|
|
Post by loy PRA on Mar 25, 2012 14:33:23 GMT
And everyone who's ever voted for them.
For obvious reasons.
|
|
samd
Steaming Bovril
Posts: 327
|
Post by samd on Mar 25, 2012 19:07:06 GMT
Guilty of that I'm afraid, only party I'd ever voted for. But last time will be my last thanks to their treachery. They don't appear to have any aims they're prepared to stick with. Think I'll just go with Labour from now on, they're all poo but I guess you have to find your own lesser of evils that you can stomach.
|
|
|
|
Post by loy PRA on Mar 25, 2012 20:59:46 GMT
I think that's the best you can hope for. I don't think enough people appreciated Labour in government and the Lib Dems made a lot of political capital on pushing themselves as an alternative to both sides, which is fine of course until you actually have to get into Gov't and make decisions!
I feel sorry for Gordon Brown. I thought he was a great Prime Minister who was hamstrung by a political elite entwined with the powers that be in fleet street.
|
|
samd
Steaming Bovril
Posts: 327
|
Post by samd on Mar 26, 2012 13:45:05 GMT
It's weird how good the Labour Government looks now compared to the Tory/Lib Dem Government. I don't for a second think Ed Miliband is much cop as Labour leader. But I'd rather just vote Labour now and hope there'll be someone better to take his place.
Lib Dems were idealistic but sold themselves out at the first sniff of "power". Seems to happen to everyone that on some sort of scale. You have great ideas but then when it comes to implementing them it's suddenly not so simple. There's just too much influence from outside parties (Fleet Street as you say, big industries, etc). Money and influence over the masses will always be important so I can't ever see a time when newspapers and big business won't have the over-riding say.
|
|
|
|
Post by loy PRA on Mar 28, 2012 23:38:55 GMT
That's all a bit harsh on the Lib-Dums. After the election effectively left us with a hung parliament, they were under pressure to form some kind of coalition with one party or the other in the national interest, as if either side had tried to form a minority government the international markets would have absolutely slaughtered the UK. Lies. You've heard something about the markets on television and you're pretending to be literate on the subject. A minority Government is what was elected, therefore a minority Government could've, and would've functioned. It's a bit unfair to bring the accusation of "treachery" because the coalition agreement gave them things close to their own hearts, such as the referendum on PR and raising the tax threshold to £10k far more quickly than the Tories ever would have. If you're referring to the tuition fees, then when you are entering into negotiations for an agreement then all sides have to compromise everywhere. We're going through this with my son at the moment, hopefully going to uni next year. It doesn't seem anywhere near as bad as people are making out. Lies. There was no referendum on PR. There was a referendum on Alternative Vote which was comprehensively rejected The threshold of tax is not at £10,000 pounds. Labour, on the other hand, didn't appear to be prepared to negotiate properly with the Lib-Dums on anything. At best, the Liberals were just taken for granted as "Labour Lite" and expected to fall into line to keep the evil Tories out, just as Paddy Ashdown acted as Blair's attack dog during the Major Government. Lies. There was a commitment to a referendum on Alternative Vote in the Labour manifesto. The Liberal Democrats made their political capital on halving the deficit within four years EXACTLY the same as Alistair Darling's commitment. They made strong commitments on keeping the 50p tax band and constructing a graduate tax, both things that were just LIES. With the likes of Lord Mandelson close to the coalition "negotiations" it seems likely that Labour deciced that 2010, like 1992, would be a pretty good election to lose. It has been widely said in Europe that whoever eventually sorts out this mess will have to have committed political suicide to do so- hence they now have governments of "technocrats" in Italy and Greece rather than party political, Merkel and Sarkozy are in deep doo-doo and the destruction of the Socialists in Spain. LIES. Clegg chose to side with Conservatives as they had 'the moral authority to govern' I've been interested in politics since 1967 and in all that time there has never been anybody cleverer in opposition than New Labour. There's nothing weird at all in the last Labour Government looking better. After all, they were just spending and borrowing the money. Somebody else has got to come up with how we pay it all back again. Look at the tuition fees again. As soon as the Coalition allowed the unis to put the fees up to £9k Balls promised to give us a discount by bringing them back down to £6k. What a neat trick that is. Now he looks like the good guy. Imagine if a Labour led coalition had stuck them UP to £6k? LIES! The Keynesian method of deficit spending has proved to be the only PROVEN way to reverse economic catastrophe. Be it Roosevelt's New Deal in depression era America, the Marshall Plan in post 1945 Europe and in 2008 Great Britain. Obama followed the Brown stimulus plan, look at their economy grow. Look at their job creation. What a disappointment that turned out to be. Pensions raided, gold sold off cheap to the Chinese, led into illegal American wars, made redundant 4 times, my own workplace of 19years shut down and demolished directly due to the policies of the Labour council in Wolverhampton hounding the company out (the Conservative MP we had from 1987-1992 Maureen Hicks fought hard to keep us open, once she'd gone we were stuffed and within days of Blair taking office in 1997 we were shut) things could only get worse for us. LIES! No local authority could ever, ever be responsible for 'hounding out' a company. The 'gold sell off' is widely misinterpreted. Gold increases inflation and costs money to be secured and stored. How could 'days of Blair taking office' close down a company? Made redundant four times? Blame the corporation. Not the Government. At the end of the day, the Lib Dems of the Clegg era are an independent, pragmatic party willing to coalesce with whichever of the two main parties are willing to offer more Lib Dem policies to the government programme. Unlike the Ashdown / kennedy era when they acted as an extra attack dog for Blair. The lesson you should learn is that you are a labour supporter and you should be comfortable as such from now. LIES! NEITHER THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY NOR THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS BASED THEIR GENERAL ELECTION MANIFESTO ON THE EFFECTIVE PRIVATISATION OF THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE. IF THEY DID, THEY WOULD HAVE LOST THE GENERAL ELECTION SPECTACULARLY. HOW CAN THEY COALESCE ON SOMETHING NOBODY IN THE COUNTRY WANTS? |
|
|
|
Post by loy PRA on Mar 29, 2012 20:42:23 GMT
Oh well, here he goes again.  I was actually addressing samd's point, but never mind, have an opinion different to loyPRA and you will get the predictable insult then get shouted down. There were many contradictions in your arguments against me, and some responses that showed that you hadn't even read my post properly but i won't bother attempting to debate them with you because your response will be all too predictable. Not that it matters to you or I or anyone else for that matter, but just for records, i didn't post "Lies, Lies!, LIES!" just a few inconvenient truths for a die-hard supporter of the last Labour Prime Minister ( niether he, nor his immediate predecessor, by the way could hold a candle to Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan or even Michael Foot, though i must admit that Blair and Brown were a definate improvement on Kinnock) and a few real life experiences that contradict the idealised view you have of the Labour Party. Awww, did that nasty Sultan question your omnipetence and infallability again? Never mind, calm down dear, take no notice of him and comfort yourself with the real truth: So it came to pass that the Lord sent his only Son, Gordon Brown, to dwell amongst the people and save the world...I think you need to be honest with yourself and admit you've had one of your usual, long, drawn-out, factually-incoherent posts that mention your redundancies, and that you've been fact checked upon it and proved to be found wanting. You are no economist, therefore you did not have the knowledge to qualify the statement that the international markets would've 'asbolutely slaughtered' the UK. You hadn't been aware that Labour had a commitment to the Alternative Vote in their manifesto, so your claim of non-negotiation of the two parties was indeed bogus. You claimed there was a referendum on Proportional Representation, that indeed, never happened. But none of these little incoherent tidbits of imagination really matter. I think the crux of the matter is my final statement; The Labour Party has a considerable record in maintaining, and investing in the National Health Service since creating it in the 1940's. Neither the Conservatives of the Liberal Democrats campaigned on a pledge of widespread, top-down reformation that would effectively privatise a previously efficient single-payer system, one buyer/one consumer demand-lead healthcare organisation which provided healthcare universally extraordinarily cheaply. If either of the other two parties had campaigned on that proviso they would have lost the election badly. Yet they still try and implement the health and social bill despite professional and public antipathy towards it. Neoliberals - Conservatives and Liberals who believe in profit over any sort of state function, the epitomising ideology of this current coalition government do not believe in single payer schemes. Nor do they believe in the democracy of local government. Nevermind the fact that the NHS is a cherished national institution the envy of the world, with satisfaction levels as high as they've ever been - they don't believe in it, they don't want it, they see it as socialised medicine being prioritised while their mates in the City are losing out a massive cash cow. What you've said is unqualified, factually incorrect and a product of warped views from an armchair daily mail perusing, bitterly avowed Conservative and you must take umbrage with yourself for misleading people with your statements. (and for the record, Callaghan and Wilson have no legacies - Brown stopped a depression. I think you'll find history tends to remember those things, not just me) |
|
|
|
Post by i3thatcher on Mar 29, 2012 21:29:42 GMT
put your dictionary away loyPA you sir are a moron and long words will fool no one.
|
|
I was actually addressing samd's point, but never mind, have an opinion different to loyPRA and you will get the predictable insult then get shouted down. There were many contradictions in your arguments against me, and some responses that showed that you hadn't even read my post properly but i won't bother attempting to debate them with you because your response will be all too predictable.