Saturday 8th & Sunday 9th November 2014

[Spacedone]

Spacedone -

Ah but Newton Dunn's tweet refers to him as a Labour man. Why tell one lie when you can tell two at the same time.

In order to create maximum confusion.

Could everyone please give me their opinion of the Steve Bell cartoon on Miliband & the commentary of the post I've included in an earlier post?

To be honest it's a bit over my head and maybe too obscure for most. Many will just see a picture of Miliband with the words "RESIGN NOW".

[AngryAsWell]

Spacedone -

Ah but Newton Dunn's tweet refers to him as a Labour man. Why tell one lie when you can tell two at the same time.

In order to create maximum confusion.

Could everyone please give me their opinion of the Steve Bell cartoon on Miliband & the commentary of the post I've included in an earlier post?

As always Steve hit the nail on the head, the right are after Ed but we are so blind to their lies we can't see further than the tiger to the Nazi behind the mask. Some would call it Godwin'esk. I call it spot on.

[citizenJA]

Spacedone -

Ah but Newton Dunn's tweet refers to him as a Labour man. Why tell one lie when you can tell two at the same time.

In order to create maximum confusion.

Could everyone please give me their opinion of the Steve Bell cartoon on Miliband & the commentary of the post I've included in an earlier post?

To be honest it's a bit over my head and maybe too obscure for most. Many will just see a picture of Miliband with the words "RESIGN NOW".

I know.

[citizenJA]

Spacedone -

Ah but Newton Dunn's tweet refers to him as a Labour man. Why tell one lie when you can tell two at the same time.

In order to create maximum confusion.

Could everyone please give me their opinion of the Steve Bell cartoon on Miliband & the commentary of the post I've included in an earlier post?

As always Steve hit the nail on the head, the right are after Ed but we are so blind to there lies we can't see further than the tiger to the Nazi behind the mask. Some would call it Godwin'esk. I call it spot on.

Yep.

I appreciate Spacedone's post.

It's easy to get blinded, confused - we're living current events that will become history.

[AngryAsWell]

Perhaps it's just my bizarrely interminable optimism (it's a hidden but constant trait) but I am beginning to feel that the anti-Ed stuff is taking on such a degree of terrified (Tories and MSM) ridiculousness, that people might just start finding it really quite silly.

I lost count of how many people said today on Twitter that all the anti-Ed stuff had persuaded them to vote Labour next year, or even to join/rejoin the party. #CrosbyOwnGoal

@Spacedone, when I were a yoof, oh so many moons ago, I was an avid reader of The New Musical Express; even at the tender age of 15 I had Parsons and Burchill marked out as a pair of prize twats! And, unlike a decent wine or a good cheese, neither of them have improved with age.

I've posted 2 "welcome home" messages to Labour re-joiners
A big thing about the #webackEd, that's maybe not so obvious, is the number of policy tweets that went out. I saw many where people were surprised at the solid policy content, as in - really? didn't know that, will they?? to which posters replies YES! lol So not just the support for Ed but the putting forward proposed policies has been a success win-win

[refitman]

Perhaps it's just my bizarrely interminable optimism (it's a hidden but constant trait) but I am beginning to feel that the anti-Ed stuff is taking on such a degree of terrified (Tories and MSM) ridiculousness, that people might just start finding it really quite silly.

I lost count of how many people said today on Twitter that all the anti-Ed stuff had persuaded them to vote Labour next year, or even to join/rejoin the party. #CrosbyOwnGoal

@Spacedone, when I were a yoof, oh so many moons ago, I was an avid reader of The New Musical Express; even at the tender age of 15 I had Parsons and Burchill marked out as a pair of prize twats! And, unlike a decent wine or a good cheese, neither of them have improved with age.

Speaking of Burchill, have you read Hadley Freeman and Will Self's responses to her book?

Haldey:

This stems from when she first found out as a youngster about the Holocaust, which was, like, totally tragic and amazing and terrible, yeah? Cue a lifetime of loving Jews by reducing them to insulting stereotypes. Jews, according to Burchill, are fascinatingly exotic. She gets crushes on the men and she loves all the adorable Jewish people in Israel, who are all chosen and stoical and wise – like people in storybooks, really! Jews are also, according to Burchill, the diametric opposite of Muslim people, who are all horrible, and their oppression of women is much worse than the oppressive codes for orthodox Jewish women, because Jews are good and Muslim people are bad. Burchill, for the record, is 55 years old.

Burchill divides up the chosen people into Good Jews (hardliners, Israelites) and Bad Jews (liberal Jews) with the enthusiasm of an antisemite. Hilariously, she sets herself up as the Jewishness Police, railing against Jews who are not Jewish enough; and one of those, it turns out, is her local rabbi, Elli Tikvah Sarah. Burchill rails against the rabbi for, in this order: ignoring a bottle of champagne Burchill gave her in favour of elderflower wine made by the rabbi’s girlfriend; “canoodling” with said girlfriend (“a Sapphic free-for-all”, sneers the heretofore not exactly prudish Burchill), and advocating a dialogue with Islam.

Burchill doesn’t include this in the book but, according to Rabbi Sarah, Burchill emailed the synagogue’s congregants railing that “your rabbi respects PIG ISLAM”. Aww, being used as a launchpad for a British columnist’s racism – we’re living in the Promised Land now, fellow Jews!

Self:

The last person to look to for such subtlety is Julie Burchill, who’s made – by her own admission – a fortune from writing the sort of ad hominem abuse that all too often is passed off as “comment” in our media. In truth, I’ve always thought of Burchill as a sort of newsprint Alastair Campbell; just as in his heyday Campbell intimidated the Westminster lobby journalists by flecking their faces with spittle and expletives, so she seems to win newspaper contracts by playing the part of sacredly authentic monster for credulous readers. I’m afraid I can’t really dignify her latest offering with the ascription “book”, nor the contents therein as “writing” – rather they are sophomoric, hammy effusions, wrongheaded, rancorous, and pathetically self-aggrandising.

I wasn’t actually aware that Burchill was a philo-Semite of long standing, but if alcoholics are prone to reciting “drunkalogues”, then we might reasonably describe Unchosen as a similarly tedious “Jewalogue”. (And since Burchill descants at such length on her own prodigious drinking and cocaine-sniffing, we might reasonably see it as a drunkalogue too.) There isn’t a shred of reason in this text, which – one hopes because all the publishers it was offered to turned it down – has been produced by an imprint funded by subscribers including such beacons of enlightenment as Richard Littlejohn. I really don’t see it as my responsibility as a reviewer to catalogue Burchill’s repugnant gallimaufry of insults and half-baked nonsense; suffice to say, she believes everything the state of Israel does is just peachy, and she uncritically accepts ethno‑Zionism, endorsing the idea that some schmuck – such as myself – who grew up in the Hampstead Garden Suburb, has a “right” to my place in the Holy Land in advance of the 1.8 million Palestinians currently penned up in the giant internment camp known as “the Gaza Strip”.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... losemitism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/n ... ill-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tubby Isaacs]

Yes.

Did you see Wilshaw's letter to the Edu Select Committee? Short and to the point...

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/comm ... to-ESC.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am very clear that I have the powers to inspect the constituent academies of a multi-academy trust (MAT). I do not have the powers to inspect and report on the overall effectiveness of the MAT. The Secretary of State for Education has confirmed that she does not intend to introduce legislation to enable this type of inspection and I respect her decision.

I like that last line...he may respect her decision as in "accept it" but not respect as in "think it's right".

He said he didn't like it but he'd have to go along with it.

Stories on Academies Week of the commissioners overruling LAs. One has chosen the "wrong" academy sponsor.

[danesclose]

Good evening all.
Interesting twitter conversation between Rentoul & Fraser Nelson:

2014-11-09_213627.jpg (67.98 KiB) Viewed 14732 times

[citizenJA]

Okay, we have a winner -

The internal critics agreed. But they took issue with the leadership’s response to criticism.

the G award for most astounding piece on fabricating problems that don't exist. That's as good as it got, by the way - all the named people quoted in the piece were in no doubtful positions. The G using that sentence above near the end of the piece is utterly absurd.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... y-suicidal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry, for the avoidance of any doubt - there are no internal critics. The article just called them the internal critics.

[RogerOThornhill]

Stories on Academies Week of the commissioners overruling LAs. One has chosen the "wrong" academy sponsor.

Yes I saw that...someone wondered what effect that has on other regions which also have schools under the same sponsor. this could get messy with one area effectively banning a sponsor in one area while another area being quite happy with them.

Having said that it might work if they were looking for more localised sponsors.

I've just been looking at letters about poor academy performance...one sent in January was uploaded only last week and the other which says you must comply within 15 days of the date of the letter...well, that might be a problem. Take a look.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _-_PWN.pdf

[citizenJA]

Sadiq Khan MP ‏@SadiqKhan · 5 mins5 minutes ago
Attacks on @Ed_Miliband create ‘worst of all worlds’ – @LucyMPowell sets out why #webackEd via @guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... CMP=twt_gu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Not read it yet....

I've got this far

As senior Labour MPs revealed that at least 20 shadow ministers are prepared to call for Miliband to stand down if Alan Johnson indicates he is willing to stand for the leadership, the new shadow Cabinet Office minister Lucy Powell challenged the critics to speak publicly.

As "revealed" earlier there are only 24 shadow ministers and one of them is Ed, so how stupid are the guardian to keep repeating this line? sigh

Very stupid. Please see the latest in stunning stupidity from the G.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... y-suicidal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AngryAsWell]

Sadiq Khan MP ‏@SadiqKhan · 5 mins5 minutes ago
Attacks on @Ed_Miliband create ‘worst of all worlds’ – @LucyMPowell sets out why #webackEd via @guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... CMP=twt_gu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Not read it yet....

I've got this far

As senior Labour MPs revealed that at least 20 shadow ministers are prepared to call for Miliband to stand down if Alan Johnson indicates he is willing to stand for the leadership, the new shadow Cabinet Office minister Lucy Powell challenged the critics to speak publicly.

As "revealed" earlier there are only 24 shadow ministers and one of them is Ed, so how stupid are the guardian to keep repeating this line? sigh

Very stupid. Please see the latest in stunning stupidity from the G.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... y-suicidal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep they get worse as the days get shorter ....

[Tubby Isaacs]

Stories on Academies Week of the commissioners overruling LAs. One has chosen the "wrong" academy sponsor.

Yes I saw that...someone wondered what effect that has on other regions which also have schools under the same sponsor. this could get messy with one area effectively banning a sponsor in one area while another area being quite happy with them.

Having said that it might work if they were looking for more localised sponsors.

I've just been looking at letters about poor academy performance...one sent in January was uploaded only last week and the other which says you must comply within 15 days of the date of the letter...well, that might be a problem. Take a look.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _-_PWN.pdf

The Secretary of State and I are therefore satisfied that the standards of
performance of pupils at The Parker E-ACT Academy are unacceptably low

All those suave, well-educated posh blokes like Lord Nash write such wonderful prose.

Is the Information Commissioner likely to be interested?

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Perhaps it's just my bizarrely interminable optimism (it's a hidden but constant trait) but I am beginning to feel that the anti-Ed stuff is taking on such a degree of terrified (Tories and MSM) ridiculousness, that people might just start finding it really quite silly.

I lost count of how many people said today on Twitter that all the anti-Ed stuff had persuaded them to vote Labour next year, or even to join/rejoin the party. #CrosbyOwnGoal

@Spacedone, when I were a yoof, oh so many moons ago, I was an avid reader of The New Musical Express; even at the tender age of 15 I had Parsons and Burchill marked out as a pair of prize twats! And, unlike a decent wine or a good cheese, neither of them have improved with age.

Speaking of Burchill, have you read Hadley Freeman and Will Self's responses to her book?

Haldey:

This stems from when she first found out as a youngster about the Holocaust, which was, like, totally tragic and amazing and terrible, yeah? Cue a lifetime of loving Jews by reducing them to insulting stereotypes. Jews, according to Burchill, are fascinatingly exotic. She gets crushes on the men and she loves all the adorable Jewish people in Israel, who are all chosen and stoical and wise – like people in storybooks, really! Jews are also, according to Burchill, the diametric opposite of Muslim people, who are all horrible, and their oppression of women is much worse than the oppressive codes for orthodox Jewish women, because Jews are good and Muslim people are bad. Burchill, for the record, is 55 years old.

Burchill divides up the chosen people into Good Jews (hardliners, Israelites) and Bad Jews (liberal Jews) with the enthusiasm of an antisemite. Hilariously, she sets herself up as the Jewishness Police, railing against Jews who are not Jewish enough; and one of those, it turns out, is her local rabbi, Elli Tikvah Sarah. Burchill rails against the rabbi for, in this order: ignoring a bottle of champagne Burchill gave her in favour of elderflower wine made by the rabbi’s girlfriend; “canoodling” with said girlfriend (“a Sapphic free-for-all”, sneers the heretofore not exactly prudish Burchill), and advocating a dialogue with Islam.

Burchill doesn’t include this in the book but, according to Rabbi Sarah, Burchill emailed the synagogue’s congregants railing that “your rabbi respects PIG ISLAM”. Aww, being used as a launchpad for a British columnist’s racism – we’re living in the Promised Land now, fellow Jews!

Self:

The last person to look to for such subtlety is Julie Burchill, who’s made – by her own admission – a fortune from writing the sort of ad hominem abuse that all too often is passed off as “comment” in our media. In truth, I’ve always thought of Burchill as a sort of newsprint Alastair Campbell; just as in his heyday Campbell intimidated the Westminster lobby journalists by flecking their faces with spittle and expletives, so she seems to win newspaper contracts by playing the part of sacredly authentic monster for credulous readers. I’m afraid I can’t really dignify her latest offering with the ascription “book”, nor the contents therein as “writing” – rather they are sophomoric, hammy effusions, wrongheaded, rancorous, and pathetically self-aggrandising.

I wasn’t actually aware that Burchill was a philo-Semite of long standing, but if alcoholics are prone to reciting “drunkalogues”, then we might reasonably describe Unchosen as a similarly tedious “Jewalogue”. (And since Burchill descants at such length on her own prodigious drinking and cocaine-sniffing, we might reasonably see it as a drunkalogue too.) There isn’t a shred of reason in this text, which – one hopes because all the publishers it was offered to turned it down – has been produced by an imprint funded by subscribers including such beacons of enlightenment as Richard Littlejohn. I really don’t see it as my responsibility as a reviewer to catalogue Burchill’s repugnant gallimaufry of insults and half-baked nonsense; suffice to say, she believes everything the state of Israel does is just peachy, and she uncritically accepts ethno‑Zionism, endorsing the idea that some schmuck – such as myself – who grew up in the Hampstead Garden Suburb, has a “right” to my place in the Holy Land in advance of the 1.8 million Palestinians currently penned up in the giant internment camp known as “the Gaza Strip”.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... losemitism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/n ... ill-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Superb! Will Self's piece is predictably excoriating, although I tip my hat to his verbose eloquence; but Hadley's is simply delicious, will have cut right to the quick. Jules virtually killed her career with that ill advised Observer piece defending Suzanne Moore's trans-gression (so to speak), to which I alluded last night; as I recall the GMG pulled the piece and Rog's mate Toby Young republished it (with his own embellishments) over at the Telegraph. Since then she has had, shall we say, time on her hands to write this book; seems she did not spend that time wisely.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The other new commissioner story in the same article is that the DfE won't tell anyone where it's happening.

[letsskiptotheleft]

Sky news "a poignant day for reflection" he's at the cenotaph FFS! Christ!

[Tubby Isaacs]

Tony Parsons has written some godawful shite for The Sun so risible I'm not even going to link it. The headline is:

"Miliband only loves the working class when they are on their knees."

So says the man who has endorsed UKIP! ****!

Ah but Newton Dunn's tweet refers to him as a Labour man. Why tell one lie when you can tell two at the same time.

That's almost as bad as the government trying to make ranting neo-con William Shawcross sound like a Labour supporter.

[mbc1955]

This last couple of days of vicious and lying mendacity from all quarters has at least made my mind up on one thing.

I've been dithering for the last four and a half years about what I was going to do in the 2015 Election. I've always been a Liberal/Lib Dem votes, since I first got the vote in time for the two 1974 Elections. I've only not voted Liberal during the Thatcher/Major years when I voted Labour as the only practical way in which to get rid of the Tory bastards. I'm one of those who voted Lib Dem in 2010, in expectation of something good coming of it, and I bear my part of the shame and blame for what occured: I never voted for a Conservative government, and after Nick Clegg made a mockery of my beliefs and expcetations, I will never vote Lib Dem again, barring some unexpected root and branch miraculous transformation of the entire Party that just isn't going to happen.

Which left me with a big question about what I would do in 2015.

Let me be honest: last time round, I believed that Labour had to go. It was exactly the same as in 1997: a long-standing Government that had run out of ideas, with the sole policy of 'we ought to be in charge', and in particular a menace to what I had always seen as Britain on the issue of Civil Liberties.

But could, would I vote for them in 2015?

I was among those who were pleased to see Ed Miliband win the leadership election, but I've been gravely disappointed with Labour and their preparation for most of the time since. Ed has not done even a fraction of what I hoped we might see from a rejuvenated Labour party that was worth taking power again.

Besides, for the last nearly thirty years I have lived in a solidly Labour constituency. My MP is Andrew Gwynne, but at any time Labour could have put forward a goat wearing a red rosette, and my MP would have been a goat in a red rosette. So, given that my vote made not the tiniest fraction of difference, what was the point of voting? I had no convictions about voting for anyone, and I was hardly needed for a vote against the Tories.

But I agree with so many people here that this country can't afford another five years of the Tories, It cannot, people cannot survive it. These past five years, my slow estrangement from the country of my birth has accelerated. I am growing to hate Britain, to hate what we have become, to hate the pettiness, selfishness, meanness and racial loathing that has been encouraged by this Government. To hate the licence for hatred it has peddled, to despair at the enthusiasm it has unleashed to hate and deride the poor, the sick, the disabled and the foreign. I loathe that racism has been re-legitimised.

Now this last weekend, with the wholesale lies about the plot to oust Miliband, the distortion and cheating, I have come to a decision.

I will vote in May. I will vote Labour. My vote may not be needed in my constituency, but it is needed in my country. Only Labour can save us from another Government like this and I think it's my duty to ensure that my vote adds to Labour's legitimacy as the governing party in the face of the lies and denigration that will come.

I had not been looking forward to the prospect of not registering my vote in a General Election for the first time, no matter its cause.


Editted for crap typing as usual.

[AngryAsWell]

This last couple of days of vicious and lying mendacity from all quarters has at least made my mind up on one thing.

I've been dithering for the last four and a half years about what I was going to do in the 2015 Election. I've always been a Liberal/Lib Dem votes, since I first got the vote in time for the two 1974 Elections. I've only not voted Liberal during the Thatcher/Major years when I voted Labour as the only practical way in which to get rid of the Tory bastards. I'm one of those who voted Lib Dem in 2010, in expectation of something good coming of it, and I bear my part of the shame and blame for what occured: I never voted for a Conservative government, and after Nick Clegg made a mockery of my beliefs and expcetations, I will never vote Lib Dem again, barring some unexpected root and branch miraculous transformation of the entire Party that just isn't going to happen.

Which left me with a big question about what I would do in 2015.

Let me be honest: last time round, I believed that Labour had to go. It was exactly the same as in 1997: a long-standing Government that had run out of ideas, with the sole policy of 'we ought to be in charge', and in particular a menace to what I had always seen as Britain on the issue of Civil Liberties.

But could, would I vote for them in 2015?

I was among those who were pleased to see Ed Miliband win the leadership election, but I've been gravely disappointed with Labour and their preparation for most of the time since. Ed has not done even a fraction of what I hoped we might see from a rejuvenated Labour party that was worth taking power again.

Besides, for the last nearly thirty years I have lived in a solidly Labour constituency. My MP is Andrew Gwynne, but at any time Labour could have put forward a goat wearing a red rosette, and my MP would have been a goat in a red rosette. So, given that my vote made not the tiniest fraction of difference, what was the point of voting? I had no convictions about voting for anyone, and I was hardly needed for a vote against the Tories.

But I agree with so many people here that this country can't afford another five years of the Tories, It cannot, people cannot survive it. These past five years, my slow estrangement from the country of my birth has accelerated. I am growing to hate Britain, to hate what we have become, to hate the pettiness, selfishness, meanness and racial loathing that has been encouraged by this Government. To hate the licence for hatred it has peddled, to despair at the enthusiasm it has unleashed to hate and deride the poor, the sick, the disabled and the foreign. I loathe that racism has been re-legitimised.

Now this last weekend, with the wholesale lies about the plot to oust Miliband, the distortion and cheating, I have come to a decision.

I will vote in May. I will vote Labour. My vote may not be needed in my constituency, but it is needed in my country. Only Labour can save us from another Government like this and I think it's my duty to ensure that my vote adds to Labour's legitimacy as the governing party in the face of the lies and denigration that will come.

I had not been looking forward to the prospect of not registering my vote in a General Election for the first time, no matter its cause.


Editted for crap typing as usual.

Well said. I admire your honesty and thoughtfulness in arriving at your decision - have a hug

[AngryAsWell]

Ed Miliband: Leaving the EU would be catastrophic for business
http://www.cityam.com/1415567335/ed-mil ... c-business" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RogerOThornhill]

Stories on Academies Week of the commissioners overruling LAs. One has chosen the "wrong" academy sponsor.

Yes I saw that...someone wondered what effect that has on other regions which also have schools under the same sponsor. this could get messy with one area effectively banning a sponsor in one area while another area being quite happy with them.

Having said that it might work if they were looking for more localised sponsors.

I've just been looking at letters about poor academy performance...one sent in January was uploaded only last week and the other which says you must comply within 15 days of the date of the letter...well, that might be a problem. Take a look.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _-_PWN.pdf

The Secretary of State and I are therefore satisfied that the standards of
performance of pupils at The Parker E-ACT Academy are unacceptably low

All those suave, well-educated posh blokes like Lord Nash write such wonderful prose.

Is the Information Commissioner likely to be interested?

What makes it worse is that this one is not one of the ones that E Act had to hand back to the DfE to find another sponsor.

I said at the time that the rationale for what stayed and what was given back made no sense whatsoever.

[AngryAsWell]

Notes from a Broken Society

Backing Ed
November 9, 2014 · by Neil Schofield
Like a lot of Labour Party members and activists, I’m angry and confused at the moment. I’m angry that with the Tory Party in disarray, losing MPs to UKIP and humiliated in Europe once again as a direct result of its fear of UKIP, the media focus appears to be all about Labour’s leadership “crisis”. And I’m confused because, with millions in poverty while working ever-longer hours, with some of the worst child poverty rates in the developed world, with hundreds of thousands of people dependent on food banks, and with our National Health Service being dismantled in front of our eyes, you might have thought that the handful of Labour MPs briefing anonymously against Ed could have found something more useful with which to fill their day.

http://notesbrokensociety.wordpress.com ... acking-ed/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[refitman]

This last couple of days of vicious and lying mendacity from all quarters has at least made my mind up on one thing.

I've been dithering for the last four and a half years about what I was going to do in the 2015 Election. I've always been a Liberal/Lib Dem votes, since I first got the vote in time for the two 1974 Elections. I've only not voted Liberal during the Thatcher/Major years when I voted Labour as the only practical way in which to get rid of the Tory bastards. I'm one of those who voted Lib Dem in 2010, in expectation of something good coming of it, and I bear my part of the shame and blame for what occured: I never voted for a Conservative government, and after Nick Clegg made a mockery of my beliefs and expcetations, I will never vote Lib Dem again, barring some unexpected root and branch miraculous transformation of the entire Party that just isn't going to happen.

Which left me with a big question about what I would do in 2015.

Let me be honest: last time round, I believed that Labour had to go. It was exactly the same as in 1997: a long-standing Government that had run out of ideas, with the sole policy of 'we ought to be in charge', and in particular a menace to what I had always seen as Britain on the issue of Civil Liberties.

But could, would I vote for them in 2015?

I was among those who were pleased to see Ed Miliband win the leadership election, but I've been gravely disappointed with Labour and their preparation for most of the time since. Ed has not done even a fraction of what I hoped we might see from a rejuvenated Labour party that was worth taking power again.

Besides, for the last nearly thirty years I have lived in a solidly Labour constituency. My MP is Andrew Gwynne, but at any time Labour could have put forward a goat wearing a red rosette, and my MP would have been a goat in a red rosette. So, given that my vote made not the tiniest fraction of difference, what was the point of voting? I had no convictions about voting for anyone, and I was hardly needed for a vote against the Tories.

But I agree with so many people here that this country can't afford another five years of the Tories, It cannot, people cannot survive it. These past five years, my slow estrangement from the country of my birth has accelerated. I am growing to hate Britain, to hate what we have become, to hate the pettiness, selfishness, meanness and racial loathing that has been encouraged by this Government. To hate the licence for hatred it has peddled, to despair at the enthusiasm it has unleashed to hate and deride the poor, the sick, the disabled and the foreign. I loathe that racism has been re-legitimised.

Now this last weekend, with the wholesale lies about the plot to oust Miliband, the distortion and cheating, I have come to a decision.

I will vote in May. I will vote Labour. My vote may not be needed in my constituency, but it is needed in my country. Only Labour can save us from another Government like this and I think it's my duty to ensure that my vote adds to Labour's legitimacy as the governing party in the face of the lies and denigration that will come.

I had not been looking forward to the prospect of not registering my vote in a General Election for the first time, no matter its cause.


Editted for crap typing as usual.

Well said

I am broadly the same, but only(!) been voting since 1996.

[AngryAsWell]

This last couple of days of vicious and lying mendacity from all quarters has at least made my mind up on one thing.

I've been dithering for the last four and a half years about what I was going to do in the 2015 Election. I've always been a Liberal/Lib Dem votes, since I first got the vote in time for the two 1974 Elections. I've only not voted Liberal during the Thatcher/Major years when I voted Labour as the only practical way in which to get rid of the Tory bastards. I'm one of those who voted Lib Dem in 2010, in expectation of something good coming of it, and I bear my part of the shame and blame for what occured: I never voted for a Conservative government, and after Nick Clegg made a mockery of my beliefs and expcetations, I will never vote Lib Dem again, barring some unexpected root and branch miraculous transformation of the entire Party that just isn't going to happen.

Which left me with a big question about what I would do in 2015.

Let me be honest: last time round, I believed that Labour had to go. It was exactly the same as in 1997: a long-standing Government that had run out of ideas, with the sole policy of 'we ought to be in charge', and in particular a menace to what I had always seen as Britain on the issue of Civil Liberties.

But could, would I vote for them in 2015?

I was among those who were pleased to see Ed Miliband win the leadership election, but I've been gravely disappointed with Labour and their preparation for most of the time since. Ed has not done even a fraction of what I hoped we might see from a rejuvenated Labour party that was worth taking power again.

Besides, for the last nearly thirty years I have lived in a solidly Labour constituency. My MP is Andrew Gwynne, but at any time Labour could have put forward a goat wearing a red rosette, and my MP would have been a goat in a red rosette. So, given that my vote made not the tiniest fraction of difference, what was the point of voting? I had no convictions about voting for anyone, and I was hardly needed for a vote against the Tories.

But I agree with so many people here that this country can't afford another five years of the Tories, It cannot, people cannot survive it. These past five years, my slow estrangement from the country of my birth has accelerated. I am growing to hate Britain, to hate what we have become, to hate the pettiness, selfishness, meanness and racial loathing that has been encouraged by this Government. To hate the licence for hatred it has peddled, to despair at the enthusiasm it has unleashed to hate and deride the poor, the sick, the disabled and the foreign. I loathe that racism has been re-legitimised.

Now this last weekend, with the wholesale lies about the plot to oust Miliband, the distortion and cheating, I have come to a decision.

I will vote in May. I will vote Labour. My vote may not be needed in my constituency, but it is needed in my country. Only Labour can save us from another Government like this and I think it's my duty to ensure that my vote adds to Labour's legitimacy as the governing party in the face of the lies and denigration that will come.

I had not been looking forward to the prospect of not registering my vote in a General Election for the first time, no matter its cause.


Editted for crap typing as usual.

Well said

I am broadly the same, but only(!) been voting since 1996.

Whippersnapper.....

[AngryAsWell]

Labour publishes anti-privatisation NHS Bill
A new draft law has been laid before Parliament today to repeal the Government’s competition rules currently driving NHS privatisation.
The Private Member’s Bill from Labour’s Clive Efford MP, with the full support of the party’s frontbench, will be put to a Commons vote two weeks today.
The law would free the NHS from David Cameron’s enforced competition and creeping privatisation rules that were ushered in by the Health and Social Care Act 2012.
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1020149 ... n-nhs-bill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

Notes from a Broken Society

Backing Ed
November 9, 2014 · by Neil Schofield
Like a lot of Labour Party members and activists, I’m angry and confused at the moment. I’m angry that with the Tory Party in disarray, losing MPs to UKIP and humiliated in Europe once again as a direct result of its fear of UKIP, the media focus appears to be all about Labour’s leadership “crisis”. And I’m confused because, with millions in poverty while working ever-longer hours, with some of the worst child poverty rates in the developed world, with hundreds of thousands of people dependent on food banks, and with our National Health Service being dismantled in front of our eyes, you might have thought that the handful of Labour MPs briefing anonymously against Ed could have found something more useful with which to fill their day.

http://notesbrokensociety.wordpress.com ... acking-ed/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

They have been more useful, Neil. Check out the Hansard record, here, for example, Labour MPs fighting for care workers to be paid for their time.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... tm_spnew26" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Those anonymous MPs aren't in the Labour party.

[citizenJA]

Labour publishes anti-privatisation NHS Bill
A new draft law has been laid before Parliament today to repeal the Government’s competition rules currently driving NHS privatisation.
The Private Member’s Bill from Labour’s Clive Efford MP, with the full support of the party’s frontbench, will be put to a Commons vote two weeks today.
The law would free the NHS from David Cameron’s enforced competition and creeping privatisation rules that were ushered in by the Health and Social Care Act 2012.
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1020149 ... n-nhs-bill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, would you look at that. Looks like Labour MPs are working on stuff regular people need. Maybe the media reports about Labour MPs without names aren't true, then?

[Tubby Isaacs]

Deary me.

That new "internal critics" lark. They found this chap.

“Ed risks precipitating the eruption he wants to avoid through the cack-handed way his lieutenants are slagging off MPs who are deeply loyal to their party but can no longer ignore the damage his unpopularity causes on the doorstep. Shouting insults from the bunker is making the situation worse for him – it is alienating MPs who would usually opt for a quiet life.”

Makes perfect sense. When "his lieutenants" say "put up or shut up", people who've been leading a quiet life all get offended!

And not Alan Johnson elevated to lost leader without even being interested at any point.

Narrative's set up. "See, if they were led by that working class bloke..."

Johnson was forgotten, off writing books.

Nor was he particularly unifying.

[adam]

When I were a yoof, oh so many moons ago, I was an avid reader of The New Musical Express; even at the tender age of 15 I had Parsons and Burchill marked out as a pair of prize twats! And, unlike a decent wine or a good cheese, neither of them have improved with age.

I had Parsons and Burchill down as my standard 'who should be first up against the wall come the revolution' answer, on the basis that they would have to die in the sure knowledge that they would always be remembered as a couple.

I went off Tony Parsons in about 1981 when he did a piece for 'Something Else' (BBC yoof tv thing) on how 'Rock' had grown old and become 'Pop' so he didn't like it anymore. And his books are crap.

Burchill I find more annoying because, whilst I've avoided everything she's done for quite a while now, she wrote 'Sugar Rush' which was really good, and when she was writing her guardian weekend magazine column about once week in six she would be absolutely spot on about something. Nothing more annoying than someone you want to write off getting something right once in a while.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Deary me.

That new "internal critics" lark. They found this chap.

“Ed risks precipitating the eruption he wants to avoid through the cack-handed way his lieutenants are slagging off MPs who are deeply loyal to their party but can no longer ignore the damage his unpopularity causes on the doorstep. Shouting insults from the bunker is making the situation worse for him – it is alienating MPs who would usually opt for a quiet life.”

Makes perfect sense. When "his lieutenants" say "put up or shut up", people who've been leading a quiet life all get offended!

And not Alan Johnson elevated to lost leader without even being interested at any point.

Narrative's set up. "See, if they were led by that working class bloke..."

Johnson was forgotten, off writing books.

Nor was he particularly unifying.

Jesus what a muppet.

We slag off the leader 6 months from an election and then wonder why the leader, and almost everybody else hates us.

No fight, no guts, no use. How does the Labour Party end up with such an idiot as an MP.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

When I were a yoof, oh so many moons ago, I was an avid reader of The New Musical Express; even at the tender age of 15 I had Parsons and Burchill marked out as a pair of prize twats! And, unlike a decent wine or a good cheese, neither of them have improved with age.

I had Parsons and Burchill down as my standard 'who should be first up against the wall come the revolution' answer, on the basis that they would have to die in the sure knowledge that they would always be remembered as a couple.

I went off Tony Parsons in about 1981 when he did a piece for 'Something Else' (BBC yoof tv thing) on how 'Rock' had grown old and become 'Pop' so he didn't like it anymore. And his books are crap.

Burchill I find more annoying because, whilst I've avoided everything she's done for quite a while now, she wrote 'Sugar Rush' which was really good, and when she was writing her guardian weekend magazine column about once week in six she would be absolutely spot on about something. Nothing more annoying than someone you want to write off getting something right once in a while.

Ah, Burchill in Weekend. I always used to thumb my way to Zoe Williams column first, usually managed to read Burchill's bit just before the mag went into the recycling bin; and, yes, it was annoying when she got something right. Still, stopped clocks and all that.

Can't say as I've ever read one of Parsons' books, one has to have standards after all.


Night all.

[citizenJA]

Deary me.

That new "internal critics" lark. They found this chap.

“Ed risks precipitating the eruption he wants to avoid through the cack-handed way his lieutenants are slagging off MPs who are deeply loyal to their party but can no longer ignore the damage his unpopularity causes on the doorstep. Shouting insults from the bunker is making the situation worse for him – it is alienating MPs who would usually opt for a quiet life.”

Makes perfect sense. When "his lieutenants" say "put up or shut up", people who've been leading a quiet life all get offended!

And not Alan Johnson elevated to lost leader without even being interested at any point.

Narrative's set up. "See, if they were led by that working class bloke..."

Johnson was forgotten, off writing books.

Nor was he particularly unifying.

So, we're still without anyone named "internal critic", Labour MP dissenting like mad in the Labour party?

[citizenJA]

G'Night everyone.

[AngryAsWell]

G'Night everyone.

Night GS night JA well

[HindleA]

Good night.

Apologies if already mentioned;
"Britain and the cuts: Blow for Cameron as UK faces deeper cuts"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5426fc12-6346 ... abdc0.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tizme1]

Dear all,

I don't have time to catch up on all today's posts - will do that shortly. You may recall I mentioned about the 'Watford Local Hero' vote and how the website went down the other day. Apparently the Watford Observer techs noticed a large number of votes coming from the same IP addy. So they tracked it and found it was the Watford Town Hall. The Dotty Mare trying to make sure Sara-Jane Trebar didn't win. Trust me, I know for a fact she is capable of stooping to that level of snide and cheating. So below is the link to vote if you feel inclined to fight fire with fire. Today is the last day for voting though and it has to be said, Sara-Jane is a worthy candidate but so are most if not all of the others.

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/watfor ... ocal_hero/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[letsskiptotheleft]

Now Farage reckons it's ''absolutely'' possible a Kipper can win Miliband's Doncaster North seat, overturning a nigh on 11,000 majority.

He knows because he spoke to a few blokes in a working mans club, there you are then.

[AngryAsWell]

Dear all,

I don't have time to catch up on all today's posts - will do that shortly. You may recall I mentioned about the 'Watford Local Hero' vote and how the website went down the other day. Apparently the Watford Observer techs noticed a large number of votes coming from the same IP addy. So they tracked it and found it was the Watford Town Hall. The Dotty Mare trying to make sure Sara-Jane Trebar didn't win. Trust me, I know for a fact she is capable of stooping to that level of snide and cheating. So below is the link to vote if you feel inclined to fight fire with fire. Today is the last day for voting though and it has to be said, Sara-Jane is a worthy candidate but so are most if not all of the others.

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/watfor ... ocal_hero/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Done, and I did follow the Farm Terrace Allotments and supported them on twitter so its not cheating

[AngryAsWell]

Good night.

Apologies if already mentioned;
"Britain and the cuts: Blow for Cameron as UK faces deeper cuts"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5426fc12-6346 ... abdc0.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

'night well

[Tubby Isaacs]

Deary me.

That new "internal critics" lark. They found this chap.

“Ed risks precipitating the eruption he wants to avoid through the cack-handed way his lieutenants are slagging off MPs who are deeply loyal to their party but can no longer ignore the damage his unpopularity causes on the doorstep. Shouting insults from the bunker is making the situation worse for him – it is alienating MPs who would usually opt for a quiet life.”

Makes perfect sense. When "his lieutenants" say "put up or shut up", people who've been leading a quiet life all get offended!

And not Alan Johnson elevated to lost leader without even being interested at any point.

Narrative's set up. "See, if they were led by that working class bloke..."

Johnson was forgotten, off writing books.

Nor was he particularly unifying.

Jesus what a muppet.

We slag off the leader 6 months from an election and then wonder why the leader, and almost everybody else hates us.

No fight, no guts, no use. How does the Labour Party end up with such an idiot as an MP.

Absolutely. If he even exists.

I haven't seen any actual quotes from these "lieutenants" either.

[refitman]

Dear all,

I don't have time to catch up on all today's posts - will do that shortly. You may recall I mentioned about the 'Watford Local Hero' vote and how the website went down the other day. Apparently the Watford Observer techs noticed a large number of votes coming from the same IP addy. So they tracked it and found it was the Watford Town Hall. The Dotty Mare trying to make sure Sara-Jane Trebar didn't win. Trust me, I know for a fact she is capable of stooping to that level of snide and cheating. So below is the link to vote if you feel inclined to fight fire with fire. Today is the last day for voting though and it has to be said, Sara-Jane is a worthy candidate but so are most if not all of the others.

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/watfor ... ocal_hero/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Voted, you'll have to remember to tell us the result.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Now Farage reckons it's ''absolutely'' possible a Kipper can win Miliband's Doncaster North seat, overturning a nigh on 11,000 majority.

He knows because he spoke to a few blokes in a working mans club, there you are then.

They aren't even targetting it, are they?

[rebeccariots2]

The Guardian view on Britain’s jobs market: Miliband’s diagnosis vindicated
Labour’s leader is under pressure. He should remind critics that he spotted Britain’s big problems with pay and upward mobility early, and turn his mind towards solutions
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... vindicated

Sigh - and sigh again. You couldn't make this up. 'Miliband's diagnosis vindicated'. Well yes - many of us know he's been way ahead of the curve in identifying the really really big issues that matter to most of the people.

Does the Guardian really hold this view ... or is it just an 'attempt' to row back on some of the utterly vile and stupid stuff they have been spouting about Miliband day after day?

[rebeccariots2]

Jon Swindon ‏@jon_swindon 11m11 minutes ago
Thanks for all the support with #webackEd Amazing things can be achieved by every day people, today's life lesson learned.

[AngryAsWell]

Night all

[rebeccariots2]

Night all

Night AAW and all.

[ErnstRemarx]

That is why I'm (personally) very much against the sorts of spat that has - apparently - seen Temulkar stop posting here. I very much regret that. FTN is, or should be, a far wider church than being an adherent of the Labour party. All shades of left are welcome, and any reasonable (ie, not bonkers) right wing poster is welcome here too. There is much to discuss and and all intelligent input is welcome. Remember, if you disagree with a post, it makes you examine your view to be able to reply.

There is a corollary to that, which is what I was trying to discuss with Temulkar (but sadly things got out of hand); inevitably, because this is a left leaning forum, a fair number of the people posting here will be "adherent(s) of the Labour Party" - that has been shown clearly this weekend. Now, the Labour Party is a broad church - it can accommodate MPs as diverse as the much discussed Mr Danczuk and the admirable Mr Skinner - and this board is an even broader one, with posters who support a number of parties/viewpoints; to that extent I am in full agreement with you, I think that provides the platform for lively and healthy debate ..... in theory at least.

My beef with Tem was that he appeared to use the "you are being partisan" card too quickly and too often; it got to a point where I felt the only people who weren't allowed an opinion was us 'adherents' (I don't think I was alone in feeling that either) so I called him out on it. And, yet again, I will apologise for how heated it got, but I felt strongly about what was happening.

Now if people are still feeling uncomfortable about that episode, if my being here is preventing others from posting, if the feeling is that I am creating an overly partisan atmosphere then I will apologise once again and re-examine my position. Over to you folks.

I've got no problem Grims with your call. You see it; you call it; you deal with it. If it gets to 'fuck you' levels, I'll step in probably, if only to remind people to play nice. Be as principled as you like - whatever your political stance; my bottom line is keep it civil, that's all. I am a Labour member and bloody councillor, for god's sake, and I will happily kick off about stuff that I think is wrong and done by the Labour party - there is plenty of documentary evidence to that effect. What isn't acceptable is ad hominem attacks. Beyond that, as Darcy would say, go to it.

[Tizme1]

Just a thought. I've been Retweeting a few #webackEd tweets for FTN

My impression is that even those who are not Labour / Ed supporters are broadly of the opinion that the media campaign against him should be stopped. Hopefully, then, support for Miliband here and on Twitter is acceptable to the wider FTN community - it's not tribal, it's about openness and honesty in the media.

Is that OK?

Still catching up on today's posts on here. Totally agree and in fact I joined in the webackEd campaign for the very reason you state. Plus, despite being a Green, I have always had respect for Ed. I've struggled a bit recently but this crap must be stopped.

[ErnstRemarx]

Perhaps it's just my bizarrely interminable optimism (it's a hidden but constant trait) but I am beginning to feel that the anti-Ed stuff is taking on such a degree of terrified (Tories and MSM) ridiculousness, that people might just start finding it really quite silly.

I lost count of how many people said today on Twitter that all the anti-Ed stuff had persuaded them to vote Labour next year, or even to join/rejoin the party. #CrosbyOwnGoal

@Spacedone, when I were a yoof, oh so many moons ago, I was an avid reader of The New Musical Express; even at the tender age of 15 I had Parsons and Burchill marked out as a pair of prize twats! And, unlike a decent wine or a good cheese, neither of them have improved with age.

Speaking of Burchill, have you read Hadley Freeman and Will Self's responses to her book?

Haldey:

This stems from when she first found out as a youngster about the Holocaust, which was, like, totally tragic and amazing and terrible, yeah? Cue a lifetime of loving Jews by reducing them to insulting stereotypes. Jews, according to Burchill, are fascinatingly exotic. She gets crushes on the men and she loves all the adorable Jewish people in Israel, who are all chosen and stoical and wise – like people in storybooks, really! Jews are also, according to Burchill, the diametric opposite of Muslim people, who are all horrible, and their oppression of women is much worse than the oppressive codes for orthodox Jewish women, because Jews are good and Muslim people are bad. Burchill, for the record, is 55 years old.

Burchill divides up the chosen people into Good Jews (hardliners, Israelites) and Bad Jews (liberal Jews) with the enthusiasm of an antisemite. Hilariously, she sets herself up as the Jewishness Police, railing against Jews who are not Jewish enough; and one of those, it turns out, is her local rabbi, Elli Tikvah Sarah. Burchill rails against the rabbi for, in this order: ignoring a bottle of champagne Burchill gave her in favour of elderflower wine made by the rabbi’s girlfriend; “canoodling” with said girlfriend (“a Sapphic free-for-all”, sneers the heretofore not exactly prudish Burchill), and advocating a dialogue with Islam.

Burchill doesn’t include this in the book but, according to Rabbi Sarah, Burchill emailed the synagogue’s congregants railing that “your rabbi respects PIG ISLAM”. Aww, being used as a launchpad for a British columnist’s racism – we’re living in the Promised Land now, fellow Jews!

Self:

The last person to look to for such subtlety is Julie Burchill, who’s made – by her own admission – a fortune from writing the sort of ad hominem abuse that all too often is passed off as “comment” in our media. In truth, I’ve always thought of Burchill as a sort of newsprint Alastair Campbell; just as in his heyday Campbell intimidated the Westminster lobby journalists by flecking their faces with spittle and expletives, so she seems to win newspaper contracts by playing the part of sacredly authentic monster for credulous readers. I’m afraid I can’t really dignify her latest offering with the ascription “book”, nor the contents therein as “writing” – rather they are sophomoric, hammy effusions, wrongheaded, rancorous, and pathetically self-aggrandising.

I wasn’t actually aware that Burchill was a philo-Semite of long standing, but if alcoholics are prone to reciting “drunkalogues”, then we might reasonably describe Unchosen as a similarly tedious “Jewalogue”. (And since Burchill descants at such length on her own prodigious drinking and cocaine-sniffing, we might reasonably see it as a drunkalogue too.) There isn’t a shred of reason in this text, which – one hopes because all the publishers it was offered to turned it down – has been produced by an imprint funded by subscribers including such beacons of enlightenment as Richard Littlejohn. I really don’t see it as my responsibility as a reviewer to catalogue Burchill’s repugnant gallimaufry of insults and half-baked nonsense; suffice to say, she believes everything the state of Israel does is just peachy, and she uncritically accepts ethno‑Zionism, endorsing the idea that some schmuck – such as myself – who grew up in the Hampstead Garden Suburb, has a “right” to my place in the Holy Land in advance of the 1.8 million Palestinians currently penned up in the giant internment camp known as “the Gaza Strip”.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... losemitism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/n ... ill-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I fucking love Will Self. He can be sancitmonious on occasion, but generally his tanks get parked on the lawns of arseholes, whereafter he gives a good rogering. That he is dismissive of Burchill is exactly right. I've had to avoid reading her shit for years and it's wearing to when she gets a gig as a colluminst somewhere as opposed to being relegated to squarking stridently in her local paper once a week, which, frankly, is all her putrid outpourings deserve.

She sickens me with her right wing Littlejohnesque bigotry and I'd be happy to call her out on it if I ran into her. Given that my brother lives near Brighton, this isn't beyond the realms of possibility, but my hearing might not pick up her fruit bat descant were I in the same pub as her.

[diGriz]

I fucking love Will Self.

Miserable git in person. And kind of rude with it.