Forum rules Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.
A supply teacher has been banned from the classroom after telling an AS level class that “Muslims worship the devil” and he was “allergic to Mohammedans”.
Reverend Robert West, 59, was covering maternity leave at Walton Girls’ High School and Sixth Form in Lincolnshire in November 2013.
and
In an email sent to the school’s principal on December 9, 2013, West wrote: “I am not prepared to teach trash to satisfy politically correct criteria set in the Education Department who are trying to give the false impression in a multi faith (multi conflict) society that the history of religion has been one long saunter written by WALT DISNEY with foxes dancing and singing with chickens instead of eating them!”
For a start he is a self-styled Reverend with his own church and is well-known as he was a member of the BNP...
Quiet what the school was doing in hiring him as a supply teacher - did they not check his background?
If I'm not here, then I'll be in the library. Or the other library.
rebeccariots2 wrote:
I see he's been given the tag 'Blairite' in various tweets. Is this how everything is going to be framed from now on?
Probably, but then we need some method of identifying where candidates stand politically and its an easily understood description. What we then have to work out is if the description is right.....
I must admit to having to resort to Wikipedia to refresh my memory on some specifics of his record in government as I could mainly recall that I found him a bit "shiny" if that makes sense. Can't say that I found it particularly impressive.
I'll put him a page up when he declares officially.
rebeccariots2 wrote:
I see he's been given the tag 'Blairite' in various tweets. Is this how everything is going to be framed from now on?
Probably, but then we need some method of identifying where candidates stand politically and its an easily understood description. What we then have to work out is if the description is right.....
I must admit to having to resort to Wikipedia to refresh my memory on some specifics of his record in government as I could mainly recall that I found him a bit "shiny" if that makes sense. Can't say that I found it particularly impressive.
I'll put him a page up when he declares officially.
James Chapman (Mail) retweeted
Martyn @moc_moc_a_moc 23m23 minutes ago
I just joined the Labour Party so that my vote for the new leader cancels out Peter Mandelson's.
I think I am going to stand back from immediate concerns about Labour leaders given that I supported Ed rather than the party.
It's taken until today to get my head more straight than it's been. I want to see how they go about giving Dave a headache. He doesn't have a big enough majority for an easy ride. I want to see how they translate it. How/What they do now is vitally important. That's if they really care about the country more than going on a power trip.
The article above is a good example.
Where is Labour's announcement? I'd be glad of mainstream press links if there are any. I ask for mainstream press, because it's where most of those who didn't vote Labour will be getting their opinions from.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
I think I am going to stand back from immediate concerns about Labour leaders given that I supported Ed rather than the party.
It's taken until today to get my head more straight than it's been. I want to see how they go about giving Dave a headache. He doesn't have a big enough majority for an easy ride. I want to see how they translate it. How/What they do now is vitally important. That's if they really care about the country more than going on a power trip.
The article above is a good example.
Where is Labour's announcement? I'd be glad of mainstream press links if there are any. I ask for mainstream press, because it's where most of those who didn't vote Labour will be getting their opinions from.
That is exactly what I thought Ohso. And their announcement should encompass how the HRA might impact across the UK in all the nations - as well as the obvious fundamental wrong and lack of need to do this.
Adam Boulton retweeted
@haveigotnews 38 mins
Post-election study reveals final result heavily influenced by “shy Tories”, “not enough Labour” and “Limp Dems”.
It wasn't hard to realise there was a very large segment of the population who were 'shy' although I would rather call them what they really were, which is 'ashamed', Simply because of the lack of Conservative posters in windows.
My son works in Surrey and he said it was a sea of blue there, but I think it was one of the few places in the country which was blue and not afraid to say so.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
ohsocynical wrote:Adam Boulton retweeted
@haveigotnews 38 mins
Post-election study reveals final result heavily influenced by “shy Tories”, “not enough Labour” and “Limp Dems”.
It wasn't hard to realise there was a very large segment of the population who were 'shy' although I would rather call them what they really were, which is 'ashamed', Simply because of the lack of Conservative posters in windows.
My son works in Surrey and he said it was a sea of blue there, but I think it was one of the few places in the country which was blue and not afraid to say so.
I think I am going to stand back from immediate concerns about Labour leaders given that I supported Ed rather than the party.
It's taken until today to get my head more straight than it's been. I want to see how they go about giving Dave a headache. He doesn't have a big enough majority for an easy ride. I want to see how they translate it. How/What they do now is vitally important. That's if they really care about the country more than going on a power trip.
The article above is a good example.
Where is Labour's announcement? I'd be glad of mainstream press links if there are any. I ask for mainstream press, because it's where most of those who didn't vote Labour will be getting their opinions from.
That is exactly what I thought Ohso. And their announcement should encompass how the HRA might impact across the UK in all the nations - as well as the obvious fundamental wrong and lack of need to do this.
I would also like to see regular newsletters going to every voter in the country, keeping the public up to date on what the Cons are doing and how it's likely to affect us.
We can't rely on newspapers to tell it like it is or to a large extent the TV news. And although I think we do a sterling job on here, we have to face the fact we aren't going to swing it for Labour by a long margin.
It might cost a bit, but I'd rather see informative, hard hitting letters or leaflets than telephone calls which to be honest puts me off and isn't going to reach nearly enough people. At least not those who count. Telephone calls are intrusive and are the American way of electioneering and it leaves me cold.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
I think I am going to stand back from immediate concerns about Labour leaders given that I supported Ed rather than the party.
It's taken until today to get my head more straight than it's been. I want to see how they go about giving Dave a headache. He doesn't have a big enough majority for an easy ride. I want to see how they translate it. How/What they do now is vitally important. That's if they really care about the country more than going on a power trip.
The article above is a good example.
Where is Labour's announcement? I'd be glad of mainstream press links if there are any. I ask for mainstream press, because it's where most of those who didn't vote Labour will be getting their opinions from.
That is exactly what I thought Ohso. And their announcement should encompass how the HRA might impact across the UK in all the nations - as well as the obvious fundamental wrong and lack of need to do this.
Yes - my thoughts exactly: where are Labour? They didn't even get a mention with regard to the cross-party talks, referenced in the article. Worrying. Best gloss I can put on this is that they're distracted - but that's not good enough. However, if Harriet Harman is in charge pro tem, I'd have thought that she'd be anxious to wade in on this one.
(The site has been off-line for me for a fair-ish while so - ohsocynical how was the dentist experience?)
''Food bank realities: The mother thrilled to get hot water bottles so her children didn't have to go to bed in coats
A blind pensioner living on custard creams after falling behind with gas payments is also among the tales of hardship seen every day by just one Welsh food bank''
I'm sorry about my anger in the last few days at those who helped the Tories get in.
But behind the anger is a feeling of almost despair that this sort of thing happens in our country in 2015. People should be ashamed of voting Tory.
yahyah wrote:''Food bank realities: The mother thrilled to get hot water bottles so her children didn't have to go to bed in coats
A blind pensioner living on custard creams after falling behind with gas payments is also among the tales of hardship seen every day by just one Welsh food bank''
I'm sorry about my anger in the last few days at those who helped the Tories get in.
But behind the anger is a feeling of almost despair that this sort of thing happens in our country in 2015. People should be ashamed of voting Tory.
Food banks - 3 more have closed today because they have run out of food/money. In Doncaster this time.
There have been quite a few of these lately - there's no way of recording them, because they are invariably small-ish independents.
I am getting very concerned about this - these independent banks are not as well-funded or organised as Trussell Trust banks they don't get big corporate donations or tie-ups with big supermarkets and outfits like Fairshares.
Trussell Trust has done some sterling work, and Chris Mould has done his best to talk to government - IDS refuses to met with him.
But we must not forget that TT is a franchise operation, and although they are a charity, they do expect franchisees to pay up-front costs and a sort of "rental" which they call an "annual donation" to set up and use their brand.
I am very concerned that this government will issue food vouchers to people instead of direct payments of benefit. IDS/DWP have had talks with companies offering financial products like supermarket smart-cards and managed accounts for when UC comes in.
Having a large established national network with ties to retail giants has effectively given the government a system they can use - DWP could start to refer people directly with vouchers, stamps, cards, whatever, to replace actual benefit payments.
The cards that have been trialled can only be used in certain outlets for particular things - eg. you can't buy tobacco, alcohol, phone credit, or pay for prescriptions with them. In Birmingham, they already have a hardship system in which people who need help get a card they can only use in Asda - so if they want to pay for the leccy they can't, if they want to shop more cheaply in the market they can't, if they need something that the card won't cover they can't buy it. If they're anything like the ones asylum seekers get, the retailer doesn't have to give change either.
I have a horrible gnawing suspicion that Cameron will try to resuscitate his Big Society bollocks - possibly with a new snappy name as the original network is still under investigation by the Charity Commission - and tie it in to IDS's plans to cut benefits by imposing behavioural change.
This is the sort of crap that the Centre for Social Justice (IDS's own think-tank) looks into.
I wouldn't be surprised if IDS decided to work out exactly how much people need in terms of food to avoid starvation, and give them vouchers for precisely that amount which they can only spend where he dictates. No little baccy roll-ups for you, scrounger.
I wonder if we will see some sort of takeover of food bank functions by big retail - possibly even the food banks themselves. If they're prepared to steal Housing Association properties, this would be easy enough. Staffed by workfare slaves policed by G4S.
I'm wittering on a bit here. The facts remain that this sort of stuff is being considered, so it's only a matter of time, IMHO.
And the facts also remain that food banks not allied to TT are in some places closing down. Too much demand, no supply.
It's a national disgrace, all this.
"Poverty is the worst form of violence" - Mahatma Gandhi
yahyah wrote:''Food bank realities: The mother thrilled to get hot water bottles so her children didn't have to go to bed in coats
A blind pensioner living on custard creams after falling behind with gas payments is also among the tales of hardship seen every day by just one Welsh food bank''
I'm sorry about my anger in the last few days at those who helped the Tories get in.
But behind the anger is a feeling of almost despair that this sort of thing happens in our country in 2015. People should be ashamed of voting Tory.
Hear hear ! I agree
How weird is this?
Two of you posting on food banks while I'm doing the same....
"Poverty is the worst form of violence" - Mahatma Gandhi
ohsocynical wrote:
I think I am going to stand back from immediate concerns about Labour leaders given that I supported Ed rather than the party.
It's taken until today to get my head more straight than it's been. I want to see how they go about giving Dave a headache. He doesn't have a big enough majority for an easy ride. I want to see how they translate it. How/What they do now is vitally important. That's if they really care about the country more than going on a power trip.
The article above is a good example.
Where is Labour's announcement? I'd be glad of mainstream press links if there are any. I ask for mainstream press, because it's where most of those who didn't vote Labour will be getting their opinions from.
That is exactly what I thought Ohso. And their announcement should encompass how the HRA might impact across the UK in all the nations - as well as the obvious fundamental wrong and lack of need to do this.
Yes - my thoughts exactly: where are Labour? They didn't even get a mention with regard to the cross-party talks, referenced in the article. Worrying. Best gloss I can put on this is that they're distracted - but that's not good enough. However, if Harriet Harman is in charge pro tem, I'd have thought that she'd be anxious to wade in on this one.
(The site has been off-line for me for a fair-ish while so - ohsocynical how was the dentist experience?)
Basically it was £40 down the drain to get my teeth cleaned and to placate the dentist. A top front tooth with a brown mark that was really the only one I was concerned about, is they tell me pre-cavity, but not enough to fill yet...However I can now be very proud of some glaringly shiny back teeth.
I must remember to yawn when I'm out rather than smile.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
rebeccariots2 wrote:
That is exactly what I thought Ohso. And their announcement should encompass how the HRA might impact across the UK in all the nations - as well as the obvious fundamental wrong and lack of need to do this.
Yes - my thoughts exactly: where are Labour? They didn't even get a mention with regard to the cross-party talks, referenced in the article. Worrying. Best gloss I can put on this is that they're distracted - but that's not good enough. However, if Harriet Harman is in charge pro tem, I'd have thought that she'd be anxious to wade in on this one.
(The site has been off-line for me for a fair-ish while so - ohsocynical how was the dentist experience?)
Basically it was £40 down the drain to get my teeth cleaned and to placate the dentist. A top front tooth with a brown mark that was really the only one I was concerned about, is they tell me pre-cavity, but not enough to fill yet...However I can now be very proud of some glaringly shiny back teeth.
I must remember to yawn when I'm out rather than smile.
Over the last few days, most of your writers have talked about the nation “turning its back on Labour”. One writer (Zoe Williams, 11 May) claimed Labour “were not offering anything that anybody wanted”. That may be how it looks inside your Westminster media bubble. Out here in the real world, more than 9.3 million people wanted it, some of us very much.
Matthew Simpson
Sheffield
Worth remembering that - alongside all the angst and renting of cloths over the changes needed. Yes - some people may have been voting for the least worst when they voted Labour - but not all of them by any means - there were some good policies and clear differences - and I believe the SNP, Greens and Plaid were looking forward to keeping a Labour government honest, weren't they? (being cheeky there ... before anyone takes offence.)
On another tack - but related. My sister was at a family do on Sunday. Her nephew was there with a couple of friends from uni ... all first time voters just registered. She chatted to them about their experience of voting. They were disappointed by the outcome and peed off at what they now considered wasted votes. Two of them had voted Green - one had voted Tory(? no I don't understand that either - unless it was to keep out a perceived Ukip threat maybe). She said they clearly didn't understand the context in their constituencies or the voting system. They were clearly deflated and she felt they might even have been turned off voting in future ... not good and I hope they are not. People have said we need better political / constitutional education - yes, we do. It's getting ever more complicated for people to work out who is responsible for what and all the other vagaries - and will become even more so with increasing devolution.
ephemerid wrote:
I am very concerned that this government will issue food vouchers to people instead of direct payments of benefit. IDS/DWP have had talks with companies offering financial products like supermarket smart-cards and managed accounts for when UC comes in.
Having a large established national network with ties to retail giants has effectively given the government a system they can use - DWP could start to refer people directly with vouchers, stamps, cards, whatever, to replace actual benefit payments.
The cards that have been trialled can only be used in certain outlets for particular things - eg. you can't buy tobacco, alcohol, phone credit, or pay for prescriptions with them. In Birmingham, they already have a hardship system in which people who need help get a card they can only use in Asda - so if they want to pay for the leccy they can't, if they want to shop more cheaply in the market they can't, if they need something that the card won't cover they can't buy it. If they're anything like the ones asylum seekers get, the retailer doesn't have to give change either.
I'm wittering on a bit here. The facts remain that this sort of stuff is being considered, so it's only a matter of time, IMHO.
And the facts also remain that food banks not allied to TT are in some places closing down. Too much demand, no supply.
It's a national disgrace, all this.
How the hell is that supposed to work for people who live nowhere near these approved outlets? When I chatted to the vicar that runs the Cardigan foodbank before Christmas he told me that people were travelling large distances to them - and some were having to walk considerable distances because there are no buses, or they can't afford them, that will get them from their home to Cardigan.
And this lot have the nerve to say today they're going to show they can be both compassionate and tough ... sickening.
We pay for people to get social security they don't always get - however many don't get their entitlements, we still pay for the salaries and systems and whatnot that deny them their benefits. It's all still there, it's all still busy, bit it's not paying benefits it's stopping them.
We pay the council tax that the councils use to run their hardship schemes, but we get no voice in how they choose to administer them and whether they give out cash, food, or supermarket smartcards (or even nothing at all) so we are paying for two lots of administration.
We pay for the food that goes in the bins at the supermarkets or the food we donate elsewhere, and we pay for donations to the charities that organise all this - so we pay again, and some of that ends up in the profits for supermarket shareholders.
While we are busy paying for all this, people are going hungry in ever-increasing numbers - the responsibility for feeding the poor is now ours, even though we are paying for others to so this through the social security system.
Neat. Fucking neat.
"Poverty is the worst form of violence" - Mahatma Gandhi
yahyah wrote:''Food bank realities: The mother thrilled to get hot water bottles so her children didn't have to go to bed in coats
A blind pensioner living on custard creams after falling behind with gas payments is also among the tales of hardship seen every day by just one Welsh food bank''
I'm sorry about my anger in the last few days at those who helped the Tories get in.
But behind the anger is a feeling of almost despair that this sort of thing happens in our country in 2015. People should be ashamed of voting Tory.
Hear hear ! I agree
How weird is this?
Two of you posting on food banks while I'm doing the same....
I am gradually clearing my head.
(1) See my post above about the leadership contest and wanting to see Labour representing us right now.
(2) I point blank refuse to stop being pissed off and disgusted.
(3) I reserve the right to make my displeasure known if I hear anyone who didn't vote Labour because of some lame excuse, moan.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
Anyone else hear the news today that detainees - immigrants waiting to hear if they can stay in the UK or not - are now being employed / working in record numbers in the secure centres they are held in ... for £1 an hour? The number working in centres run by Serco has gone up by over 50% since 2011 and another private firm (can't remember which) by 20%. Of course, the firms insist they are not replacing paid 'professional' staff. Do we believe that? I don't. These detainees, who have committed no crime, are doing the cooking, cleaning etc - and the firms are maximising their profits. Surely it's illegal for people to work and be paid less than the minimum wage?
We pay for people to get social security they don't always get - however many don't get their entitlements, we still pay for the salaries and systems and whatnot that deny them their benefits. It's all still there, it's all still busy, bit it's not paying benefits it's stopping them.
We pay the council tax that the councils use to run their hardship schemes, but we get no voice in how they choose to administer them and whether they give out cash, food, or supermarket smartcards (or even nothing at all) so we are paying for two lots of administration.
We pay for the food that goes in the bins at the supermarkets or the food we donate elsewhere, and we pay for donations to the charities that organise all this - so we pay again, and some of that ends up in the profits for supermarket shareholders.
While we are busy paying for all this, people are going hungry in ever-increasing numbers - the responsibility for feeding the poor is now ours, even though we are paying for others to so this through the social security system.
Neat. Fucking neat.
Can I vote for this post to go on the blog if we get it up and running. It should be the first article on there. In bold.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
On a completely separate note while there's peace; internet spats. They happen anywhere and everywhere online and shall no doubt continue to do so. May I make one further observation that likens it to road rage. If you have a spat then you are part of the problem.
Okay some journeys and decisions are made in haste. Stuff happens. Have I enough time? Shall I get to my destination any quicker? 'And the biggie, am I comfortable or am I safe? I may think so if I shout loudly enough.
Do you remember early email advice? If angry or frustrated do not send till the following day. Nowadays with instant messaging, please take time to reflect such things before booting up or logging in. You do not have to take my word for it but I was once an educationalist in all things computer science related, including human interaction and its sociological impact. Take care.
Oh yeah, nearly forgot the advice. Content yourself with your last word if necessary. Should they still come back then why bother? They're wasting their own breath or effort. I may read another of their contributions some time; maybe tomorrow if so inclined or maybe never as the case may be. Angry? No, there's so much more to be angry about.
Now where is that JCB I ordered?
Edit: punctuation
Last edited by utopiandreams on Tue 12 May, 2015 7:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Lucy Fisher @LOS_Fisher 25m25 minutes ago
A Westminster wag texts to say of Ukip row: "There is something admirable about a party with one MP staging a backbench rebellion"
Allegra Stratton @BBCAllegra · May 8
One eminent LD tells me they see way back - that party should join forces with whoever takes over Labour. Like Ashdown & Blair nearly did
How is that a way back? and for who? they still won't be able to get them out
AngryAsWell wrote:Allegra Stratton @BBCAllegra · May 8
One eminent LD tells me they see way back - that party should join forces with whoever takes over Labour. Like Ashdown & Blair nearly did
How is that a way back? and for who? they still won't be able to get them out
Yes I agree with that.
The two parties are now complementary throughout most of the country. The Lib Dems don't have the strength to run a national campaign but they are strong in the South West and some other rural constituencies where Labour are too weak to challenge.
AngryAsWell wrote:Allegra Stratton @BBCAllegra · May 8
One eminent LD tells me they see way back - that party should join forces with whoever takes over Labour. Like Ashdown & Blair nearly did
How is that a way back? and for who? they still won't be able to get them out
Yes I agree with that.
The two parties are now complementary throughout most of the country. The Lib Dems don't have the strength to run a national campaign but they are strong in the South West and some other rural constituencies where Labour are too weak to challenge.
Sorry my head was still full of food banks and I just went into "can they get them out?" mode, and then fell back down again when I realised they can't.
Lucy Fisher @LOS_Fisher 25m25 minutes ago
A Westminster wag texts to say of Ukip row: "There is something admirable about a party with one MP staging a backbench rebellion"
AngryAsWell wrote:Allegra Stratton @BBCAllegra · May 8
One eminent LD tells me they see way back - that party should join forces with whoever takes over Labour. Like Ashdown & Blair nearly did
How is that a way back? and for who? they still won't be able to get them out
I'm not sure what that means either. Haven't seen anything else on that line elsewhere. But I'd imagine the thought of any kind of formal alliance or coalition with another party would send a shudder through the Lib Dems now - understandably so. Co-operation on various issues where there are similarities with other parties - fine. That's what I hope will happen in the House of Lords re opposing the abolition of the Human Rights Act. There are going to be a lot of opportunities for various parties to work together given the measures this government has set out as its priorities.
According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
Willow904 wrote:According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
Is that because to stay in would give a double benefit to the bankers et al? That is to say, they'll get the best of both worlds?
Your way is tempting, but I think I'd still vote to stay in.
AngryAsWell wrote:Allegra Stratton @BBCAllegra · May 8
One eminent LD tells me they see way back - that party should join forces with whoever takes over Labour. Like Ashdown & Blair nearly did
How is that a way back? and for who? they still won't be able to get them out
I'm not sure what that means either. Haven't seen anything else on that line elsewhere. But I'd imagine the thought of any kind of formal alliance or coalition with another party would send a shudder through the Lib Dems now - understandably so. Co-operation on various issues where there are similarities with other parties - fine. That's what I hope will happen in the House of Lords re opposing the abolition of the Human Rights Act. There are going to be a lot of opportunities for various parties to work together given the measures this government has set out as its priorities.
I posted just such a suggestion on LDV a few days ago.
It isn't hard, they don't run in Labour targets, Labour don't run in theirs.
Willow904 wrote:According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
The implications of our leaving the EU are too horrific to contemplate, the collapse in the economy would make the 1920's look like a picnic.
Today, I was unlucky enough to be trapped into a conversation with a couple of kippers. Apparantly Fuhrage is saying in public what "we" are all saying behind closed doors. Stupidly I took the bait, and asked what exactly it was that "we" are thinking. Immigrants, came the answer. Hordes of them. They're getting free council houses, taking over, and they're only pretending to be escaping from war zones and genocide. Fuhrage is right about them, apparantly.
Trying to keep my temper in check, I pointed out that my parents were immigrants, but they seemed to object to my taking their rampant kippery personally. I went on to explain that the lack of social housing was not the fault of immigrants, nor was the tanking economy (construction sector has had three quarters of negative growth), nor was the lack of investment in the NHS, transport and so on. They merely gaped at me like landed fish (for pointing at?) and went but-but-but.
Just how do you respond to this kippery without committing murder? Any ideas?
Sky News @SkyNews · 7 hrs7 hours ago
Chuka Umunna says "no more Blairites, no more Brownites" as he announces he is running for #Labour leader
Paul Flynn @PaulFlynnMP · 53 secs54 seconds ago Newport, Wales
2 fine candidates for Labour Leadership. Watch Tory press now attack Chuka-confirming he is the candidate they fear the most. I'm convinced.
Willow904 wrote:According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
This could so easily end up like the AV referendum. People voting contrary to what they might actually want as an outcome for a host of reasons other than they have actually changed their mind about the central question especially if Cameron leads the campaign and starts with his usual trickeries like that. Extreme narked offness with the person forcing this referendum on the country for political expediency rather than out of true conviction and for their brazen pandering to certain interests might cause a surge in voting OUT.
Willow904 wrote:According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
The implications of our leaving the EU are too horrific to contemplate, the collapse in the economy would make the 1920's look like a picnic.
Yes - and all the other safeguards that may be left in place would be lost, too. And God knows we need all the protection we might be able to get. Voting for "out" is a scorched earth policy, in my opinion.
Tony2602 wrote:Evening all, a quick observation for you.
Today, I was unlucky enough to be trapped into a conversation with a couple of kippers. Apparantly Fuhrage is saying in public what "we" are all saying behind closed doors. Stupidly I took the bait, and asked what exactly it was that "we" are thinking. Immigrants, came the answer. Hordes of them. They're getting free council houses, taking over, and they're only pretending to be escaping from war zones and genocide. Fuhrage is right about them, apparantly.
Trying to keep my temper in check, I pointed out that my parents were immigrants, but they seemed to object to my taking their rampant kippery personally. I went on to explain that the lack of social housing was not the fault of immigrants, nor was the tanking economy (construction sector has had three quarters of negative growth), nor was the lack of investment in the NHS, transport and so on. They merely gaped at me like landed fish (for pointing at?) and went but-but-but.
Just how do you respond to this kippery without committing murder? Any ideas?
Hi nice to see you.
I'm not so nice at all, I sort of say things like "were you born stupid? or did you have to go to collage for a degree in stupidity?"
5 years of tory rule and the prospect of another 5 have turned me into a-not-very-nice person.
I admire your patience greatly
AngryAsWell wrote:Allegra Stratton @BBCAllegra · May 8
One eminent LD tells me they see way back - that party should join forces with whoever takes over Labour. Like Ashdown & Blair nearly did
How is that a way back? and for who? they still won't be able to get them out
I'm not sure what that means either. Haven't seen anything else on that line elsewhere. But I'd imagine the thought of any kind of formal alliance or coalition with another party would send a shudder through the Lib Dems now - understandably so. Co-operation on various issues where there are similarities with other parties - fine. That's what I hope will happen in the House of Lords re opposing the abolition of the Human Rights Act. There are going to be a lot of opportunities for various parties to work together given the measures this government has set out as its priorities.
I posted just such a suggestion on LDV a few days ago.
It isn't hard, they don't run in Labour targets, Labour don't run in theirs.
A Lib Lab pact? The terms would be a mutual commitment to electoral reform I suppose, with the pact covering Tory marginals only maybe? It's got to be considered. The seats to votes ratios were some of the most extreme ever this last election. And Labour no longer have the advantage they once had, so the Libdems probably have their best chance of persuading them to dump FPTP they'll ever get.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
Tony2602 wrote:Evening all, a quick observation for you.
Today, I was unlucky enough to be trapped into a conversation with a couple of kippers. Apparantly Fuhrage is saying in public what "we" are all saying behind closed doors. Stupidly I took the bait, and asked what exactly it was that "we" are thinking. Immigrants, came the answer. Hordes of them. They're getting free council houses, taking over, and they're only pretending to be escaping from war zones and genocide. Fuhrage is right about them, apparantly.
Trying to keep my temper in check, I pointed out that my parents were immigrants, but they seemed to object to my taking their rampant kippery personally. I went on to explain that the lack of social housing was not the fault of immigrants, nor was the tanking economy (construction sector has had three quarters of negative growth), nor was the lack of investment in the NHS, transport and so on. They merely gaped at me like landed fish (for pointing at?) and went but-but-but.
Just how do you respond to this kippery without committing murder? Any ideas?
Sounds like you did a good job at pointing out the realities to them. Trouble is you'd probably have to have very many repeats of those sorts of conversations to make any headway ... they're hearing the other stuff all the time in the press and via Farage and co. I was told when we started canvassing that research shows that you need at least 7 contacts to make an impact ... that's why doing stuff in the community which facilitates people from different walks of life and perspectives interacting can help develop a better understanding of other experiences, views and how things actually work or don't.
Willow904 wrote:According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
This could so easily end up like the AV referendum. People voting contrary to what they might actually want as an outcome for a host of reasons other than they have actually changed their mind about the central question especially if Cameron leads the campaign and starts with his usual trickeries like that. Extreme narked offness with the person forcing this referendum on the country for political expediency rather than out of true conviction and for their brazen pandering to certain interests might cause a surge in voting OUT.
Yes, exactly - I can see people voting for OUT because Cameron will be leading the IN campaign.
Labour, Lib Dems and other parties who want to stay in the EU have to run a separate campaign from the Tories. If they join the same campaign then there could be a similar reaction as in Scotland where Labour were tarred with the Tory brush by campaigning with them.
A separate campaign by these parties could be the start of a Coalition of the Left?
Willow904 wrote:According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
This could so easily end up like the AV referendum. People voting contrary to what they might actually want as an outcome for a host of reasons other than they have actually changed their mind about the central question especially if Cameron leads the campaign and starts with his usual trickeries like that. Extreme narked offness with the person forcing this referendum on the country for political expediency rather than out of true conviction and for their brazen pandering to certain interests might cause a surge in voting OUT.
Yes, exactly - I can see people voting for OUT because Cameron will be leading the IN campaign.
Labour, Lib Dems and other parties who want to stay in the EU have to run a separate campaign from the Tories. If they join the same campaign then there could be a similar reaction as in Scotland where Labour were tarred with the Tory brush by campaigning with them.
A separate campaign by these parties could be the start of a Coalition of the Left?
Hi Angry. Well, it wasn't easy. But like I said on Saturday, they're going on the list (when the shit hits the fan they'll be the first to come bitching to the union rep). All I could think of at the time was this:
And you know, I really think we're approaching that moment. God help us.
Willow904 wrote:According to C4 News the really important thing that Cameron is desperate to re-negotiate with the EU before he can recommend to stay in is protections for the City of London. He doesn't try to hide who he works for, does he? I hope the EU tells him where to go but if he does win the hedge funds and bankers concessions, I think I'll be voting out.
The implications of our leaving the EU are too horrific to contemplate, the collapse in the economy would make the 1920's look like a picnic.
Yes - and all the other safeguards that may be left in place would be lost, too. And God knows we need all the protection we might be able to get. Voting for "out" is a scorched earth policy, in my opinion.
Don't worry. My voting out would pretty much guarantee everyone else votes in! I'm almost always on the wrong side of majority opinion. Which is the problem, because my natural inclination is in, which means the majority is probably for out and I'm not sure the papers will be enough to convince people who have been waiting for a chance to leave for decades to change their minds.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
Tony2602 wrote:Evening all, a quick observation for you.
Today, I was unlucky enough to be trapped into a conversation with a couple of kippers. Apparantly Fuhrage is saying in public what "we" are all saying behind closed doors. Stupidly I took the bait, and asked what exactly it was that "we" are thinking. Immigrants, came the answer. Hordes of them. They're getting free council houses, taking over, and they're only pretending to be escaping from war zones and genocide. Fuhrage is right about them, apparantly.
Trying to keep my temper in check, I pointed out that my parents were immigrants, but they seemed to object to my taking their rampant kippery personally. I went on to explain that the lack of social housing was not the fault of immigrants, nor was the tanking economy (construction sector has had three quarters of negative growth), nor was the lack of investment in the NHS, transport and so on. They merely gaped at me like landed fish (for pointing at?) and went but-but-but.
Just how do you respond to this kippery without committing murder? Any ideas?
Nope. They're best left alone. If Labour tries to court them, they're going to get their fingers burned...Treat like BNP. Unacceptable in decent society. End of.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
