View Full Version : Eurgh! Tony Blair has made me ill again.

Surly Bondslipper
10th Apr 2002, 10:41
It is reported today that Downing Street tried to arrange for Tony and Cherie to delay their arrival at Westminster Abbey, so that they entered after all other guests were in place and just before the Queen.

This would have given them the chance to process in glory down the packed nave, nodding and smiling all the way, cameras tracking their progress.

Mercifully the Palace managed to nix this charming proposal, tactfully pointing out that, as 35 members of her family, nine Queens, four Kings and forty-odd Heads of State were happy to turn up together and get in place, maybe our alternative Royal couple might do the same.

Pass the sickbag please, if it is not full already.....

Tartan Gannet
10th Apr 2002, 11:54
I agree wholeheartedly. I only have to see those two, (the middle class version of Posh and Becks) or hear his horrible unctious voice to feel sick to my stomach. I wont indulge in the forbidden topic of pary politics but as an Old Labour type I hate Blair for his politics as well.

Bravo Betty for putting this parvenu firmly in his place! Let him never forget that YOU are Head of State, he is merely Head of Government and you have seen 10 different PMs in your time on the Throne. If anyone has converted me to a staunch supporter of the Hereditory Constitutional Monarchy we have in the UK then Blair has been that man!

Fr O'Blivien
10th Apr 2002, 16:58
Alternative Royal couple indeed!

Can you imagine the insufferable egos of that smarmy creep and the wide mouthed frog wearing crowns! Yerrrcccchhhh.

Stick to protocol Mr Blair, and just remember you are OUR EMPLOYEE, JUST A PUBLIC SERVANT. With the emphasis on servant.

10th Apr 2002, 21:35
Where did you get your info, SBS? Daily Mail? Evidence?

TB may not go down well on PPRuNe, but they love him in Washington and Texas, and in the UK nobody likes him except the voters.

I can live with that.

Anybody want a tenner for IDS to be next PM? I'll take your money with a smile.

10th Apr 2002, 21:42
Tony Blair will probably win the next election, or one of his other crooks. I think it is because people don't really want either, but TB is more appealing, despite him being a __________________insert swear words________________

Send Clowns
10th Apr 2002, 21:49
And couldn't the little idiot get to Moss Bros to hire morning dress for the occasion? Inverted snobbery is no better than any other sort, and for this occasion there is only one correct dress code for the head of government.

Standard Noise
10th Apr 2002, 23:28
rob_frost - would wucking fanker be the words to complete your sentence?

I'm just surprised we haven't had to put up with more of the cheesy **** in the last couple of days. I wonder how many black ties he's managed to wear out in the last 5 years and why does he think he always has to take on the role of mourner-in-chief anyway?

Personally, the painted on smiles Phoney and Cheerie wear look like someone has stuck a coathanger in their gobs.
Oh dear pass the sick bag....

10th Apr 2002, 23:54
Funny how the doves of youth turn into the bloody hawks in middle age. Dear old Tony seems determined to put our armed forces in everywhere he can, it's almost as if he can't hear the elastic limits being reached.:D

Still, rather have him on the throne, then that fcuking slaphead rascist (Either of them, and the honarary one that finally contracted mad cow disease)

Any danger of that Nice Mr. Ashdown (Trained Killer) getting into No.10, he knows a thing or 2 about Power projection.



11th Apr 2002, 00:05
My theory is that when they are young rebellious undergrads, they are in the conscription age band :eek: and so are "doves".....

...but, by the time they become middle-aged politicians, they are out of that age band, and so can safely become hawks..... :mad: :rolleyes:

Tartan Gannet
11th Apr 2002, 00:48
U_R, your money is safe. There is more chance of me being the next Pope. (Orange? Masonic? Pro Abortion and Euthanasia?) than IDS winning anything. Phoney or Gordon the Monocular Money Man are safe bets to win the next election and maybe the one after that!

Its a pity as a Democracy needs an Opposition that is a viable and credible alternative Government. Alas the Tories just aint that these days!

11th Apr 2002, 03:27
Unwell Raptor, you claim that the voters like Tony Blair - and your evidence for this is ?????

That his party was voted in once again is not evidence that Tony Blair is personally liked. And did he really have that big a percentage of the population vote for him or his party? Labour party membership is at an all time low - surely not a sign that Tony Blair has captured even the minds, let alone the hearts of his electorate. Before I left England I understood the polls were showing quite a drop in his ratings - an old adage, but a true one - you can't fool all the people all the time.

Send Clowns
11th Apr 2002, 09:06
Soltok, you sound rather petty, petulant and like a mouthpece of the Guardian or the Mirror. Nothing IDS nor Hague ever said was racist. It's just that any debate that the centre/left want to shut down they immediately characterise as fallig foul of ther own bizarre Politically Correct code, whether it does or not. You seem unable to think for yourself or bother to understand what has been said that is claimed to be raist.

On the other hand Blair has destroyed a lot of the institutions that helped govern this country in a moderate way, without the excesses that have gripped politics in other European countries. We will come to regret that. He has done everything to keep power for himself, personally, as his personal petty fiefdom and attacking anything against which heis prejudiced, while making life harder for everyone else. This is much more important than any policy differences : the very constitution of the country is in danger under this creep.

So far this government has cost me well over £15 000, and much more in the long term, at a time when I have not been at all well-off (not able to work due to a full-time course, for example). I don't see how you can jusify that Blair is better than Hague or IDS for many people. In fact Thatcher has been best for most people : according o the CEO of MORI more people climbed to a middle-class life between 1981 census and the 1991 census than in any other decade "in the last Millenium".

11th Apr 2002, 11:14
Send, I am PongoPrivatePilot with one of pprunes enforced name changes, do I look fcuking politically correct or left-wing to you?:mad: As for the 2 rags you mention, I wouldn't wipe my butt with them, except for last weeks Mirrors, which defended the Queen Mother against the trendy Royal Bashers.

Petty and Petulant? Hague was useless, the standby slaphead is the same. "More people rose to the Middle-Classes"? and what was the rate of business failures, as The vieux trout built the biggest pyramid game in the world again?I saw her interviewed on local television yesterday, and she has lost the plot, mind you,in my opinion, she did that a long time ago.Best for most people? She wasn't for my best friend from school, who died on a lump of rock in the South Atlantic, in a conflict that could have been avoided, if she had listened to HMS Endurance, instead of pushing a bad position, because she wanted re-election, so kindly do not mention that selfish,self-serving old Bi**h as an example of a great leader, she isn't fit to lie in Churchills or even Atlees' shadow.

I love the way the blues operate...."Oh the NHS and the armed forces are in Rag order, it's all Blairs fault" Whilst forgetting that SDR and NHS trusts were Tory brainchilds that just don't work, and have ended with the NHS and the Forces eviscerated.

The system in this country needs a radical overhaul, and politicians, from across the political spectrum , need to stop thinking of themselves first, and their City of London Directiorships and Euro Gravy-trains, and start thinking about us, the punters who put them there in the first place

(Edited because I couldn't find strong enough words to emphasise my dislike of a certain politician)

11th Apr 2002, 19:50
Well thank goodness I live in a country where such discussions can freely be displayed. Some of you seem to hold an almost slavering hatred or unrequited lurve for one or other of these power hungry people mentioned so far. Personally I find it rather sad that in most elections that we have less than 50% can be bothered. I do find that once people attain a certain position, that they have to shove it down our throats,and not just in politics. IDS seems to be rather less inclined to do that than "Townie Bleah".

Send Clowns
11th Apr 2002, 20:27
Ah, well PPP however little you like Hague (since the media never really gave him any chance, too busy snig'gering abut his misspent youth, I don't see how you can judge) or Duncan Smith you have not justifeid your assertion that they are racist. That has been made up buy the centre-left politico-media establishment.

Thatcher helped the people who needed it. I aree it was for selfish reasons - the middle class voted for her and her successors. This is why Blairs policies are designed to keep people in the gutter : our media propoganda is that Socialists help such people, so they vote for the people who try to keep them dependent. The reason busness failures were high is that record numbers of businesses were set up. That is't likely under the disgraceful business/social legislation of this government.

11th Apr 2002, 20:41
I was sad to see Ken Clarke miss out on the blue leadership. Who could be better to stand against the cheesy, politically correct Blair PR machine than an overweight alcoholic who makes his money selling nicotine to 14 year old Vietnamese schoolgirls.

Seriously though, the courage of his convictions about the euro, whether you agree with the policy or not, is something rare these days in politics, especially as it was clearly the factor causing his defeat.

You can always trust a fat man, especially if heís drunk by 10am. :p

11th Apr 2002, 22:20
All this rant against politicians - nothing wrong with that what so ever.

But why don't we do something about that?

Have an open season for the scum bags. You know, with prize money for the best kills.

Like £1 million for Keith Vaz, Blair, Mandelson, Byers ,other cheif crooks

£100,000 for other cabinet members

£1000 for an MP

£100 for wounding them

Sell their jags, suit collections, country mansions etc for the prize money. Make handguns legal ( no wait, you can them faster now on the black market than before ) and some other weapons so our huntsmen are well equiped. We could also use all those fox hounds and blood hounds. Have a nice, mounted chase. Then the people who complain about losing their jobs due to fox hunting being banned will still have jobs.


11th Apr 2002, 22:58
OK, so we've had what, 5 years now? 1997-2002?

How much longer do we have to put up with CheesyGrin saying that it's all the Tories fault?

As a staunch, card carrying, Tory I happily concede that after 18 years it was time for a change. Personally, I'd have preferred that change to come from within the party - it didn't and the CheesyGrin Bandwagon rolled into town. OK, accept defeat gratiously.

But I'm getting a bit fed up with everything being blamed on Maggie - she's gone now, seemingly Cheesy didn't notice this.

I remember listening to John Prescott (I admire bits of his character, not much, but bits) during the 97 election campaign standing on his soapbox in Plymouth (I lie, it was actually the back of a New Labour, New Flat Bed Trailer) he talked for about an hour whilst we all listened intently. We all clapped when he finished (some relief, some hysteria), and then when we'd all finished he said "course, it's going to take at least two terms in office".

Pillock. If New Labour had moved in and changed everything back in line with Labour principles (and I have to admit to have a great deal of respect for "Old" Labourites, people who really have a conviction about their politics) then I'd have been happier. But when a party moves in changes everything blue to red and then carries on as if nothing had happened, deserting the people who put them there, then that really makes me angry and makes me wonder how New Labour can turn around and say that the Tories are being insincere about their desire to change and get away with it.

New Labour, New Conservatives. Rock on Denis Skinner. More power to you and people like you.

And on the subject of the last election. The turnout was the lowest since 1918, with only 58% of those eligable to vote doing so, with an increase in the Tory vote. Jack Straw, at the time, blamed it on "The politics of contentment" - a rather self-righteous and grand statement in my view, and one which he must have made after he breathed a great big sigh of relief that more people hadn't bothered...

Ah, I feel better now. Are we allowed to debate politics here...?! :p

11th Apr 2002, 23:01
Itís for the good of the nation. They are a pest and their numbers need to be controlled. However, there are obviously advantages and disadvantages to this proposition of MP hunting. I am informed that the MPs will feel no pain in their ordeal, but there are probably many advantages too. ;)

11th Apr 2002, 23:07
"Unwell Raptor, you claim that the voters like Tony Blair - and your evidence for this is ?????"

Two massive election victories.

Consistently high poll ratings since 1997 - almost unknown for a sitting Prime Minister. Remember the ratings for Major, Thatcher, Callaghan, Wilson, and Heath at this stage of their terms of office?

What more do you need?

For some reason PPRuNe is a hermetically sealed vessel where Blair is concerned. It's interesting, but it doesn't prove much. Most of the criticism seems to centre on the fact that he smiles, has a successful wife, and - er - that's it.

Send Clowns
11th Apr 2002, 23:39
U_R they were not massive election victories. That is a New Labour lie (not a rare thing) to justify the disgraceful distruction of our constitution. The vote for Blair in 1997 was lower than the vote for Major in 1992. In between New Labour had been very vociferous in lobbying the boundary commission when large numbers of constituency borders were reset. The vote for Blair in 2001 was lower than the vote for Kinnock in 1992. There was also a lot of talk of vote rigging caused by Blair's appalling restructuring of the postal ballot rules, destruction of the requirement to vote in confidence, in a booth to which you re not allow entry to anyone else.

Tartan Gannet
11th Apr 2002, 23:44
Send Clowns, get real my friend, BLAIR IS NOT A SOCIALIST! If he is then the Pope is an Orangeman and an Abortionist.

I detested the economic and industrial policies of Thatcher but admire her for the following actions:-

1 Sinking the Belgrano
2 Letting the SAS exterminate 3 murdering terrorist vermin on Gib "Death on the Rock"

She let me down badly on Law and Order as she could have used her huge majority to get the restoration of the Death Penalty through on a 3 line whip, expelling the wets such as Hurd who were against.

I feel the time is ripe for a new political party, free of the big business influence of the dying Tory party or the spinmeister, self serving candyfloss of Blair and his cronies.

I dont live in any hope. BTW I no longer vote as I feel it is a waste of time as politicans, except for a few principled individuals, pay no heed of the views of their electorate but either follow their own self interest or slavishly obey the dictates of their party whips.

U_R, Phoney Tony won by default. A washed up Tory Government with a hopeless tired out Major as its nominal leader in 1997, then a fatuous slaphead as his opponent, with a shell shocked and purposeless Tory party in 2001. The LDs are not yet trusted to take over as the Opposition although they are certainly growing in the number of seats they hold. Any bets in their winning 100 plus seats at the next General Election in 2005-06?

BTW Im surprised Danny hasnt spiked this thread as he banned party politics, maybe he is getting soft in his old age?

11th Apr 2002, 23:49
"U_R they were not massive election victories."

All three parties fought under the same rules. Every adult was entitled to vote. The result was two huge majorities in the Commons. It is ludicrous sophistry to try to belittle the results of two fair and democratic elections just because you didn't like them.

12th Apr 2002, 01:37
As I understand it, Da big boss man is currently in the middle of B737 conversion training atm. Thats prob why he hasn't put his foot down here.

I should make the most of it, in thelimited time availiable....:eek:

Tartan Gannet
12th Apr 2002, 08:13
Swinging this topic a little I assume many of you have heard that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder aged 57 is suing DDP News Agency over a statement that he dyes his hair. Now all this says to me is that he is a Sad Bosche Bast**d, and would make me far less likely to vote for him were I a German. What a whimp!

Now what would happen here if some newspaper alleged that our Beloved Leader's lovely and famous teeth , verily his Trademark, were NOT natural but a very expensive dental bridge hiding a row of crooked discoloured gnashers? A smile as Phoney as Tony himself???

TG goes into hiding as he awaits writ issued by Derry (Wallpaper) Irvine, the Lord High Crony of All England.

Doors to Automatic
12th Apr 2002, 15:03
I CANNOT STAND Phoeny Blair (or is it Bliar?)

I LOATHE the likes of Prescott, Mandelson, Short, Meacher etc etc etc

My MP, Patricia Hewitt is far more interested in photo opportunities than she is in doing here job and as for Blunkett, well what can I say about Blunkett? He clearly cannot see further than the end of his nose!!

The party claimed to be "Tough on Crime, tough on the causes of crime" HA HA HA What a sick joke!

The only people these imbeciles are tough on are those that dare to defend themselves against the scum that is roaming our streets completely unchecked.

Those like Tony Martin the farmer that has now been in prison for two years for simply defending his property against a group of terrorists with 115 convictions between them

This situation is no better than the filthy regime in Zimbabwe!

I think this government is an absolute shower and the fact there is no viable opposition is equally depressing

Surly Bondslipper
12th Apr 2002, 16:48
Top tip about the Tory leadership:

IDS will get two more years and be booted out. The next man in, to run up to the election, will be Oliver Letwin.

This is the private prediction of a fat, laid-back, jazz-loving,pro-euro cigarillo smoker who favours scuffed suede shoes....

12th Apr 2002, 17:11
............and should be in charge himself. Top man.

12th Apr 2002, 19:49
Slimy PMs aka President Bleagh.

Boris Johnson for Prime Minister!

12th Apr 2002, 20:01

BJ for PM much better

12th Apr 2002, 21:13
...and he made agreements and shook hands with *twitch* Berlusconi ! Quick, a sick bag!!!!

er, he's cute though!:D

13th Apr 2002, 16:08
All of you that do not vote or are sick of "the current crop", have you ever thought of actually doing some thing about it?

Try standing for election, as any representitive of people and see how it's done.

I have done it at a VERY minor level and believe me it wasn't the party politics or having to follow a particular line that was difficult.

No, it was the very people who elected me that really made the job hard.

The old adage is true, you cannot please all the people all the time!

We still live in a democracy, whether you like it or not!

Stand up for election if YOU really think you can do something about it.

If you don't vote then wind your neck in, you have not only already lost your voice but you insult the memory of the millions that have died to give it to you!:mad:

13th Apr 2002, 18:43
Iím afraid I donít agree with you Hovis. You appear to claim that everybody should vote in a democracy simply because of the sacrifices made to achieve and maintain it. A vote is a powerful thing, and if someone is ignorant or indifferent to the election then it is at best random and at worst irresponsible for them to be compelled to vote simply to honour the freedom to do so.

I vote very willingly, and do so educated and informed. But I know many people who either lack any interest or simply cannot decide. If they felt compelled to vote then the power of it would pass to the law of Ďeenie-meenie-meinie-moí, or to that dayís headline in The Sun. These are not the bricks democracy is built from.

13th Apr 2002, 19:59
I think what Hovis was getting at was the people who voice such and such an opinion and feel very strongly about something but don't bother to vote. I have to agree with him on that one.

Just for my two pennys worth I think that the right to vote should be limited to regular readers of broadsheet newspapers, Radio 4 listeners and Classic FM listeners!

I'm not saying that these are unbiased founts of wisdom but at least the broadsheets devote some column inches to the slightly (i.e. as opposed to 'Keep the Pound', 'Stephen Byars is lying again' style reporting) more obscure policies such as abolishing the right to a jury and the worsening state of the NHS.

The large amount of the voting population who don't really have a clue about the manifesto and policy of the party they vote for is what really damages democracy. Oh yes and the complete lack of ideas from the main Political parties and the almost total isolation from the 'man on the street' top ranking politicians seem to live in.

Sorry for the incoherent ramblings. Subject that gets me quite wound up!

13th Apr 2002, 20:54
Something in me says that topics such as Fox Hunting would not be an issue where it not for the desire of the Islington liberals wanting to destroy the "forces of conservatism" and make us forget what heritage we have because it doesn't account for the style of all-encompassing inclusiveness that says that elite educational institutions should be smashed and dumbed down to meet a social agenda of supposed equality, he denial of a monarchy in favour of a presidency, the denial of a national identity in favour of a corporate European identity, and the alignment of our national character in favour of the bland middle-fo-the-road variety so favoured by the European Socialists. The world view that the current Government favours is one where it is impossible to hold a view of right or wrong, where history is forgotten in favour of the "future" and where homogenity is the order of the day. Taxation will be high, ingenuity and entreprenurial spirit will be crushed, the state will own all and decide all, and we will all be governed without a real democratic say in the decisions which are taken in our name. The Government is currently so arrogant as to believe it knows better than us what is and is not in our best interetsts, and in the case of hunting with hounds, this too is the case.

This ideology of homogenity and social inclusiveness into an automotive existence, of social engineering into a state of fear and domination over the process of free thought when mixed with hatred and envy for those who create wealth and exercise independant choice and authority manifests itself in the banning of an occupation deemed archane.

Would this have come to a head so suddenly had Stephen Byers not made such a hash of the railway system, and to preserve the face of the government made a deal with the devil? The snivelling syccophants sicken me to the core as I observe the theft of all that I hold dear by the hazy agenda of hatred for England and all her institutions that this Government has, the contempt for the voting public, and insults to our intelligence as spin replaces substance is all too much

The sooner this Govenment is voted out of office and consigned to oblivion, the better for all of us.

Anyone who doesn't think that Tony Blair fancies himself as a President should take note of his comments about "his armed forces" and Jack Straw's assertion that Tony Blair is the "head of state" in 3 instances in the same Guardian interview.

Tartan Gannet
13th Apr 2002, 21:06
Hovis, I have been a Local Councillor twice. Now apart from the interference by National Goverment and the obstruction of Council Officers I objected to being made to vote and speak along whipped party lines when the interests of my electors were opposite to Party Dogma.

If I could get elected in a rural area as an Independant then that would be well and good but as part of a Party Machine then no thank you. (Both of the main parties are as bad as each other in this regard).

Perhaps more people should stand as Independants in marginal wards, that might make the Party Hacks sit up for once as their seats switch owing to such an intervention.

In Reading we have this totally undemocractic Cabinet system with "Lead Councillors" instead of Committees and Chairmen and the town is solidly New Labour, the Tories having given up the ghost apart from the one very posh ward they still hold in Caversham Heights. The Liberals have lost their long time Leader who retired last June and are confined to two wards in the town. We also have that dreadful retiral by thirds system instead of all the Council coming up at once . Thus even if the Tories or Libs won all 15 seats from New Labour in Reading we would still have them in office with a working majority. So that is why I feel that voting here is a bit of a waste of time.

I dont think Ill bother this time, honestly.

WE Branch Fanatic
13th Apr 2002, 21:48
They say "clothes maketh the man"...well, the Bible does.

So why doesn't Tony Bl-air wear a cowby outfit? lso the rest of the Government.

14th Apr 2002, 01:06
In the last general election, I volunteered to help a friend of mine, who was standing for election in a ward here.

I have a lot of respect and time for him, chiefly because, without him, a major car-making plant would now be green fields, and an unemployment blackspot. The said candidate, has a reputation, for dealing from a straight deck, but sadly, twas the undoing of him. His opponent, a minister of the Crown, used every low trick in the arsenal, including Septic "Guns for Hire" and we won't even mention the famous Videos, still I got to shake the directors hand at the count, and I loved "Chariots of Fire " personally. Election expenses? LMFAO.

Such was the consternation, in the Labour Party, that another minister of the crown predicted, they would lose the seat on Channel 4 news. Unfortunately, it was not to be, but it was nice to see a very very worried Blurgh, 2 Jags and the parsimonius one, here on 3 seperate days, desperately drumming up support from the faithful, they even bussed in activists from as far afield as Manchester, to give the old dears a lift to the polling station.

In the end, my friend lost by 2,000 votes in a 61,000 voter seat. Quite a wide margin, but he is not discouraged, and I will certainly help him again. I was saddened though, that mot ONE of the people, whose jobs he saved, couldn't even see fit to come out and help him, but were quite happy to moan their fcuking arses off, about how dreadful it was, that the incumbent got another term

It goes to prove , the little man can make a difference, if he would only get off his fat arse. If you don't like the system, do something about it


14th Apr 2002, 12:00
Deep C, Thank you for clarifying my point.

I do not believe that compulsary voting should be introduced, as has been said it will not make an individual interested in politics.
However, the general "crew room" banter that invades every work place should be aired publicly and maybe then the polls will get a good turn out.
Mention politics anywhere and you will enter a debate, so why do people not act. Enough energy is expended in argument everyday, down the pub/gym/football, everyone has an opinion. But when it comes to walking round to the local school and putting an X against a name apathy rules! I just don't get it.

As for this particular bunch that is in office now, I've seen worse! 1979-1997;)

Tartan Gannet
14th Apr 2002, 12:48
Hovis, Im glad YOU can see a difference between the lot from 1979 to 97 and this lot May 1st 1997 onwards for Im bugg***d if I can!

If we had a REAL Labour Government in the Attlee or Harold Wilson (1964-70) mould I would vote for them but not for this creature who panders to the Bosses, the modern Ramsay Mac Donald who has hijacked a noble name "Labour" and sullied it, who has betrayed the Working Class and denied them the only effective democratic means of redress and representation.

Not being fortunate enough to live in Bolsover or Thurrock, or others seats still having an OLD Labour MP but being represented by one of Blair's loyal placemen, I wont waste my time voting unless there is ever a credible alternative who fights the seat Reading West, to win.

As for the Euro-elections, the closed list used last time was as undemocratic as anything in the old USSR! In the South East Euro Constituency I had 11 representatives to elect but only one vote for a block. No chance to mix my ticket, take it or leave it, my vote could only have been for a fixed slate of 11 names, a New Labour, or Tory, or Lib Dem vote meant accepting ALL on the list, some of whom I didnt know, others I DID know and wouldn't put in charge of a public toilet! In the end I spoilt my paper by putting ticks next to the 11 people I wanted, a totally mixed ticket but containing no New Labour nor Tories, and puting a line through the names I didnt like. I know this would have been treated as a spoilt paper and not counted but it did make my feelings felt. In the event one of my choices, Baroness Emma Nicholson, did get elected.

So its all a big con. As Burns said, "A fig for those by Law protected, for Liberty's a glorious feast. Courts for Cowards were erected, Churches built to please the Priest!"

17th Apr 2002, 00:38
Tartan Gannet - you are exactly what I was referring to in my earlier post. Old Labour - moralled, dedicated, belief. New Labour - er, well let's forget all that and copy Maggie's 1979 Manifesto (perhaps that's going a little far - but you get my point).

Last year I spent two months pounding the beat for the Tories during the GE and the subsequent Local Elections a month later. On a reduced turnout we increased our majority at the GE and returned a Conservative Local Councillor in place of a LibDem - in an area where LibDem is tattoeed on baby's foreheads.

If you look at Local Councils then you'll see that the Conservatives are the strongest party across the country with increasing seats (which was also the case under John Major in 1996/7)

What bothers me is that until Labour take over New Labour then the true Conservatives will never be able to form the Government again in the UK! What's the point of voting when it appears there's hardly anything to choose? I said before, I'd be really p*ssed off if I was a long time Labourite and had to watch my party taking up Tory principles and ideas.

I'd love to stand for the Local Council, but my present role gives me no time to sh*t, never mind spend the 20+ hours a week that being a Councillor requires. But helping pound (a pun?) the beat makes me feel that I'm doing something for the party and I even if I convince one person to get off their arse and vote (for whoever) then I'm happy.

And that's what the parties need to worry about - getting people out to vote. And for that we need proper politics, not sleaze slinging. There's no political capital, in the long term, to be gained from Hindujas, Mandelsons, Vas etc. In the short term the Daily Mail readers tut and the Mirror readers go on about how it was worse under the Tories. So that's not helping anyone.

Let's talk Education, Health, Defence.

Hmm, I feel better now - did any of that make any sense...?

17th Apr 2002, 06:11
I favour compulsory voting.

I don't vote, but not because I'm lazy and can't be bothered; there simply isn't anyone who represents my views. By not voting I'm considered to be uninterested and therefore not worth consideration and if I voted 'Monster Raving Looney' then it has pretty much the same effect. If voting was compulsory however, and everyone had to put a vote into the ballot box, then at least my 'spoiled paper' with "None of the above" written across the bottom would have to be counted as a valid vote [for the nihilist party?] and be recorded.

Unfrock the vicar of St. Albion!

Through difficulties to the cinema

Send Clowns
17th Apr 2002, 09:08
U_R we both know that Labour's majority in the commons is not the result of a massive mandate from the electorate. It is disingenuous of you to argue that Labour's electoin victory was "massive", however even the rules.


If you think New Labour are not socialist, wait for a shock this afternoon. I think we find the third way is the worst aspects of the other two ...