May calls General Election on 8 June

[Stickman]

[Stickman]

I see the BBC are running with this ('Corbyn struggles on childcare cost') as one of their main stories:-

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40090520

 

They truly are a set of noncey, tory bastards.

 

 

I guess it's easy to forget the cost of your policies as unlike the Tories Labour have actually got figures next to their policies

[Em City]

To be fair, he's had a right 'mare there.

 

If that was May, we'd all be savaging her, just like the time Cameron got mauled over not knowing the price of milk or some shit like that.

 

It might not matter on a substantive level, but the optics are bad.

[Red Phoenix]

To be fair, he's had a right 'mare there.

 

If that was May, we'd all be savaging her, just like the time Cameron got mauled over not knowing the price of milk or some shit like that.

 

It might not matter on a substantive level, but the optics are bad.

 

Clearly it would've been best if he'd known the figure. It gets a little boring though when almost every single time something goes well for him there's something lined up shortly after to go against him. And was it one of the main figures he was supposed to have off the top of his head, or was it a more obscure one that they deliberately looked for hoping he'd not know it?

 

I'd say not knowing the price of milk (or bread which I can see from searching) is a bit worse too.

 

The interviewer who did this is also a former Torygraph editor.

[Red Phoenix]

You know something's badly wrong when you're literally just waiting for the next attack on him or waiting for what the next diversion will be if he has a good day. And also remembering that you've been doing the exact same thing ever since he became Labour leader.

[Bobby Hundreds]

Dimbleby has come out and said Corbyn doesn't get a fair deal in the press.

 

Is this real life.

[Red Phoenix]

Dimbleby has come out and said Corbyn doesn't get a fair deal in the press.

 

Is this real life.

 

Don't worry. If he's stepped out of line too much he'll be sent to the BBC basement for some Clockwork Orange-style reprogramming.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

 

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/not-yet-shot-anybody-tory-candidate-jo-coxs-seat-makes-tasteless-jokes-075408483.html

 

‘We have not yet shot anybody’: Tory candidate for Jo Cox’s seat slammed for tasteless joke

The Conservative candidate standing for election in the seat of murdered MP Jo Cox has joked the campaign is going well as “we have not yet shot anybody”.

Dr Ann Myatt, who is running for election in Batley and Spen, made the comment during a hustings debate ahead of the June 8 General Election.

Speaking at the event, she said: “We have here people of all faiths, we have here people from different parts of the community, and we have not yet shot anybody so that’s wonderful.”

Mother-of-two Mrs Cox, 41, was shot and stabbed by neo-Nazi Thomas Mair in her constituency just days before last year’s EU referendum.

In a video revealed by the Mail Online, the candidate laughs but her remarks are met by dismayed groans from the audience. She later apologises.

Labour candidate Tracy Brabin, who was elected at a by-election in October 2016 following Cox’s murder, is seen to be visibly shocked.

Andrew Gwynne, Labour’s National Election Coordinator, called the comment “appalling”.

“That they come from the Conservative candidate beggars belief. She should immediately apologise and frankly so should Theresa May’s campaign,” he said.

Dr Myatt said: “I wholeheartedly apologise for my ill-judged remarks at the hustings and for any offence they caused.

“I said sorry at the time and would like to apologise again for my comments, which were out of character and came at the end of a tiring day.”

 

Local David Keeton, who was also at the hustings, said: “My initial reaction at what she said was shock, then utter abhorrence that someone could say such a thing under any circumstances, let alone here less than a year after our wonderful MP Jo Cox was murdered by a far-right terrorist.

“For my wife and I it was made all the more personal as we knew Jo well – we were last with her the evening before she was killed.

“The Tories have parachuted in a candidate for this election who knows nothing about the area, and clearly knows even less about the people here.”

Brendan Cox, the husband of Jo, wrote on Twitter that he believed the comments were not malicious.

“This was clearly a stupid thing to say but I hope we can all assume the best and put it down to a slip of the tongue rather than any malice,” he said.

The joke is reminiscent of Nigel Farage’s comments after the EU Referendum that the Brexit campaign had been won “without a single bullet being fired”.

The former Ukip leader was branded “unbelievably insensitive and crass” at the time.

Ms Brabin’s maiden speech in the House of Commons paid tribute to her friend and “inspiration” Mrs Cox.

She told the Commons: “Batley and Spen will not be defined by the one person who took from us, but by the many who give.”

[Rico1304]

Interesting read.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/shouldnt-vote-jeremy-corbyn/

[Plev]

Interesting read.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/shouldnt-vote-jeremy-corbyn/

If by interesting you mean regurgitated shite, then yes it's interesting.

[Red Phoenix]

Interesting read.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/shouldnt-vote-jeremy-corbyn/

 

Nick Cohen is still a Corbyn fan then. Oh look, there's an anti-Semite section there too! Well done Nick, good to see you're still on form.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

May is desperately trying to get the narrative back to Brexit, "strong and stable" and "coalition of chaos"

 

It's pathetic. Surely the public can't be buying this? Surely?

[setreal]

Interesting read.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/shouldnt-vote-jeremy-corbyn/

 

Personally, I prefer their "Wine Club" section.

[Red Phoenix]

Haha, Cohen has just called Paul Mason a "Trot Trump" on twitter : https://twitter.com/NickCohen4/status/869522235559739394

[Rico1304]

If by interesting you mean regurgitated shite, then yes it's interesting.

Oh right, which bits aren't true then?

[Mook]

Oh right, which bits aren't true then?

 

I'm far too lazy to go through it all & point out why a lot of it is pish but here's something from the comments underneath...

 

steepholm Disgruntledgoat • 9 months ago

I decided to take one claim at random. This one caught my eye: "Corbyn wrote in defence of a vicar who suggested that 9/11 was an inside job by the Jews."

I clicked on the link, expecting it to take me to an article where Corbyn was quoted to that effect. Instead, it took me to a hostile article that merely repeated the same claim, without sources, context or quotation.

Doing my own googling, I eventually found out more. The vicar had indeed posted a link on his Facebook page about 9/11, adding that it raised "many questions". He was disciplined by the CoE, ostensibly for this act. However, it came at the end of "a string of controversial statements about the Middle East on social media by the Rev Sizer", and some people (including Corbyn) saw the church's action as an opportunist move to end his more general critique of Israeli policy. What Corbyn actually wrote was: "Reverend Stephen Sizer seems to have come under attack by certain individuals intent on discrediting the excellent work that Stephen does in highlighting the injustices of the Palestinian-Israeli situation.”

So, let's go back to the initial claim: "Corbyn wrote in defence of a vicar who suggested that 9/11 was an inside job by the Jews"

At the very least, this is bloody misleading. First, the vicar did not in fact suggest that the 9/11 was in inside job, but posted a link to that effect on his FB. Irresponsible perhaps, but are we to assume that we endorse - and have in effect authored - every word from every article we post on our FB pages?

I haven't seen the link the vicar posted, but "an inside job by the Jews" sounds incontrovertibly anti-semitic: I would bet that some more specific group (e.g. Mossad, or Israel) was actually named. That's still ludicrous, but note the rhetorical effect achieved by broadening it out to a whole race!

The quotation also implies that Corbyn was specifically defending the contents of the 9/11 post, whereas his defence was a far broader one of the vicar's work on Israeli-Palestinian relations. Again, this is highly misleading.

I have a life, so I won't be subjecting the other claims to the same level of scrutiny, but on this basis I'm not inclined to take the article very seriously.

[Plev]

I wouldn't know to be honest as I'm not particularly interested in what someone did thirty odd years ago, although I did see one or two on the list that have been shown to be untrue/misleading.

 

I'm now at the point that if you showed me a picture of Corbyn wiring up a Tupperware box for his IRA mates, it would make absolutely no difference to me. What does make a difference is getting emails off my daughters school asking for donations to make up for budget shortfalls (two months ago). Having to stop her doing speech and drama as we now have to pay for her school meals (about £40 a month) since she went into year three, so something had to give. I could go on, but you know IRA and all that. I'm sure you don't have to make decisions like the one above on your meagre £120 grand a year.

[Rico1304]

I wouldn't know to be honest as I'm not particularly interested in what someone did thirty odd years ago, although I did see one or two on the list that have been shown to be untrue/misleading.

I'm now at the point that if you showed me a picture of Corbyn wiring up a Tupperware box for his IRA mates, it would make absolutely no difference to me. What does make a difference is getting emails off my daughters school asking for donations to make up for budget shortfalls (two months ago). Having to stop her doing speech and drama as we now have to pay for her school meals (about £40 a month) since she went into year three, so something had to give. I could go on, but you know IRA and all that. I'm sure you don't have to make decisions like the one above on your meagre £120 grand a year.

Thanks. A lot of people are though.

 

(I'm not on £120k a year)

[Rico1304]

I'm far too lazy to go through it all & point out why a lot of it is pish but here's something from the comments underneath...

 

steepholm Disgruntledgoat • 9 months ago

 

 

 

 

I decided to take one claim at random. This one caught my eye: "Corbyn wrote in defence of a vicar who suggested that 9/11 was an inside job by the Jews."

I clicked on the link, expecting it to take me to an article where Corbyn was quoted to that effect. Instead, it took me to a hostile article that merely repeated the same claim, without sources, context or quotation.

Doing my own googling, I eventually found out more. The vicar had indeed posted a link on his Facebook page about 9/11, adding that it raised "many questions". He was disciplined by the CoE, ostensibly for this act. However, it came at the end of "a string of controversial statements about the Middle East on social media by the Rev Sizer", and some people (including Corbyn) saw the church's action as an opportunist move to end his more general critique of Israeli policy. What Corbyn actually wrote was: "Reverend Stephen Sizer seems to have come under attack by certain individuals intent on discrediting the excellent work that Stephen does in highlighting the injustices of the Palestinian-Israeli situation.”

So, let's go back to the initial claim: "Corbyn wrote in defence of a vicar who suggested that 9/11 was an inside job by the Jews"

At the very least, this is bloody misleading. First, the vicar did not in fact suggest that the 9/11 was in inside job, but posted a link to that effect on his FB. Irresponsible perhaps, but are we to assume that we endorse - and have in effect authored - every word from every article we post on our FB pages?

I haven't seen the link the vicar posted, but "an inside job by the Jews" sounds incontrovertibly anti-semitic: I would bet that some more specific group (e.g. Mossad, or Israel) was actually named. That's still ludicrous, but note the rhetorical effect achieved by broadening it out to a whole race!

The quotation also implies that Corbyn was specifically defending the contents of the 9/11 post, whereas his defence was a far broader one of the vicar's work on Israeli-Palestinian relations. Again, this is highly misleading.

I have a life, so I won't be subjecting the other claims to the same level of scrutiny, but on this basis I'm not inclined to take the article very seriously.

 

Thanks.

[Anubis]

It's not even a Cohen piece. It's by somebody who won't even put their name to it.

[Jairzinho]

Nick Cohen looks like an evil frog.

[Plev]

Thanks. A lot of people are though.

 

(I'm not on £120k a year)

A lot of people are what? Struggling? The only people I know that are remotely arsed about the IRA thing are either Tories/Ex Forces/Racists or a combination of the three.

 

Your household budget is 120k and you seem to have no empathy at all.

[Carvalho Diablo]

Dimbleby has come out and said Corbyn doesn't get a fair deal in the press.

 

Is this real life.

 

[Red Phoenix]

[Rico1304]

A lot of people are what? Struggling? The only people I know that are remotely arsed about the IRA thing are either Tories/Ex Forces/Racists or a combination of the three.

Your household budget is 120k and you seem to have no empathy at all.

Maybe it's an age thing, I've no idea how old you are but it was a big thing when I was growing up.

 

Am I supposed to be ashamed of that? I'm not. I've been lucky and the wife is clever. I do have empathy, but less than you. Should the person with more than empathy than you look down on you?