voters poorer.

I think this is worth commenting on. A more negative Tory conference you'd try hard to imagine, even were you uncommitted. It's been depressingly downbeat, as if those sunny uplands have finally disappeared. Where's the hope? For the 10,000,000 who are about to join the fucked over (if they haven't already) there's none. get used to it. Eat shit for another five years and that's your lot.

That's not mindset of a party that wants to help people and sort out this country. That's a suicide note.

ErnstRemarx wrote:

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

RogerOThornhill wrote:Interesting take on why the Tories are in trouble.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... -it-again/
Well quite.

That bit where personal finance writers have twigged that getting rid of tax on pension pots can help for IHT which will benefit 3% of the population is another sign that the "we're all in this together" has simply been abandoned and they've reverted to type.

I believe I am on record as saying this conference will highlight to voters that the Tory offer is as attractive as a cup of vomit.

So far I have seen nothing to disabuse me of that notion. If anything it is even worse for them than I expected. I didn't expect Osborne to gleefully announce he was targeting making 10 million voters poorer.

I think this is worth commenting on. A more negative Tory conference you'd try hard to imagine, even were you uncommitted. It's been depressingly downbeat, as if those sunny uplands have finally disappeared. Where's the hope? For the 10,000,000 who are about to join the fucked over (if they haven't already) there's none. get used to it. Eat shit for another five years and that's your lot.

That's not mindset of a party that wants to help people and sort out this country. That's a suicide note.

I agree. I think that they will split into two partys after the election. The moderates might merge with the liberals but I doubt it. That will leave three partys of the centre. with UKIP on the far right and greens on the left.

PorFavor wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

PorFavor wrote:What did we do before the internet? Open everyone's letters? This always baffles me.

That happened a fair bit, yes.

I'm aware that that happened in certain periods of history - but in (say) the 1970s? I'd have thought that the sheer scale of the job would be a limiter. It must have had to be very targeted, surely (in both cases, actually - in the first because it was easier to target and in the second because it was necessary since not targeting would render the task too vast). If you follow my meaning . . .

My post was opened for years - pretty much all of it - because of where I lived and who with ... in the 1979s and 80s.

I think that was the time I started to get really interested in politics and how power ticks.

Evening all.

rebeccariots2 wrote:

PorFavor wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote: That happened a fair bit, yes.

I'm aware that that happened in certain periods of history - but in (say) the 1970s? I'd have thought that the sheer scale of the job would be a limiter. It must have had to be very targeted, surely (in both cases, actually - in the first because it was easier to target and in the second because it was necessary since not targeting would render the task too vast). If you follow my meaning . . .

My post was opened for years - pretty much all of it - because of where I lived and who with ... in the 1979s and 80s.

I think that was the time I started to get really interested in politics and how power ticks.

Evening all.

Big data, the internet and automation means you can put in place a police state that the Stasi could only dream of.

Surveillance always existed but now it doesn't need an army of informers. If I want to see what you are doing I can turn on your phone camera.

Retweeted by George Eaton
Jason Farrell ‏@JasonFarrellSky 20m20 minutes ago
I'll reveal who the latest UKIP grab from the Tories is tomorrow am on #skynews #sunrise

Tease.

I'm assuming that cigarettes are not part of the forbidden purchases for IDS's prepaid cards dream ............ and that we have Lynton Crosby to 'thank' for that exemption.

David Cameron ‏@David_Cameron 2h2 hours ago
Working on my speech for tomorrow, when I'll set out how we make Britain a place everyone can be proud to call home.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:David Cameron ‏@David_Cameron 2h2 hours ago
Working on my speech for tomorrow, when I'll set out how we make Britain a place everyone can be proud to call home.

Is this the speech?

Mate, fuck off with your spam.

I thought I had the wrong website for a minute.

Temulkar wrote:Mate, fuck off with your spam.

How the hell do these robotic spammers manage to thank other posters?

My goodness! As I was reporting three spammy posts the 2nd and 3rd were being zapped. Good work, whoever has their finger on the whack-a-mole mallet

LadyCentauria wrote:My goodness! As I was reporting three spammy posts the 2nd and 3rd were being zapped. Good work, whoever has their finger on the whack-a-mole mallet

Moi!

They will return tho, whack-mole describes them perfectly,back to sleep, well try to...

Thanks, everyone for all the great posts and links today! I got here at about 11.45pm and it has taken me until now to read all of todays posts in The Daily Politics and all of the links you've posted.

Glad that Ohso and Mr. Ohso are safe and sound - and hope that all the nuts and bolts are safely tightened, now :wipes brow:

My stand out moments of the day are:

1) Boris Makes A Brick, in which our hero declares that the clay looks just like chocolate, offers reporters a taste while repeating "it looks delicious doesn't it!", stands at a bench whilst utterly engrossed in the act of s-l-o-w-l-y and carefully squishing clay into a brick-mould – reminding me of nothing more than an overly plump. and plodding, infant school pupil having discovered plasticene for the first time in his life – then having successfully turned out almost a whole brick is offered one that has dried sufficiently to be fired, and finally walks towards the brick oven, which, when he spots it, he declares – in amazement – to be, "just like like an enormous fiery furnace!!!"

Yes Boris, dark brown clay does look something like chocolate and brick ovens are enormous fiery furnaces. What on earth did you think it would be? Something like an Aga? Or a Bosch fan-assited job? Had me torn between horror and helpless giggles.

2) The first ten minutes of so of The Daily Politics Conference Special, as seen on BBC Parliament just after midnight, which consisted of cameras panning and zooming – at one moment right in on the lump just by Neil's right eye-brow – lots of failed cuts to a frozen image or a moving image for minutes on end but lacking the voice-overs, Neil setting up his netbook, arranging his iPad and folder then counting the pages contained within the latter, cutting to a still of the logo, conversation between him, the woman, and their producer, back to Neil preparing then suddenly saying "this is useless" (or words to that effect) before finally going to opening animated logo with music and into the show.

Now, I know that's what happens before any programme goes live, y'know checking that the titles and VTs work, lining up the shots and camera angles, and that the down-the-line guests are in place, etc., But it's unusual for the pre-show to be shown live or, in this case as it was the repeat, 'as live'. I burst out laughing when Neil said it was useless/rubbish or whatever. And, once the programme proper was on, having taken a break from reading here as I wondered whether they would apologise to the audience or explain, I just listened while reading until, Lo! and Behold! comes Boris and his brick schtick as he waffled his way through his speech to Conference.

Any road up, I needed some giggles today and got belly-laughs.

And as for Boris claiming (not quite his words but as close as I recall) that the rapid sprouting of skyscrapers "remind me of a David Attenborough film of spring spreading gloriously across the great Canadian tundra." No, Boris! The rapid expansion of London's commercial buildings (260 massive ones are in the pipeline) is almost the polar opposite of spring blossoming across the Canadian tundra, or the South African veldt, or any other natural landscape.

Back to reading FTN, then. Hi to anyone who is still up, belated goodnights to those who have turned in, good morning to the early-shift

letsskiptotheleft wrote:

LadyCentauria wrote:My goodness! As I was reporting three spammy posts the 2nd and 3rd were being zapped. Good work, whoever has their finger on the whack-a-mole mallet

Moi!

Thanks LetsSkip You are an excellent and mallet-wielder!