Tony Blair

[Creator Supreme]

That's about it so far, although I doubt whether they'll run with it in 2015 given how ill-conceived it is.

 

 

 

 

They should have some. At the moment it appears to be "oppose everything the government does".

 

Which is fine if you're just after easy headlines, but when someone calls your bluff and asks you what cuts you'd reverse, and you admit that actually, you won't commit to reversing a single one of them, it makes them seem like cynical opportunists.

 

Those in glass houses you tory lite prick!!

[brucespanner]

Those in glass houses you tory lite prick!!

 

Constructive.

 

What are your views on the off balance deficit?

 

The omission of the arts from school timetables, and further free schools?

 

Do you think Cameron has sufficient international experience to represent us at the UN if needed?

 

Is this you?

[Strontium]

Thanks to Creator Supreme for that incisive political analysis.

[VladimirIlyich]

Thanks to Creator Supreme for that incisive political analysis.

 

You keep having digs but don't offer any alternatives other than to back everything your cohorts do.

 

Your friend Dave is the King of opposing everything a government does rather than having any policies of his own.

He was Mr Bandwagon jumper just over a couple of years ago.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

That's about it so far, although I doubt whether they'll run with it in 2015 given how ill-conceived it is.

 

What's ill-conceived about it? Don't get me wrong, £6k is an abomination, but I'd be interested to know why you think it's ill-conceived? Surely saying this is ill-conceived must either mean that the current 9k is ill-conceived or, indeed, the LD's flagship policy of free education is?

 

 

They should have some. At the moment it appears to be "oppose everything the government does".

 

Which is fine if you're just after easy headlines, but when someone calls your bluff and asks you what cuts you'd reverse, and you admit that actually, you won't commit to reversing a single one of them, it makes them seem like cynical opportunists.

 

I don't think they should be committing to anything just yet. Even then, I don't think they are actually guilty of opposing everything the government does; If anything I think they should be putting up for more opposition. Essentially we've got three parties fighting over the same plot on the political spectrum.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Numero Veinticinco

[Strontium]

You keep having digs but don't offer any alternatives other than to back everything your cohorts do.

 

 

That's just not true on any level, is it?

 

Besides, this topic isn't about the government, it's about Tony Blair and, tangentially, his present successor in the role.

 

Your friend Dave is the King of opposing everything a government does rather than having any policies of his own.

He was Mr Bandwagon jumper just over a couple of years ago.

 

 

Having made the point myself on mutliple occasions, I don't disagree. Except for the bit where you describe him as "friend".

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

That's just not true on any level, is it?

 

It certainly feels like dissent isn't your main aim. I think you've backed and defended pretty much everything. I guess there's some things you've been quiet about. Are you just opting to silently endure all the things you dislike and then back the things you do?

[VladimirIlyich]

That's just not true on any level, is it?

 

Besides, this topic isn't about the government, it's about Tony Blair and, tangentially, his present successor in the role.

 

I havent seen you offer any alternatives but if you have please feel free to re enlighten me.

 

 

 

Having made the point myself on mutliple occasions, I don't disagree. Except for the bit where you describe him as "friend".

 

If he wasnt a friend,I was referring to your party of course not you personally,then why the hell are your party enabling almost everything his party does?

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

If he wasnt a friend,I was referring to your party of course not you personally,then why the hell are your party enabling almost everything his party does?

 

Well, they've locked themselves in to this coalition. They'd do so badly at an election, just now it's suicide to break it. They're kicking up all this fuss at the conference but they'll go back and happily work with the Tories until probably 12 months before the next scheduled election.

[Strontium]

What's ill-conceived about it? Don't get me wrong, £6k is an abomination, but I'd be interested to know why you think it's ill-conceived? Surely saying this is ill-conceived must either mean that the current 9k is ill-conceived or, indeed, the LD's flagship policy of free education is?

 

 

It's ill-conceived because far and away the biggest beneficiaries of the "tuition fee cut" are wealthier graduates. A poorer graduate will pay back the same amount whether the cap is 6k or 9k.

 

I'm no fan of the £9,000 cap and would really like to see alternative proposals, but a £6,000 cap is no improvement in any way, shape or form. The only thing it's really good for is that it sounds less bad than a £9,000 cap. In other words, its only function is to dispel some of Labour's own scaremongering about fees. It's not doing much to dampen my cynicism anyway.

[VladimirIlyich]

Well, they've locked themselves in to this coalition. They'd do so badly at an election, just now it's suicide to break it. They're kicking up all this fuss at the conference but they'll go back and happily work with the Tories until probably 12 months before the next scheduled election.

 

If it truly was a coalition,co being the operative syllable then the LibDems would have a real say in the running of the country which they either dont or are very happy to back dodgy Dave in the continued destruction of everything the ordinary person relies on for his continued wellbeing.

[Creator Supreme]

About as incisive as anything the ConDems come up with!!

 

And for the spanner:-

 

What are your views on the off balance deficit? I'm honest enough to admit I don't even know what it is!!

 

The omission of the arts from school timetables, and further free schools? Arts I really could care less about personally, however, there should be some provision made for those pupils who wish to follow arts programmes, should they be creative or performance arts, in the school curriculum. I find free schools abhorrent - simply giving in to upper middle class parents who don't want Tarquin and Jemima mixing with the proles!

 

Do you think Cameron has sufficient international experience to represent us at the UN if needed? In a nutshell no, what was his role before becoming an MP? Researcher I believe (I wait to be corrected on this), and he was barely an MP for 5 minutes before being elected party leader, and sadly subsequently prime minister (thanks Cleggy). However, he could surprise us all and turn in to the statesman we require at that time - I sincerely fucking doubt it though!

 

Is this you? No, he's much more handsome than me!! :)

 

Anything else cock smoker (seeing as I am a bellend)?

Edited September 27, 2011 by Creator Supreme
brucespanner negging me!!

[VladimirIlyich]

It's ill-conceived because far and away the biggest beneficiaries of the "tuition fee cut" are wealthier graduates. A poorer graduate will pay back the same amount whether the cap is 6k or 9k.

 

I'm no fan of the £9,000 cap and would really like to see alternative proposals, but a £6,000 cap is no improvement in any way, shape or form. The only thing it's really good for is that it sounds less bad than a £9,000 cap. In other words, its only function is to dispel some of Labour's own scaremongering about fees. It's not doing much to dampen my cynicism anyway.

 

I think it shows that they believe there is a better and cheaper way.

It could easily be done by adding a couple of pence on the higher rate of tax and bonuses paid to high earners.

[lifetime fan]

Back to Blair, it'll always be a case of what could have been for me.

[Strontium]

It certainly feels like dissent isn't your main aim. I think you've backed and defended pretty much everything. I guess there's some things you've been quiet about. Are you just opting to silently endure all the things you dislike and then back the things you do?

 

 

Isn't compromise about exactly that - putting up with stuff you don't particularly like to get the stuff you do like? On balance, the stuff I like outweighs the stuff I don't by a reasonable margin. Others will disagree, which is fine.

 

That said, I will still defend the stuff I'm not overly fond of (eg higher tuition fees) against unfair criticism. I'll defend anything or anyone against unfair criticism.

 

If he wasnt a friend,I was referring to your party of course not you personally,then why the hell are your party enabling almost everything his party does?

 

 

We have an agreement, the coalition agreement. Some Tory policies, some Lib Dem policies, some a combination of the two.

[Strontium]

Back to Blair, it'll always be a case of what could have been for me.

 

 

He had a massive mandate. He could have done anything. I'm still waiting for the electoral reform I was promised in the 1997 Labour manifesto. At least we had an excuse for breaking our policies.

[dennis tooth]

Labour in Liverpool was actually an obstruction to redevelopment. Too many stories to list here, but one that really summed them up was during the final days of the previous Labour council before they lost power in 1998, when they sold an option on Chavasse Park to Bill Davies for £50,000. It cost the city council £2m to fight that option off so we could get Liverpool One built.

 

Now that's perhaps off the main topic of Blair, but thematically not, because leaving a mess for their successors to deal with is something that characterises the modern Labour politician, which Blair is the apotheosis of. Utterly devoid of principle or remorse, where getting and retaining power is the overriding concern rather than the means to an end. You will hear Labour supporters castigating Blair on a regular basis, but you know they would trade Ed Miliband for another Blair in a heartbeat.

 

 

Ahem!

[Creator Supreme]

Isn't compromise about exactly that - putting up with stuff you don't particularly like to get the stuff you do like? On balance, the stuff I like outweighs the stuff I don't by a reasonable margin. Others will disagree, which is fine.

 

That said, I will still defend the stuff I'm not overly fond of (eg higher tuition fees) against unfair criticism. I'll defend anything or anyone against unfair criticism.

 

 

 

 

We have an agreement, the coalition agreement. Some Tory policies, some Lib Dem policies, some a combination of the two.

 

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

We have an agreement, the coalition agreement. Some Tory policies, some Lib Dem policies, some a combination of the two.

 

And quite a lot which was in neither manifesto.

 

It's ill-conceived because far and away the biggest beneficiaries of the "tuition fee cut" are wealthier graduates. A poorer graduate will pay back the same amount whether the cap is 6k or 9k.

 

I'm no fan of the £9,000 cap and would really like to see alternative proposals, but a £6,000 cap is no improvement in any way, shape or form. The only thing it's really good for is that it sounds less bad than a £9,000 cap. In other words, its only function is to dispel some of Labour's own scaremongering about fees. It's not doing much to dampen my cynicism anyway.

 

That's not a particularly great article. It neglects to mention the unknowns of Labour's proposals. It assumes various things (for example, the amount of earnings before 65k and the value of that 65k when the time comes; how the debt will be repaid; and it makes the assumption it'll be a continuation of the current repayment system).

 

However, I'm not going to spend any time of defending a policy I don't support. Requiring students to pay for their own education through any other means than fair and necessary taxation when they're able isn't something I support.

[dennis tooth]

Must say that Milliband is a total cunt watching that today.

 

Give me the Tories every day of the week over that cunt and the clapping seals in the crowd. 'Bankers are part of the solution, not part of the problem'.

 

Bullets in that man's cranium are part of the solution.

 

Of course I do not support any party but how in Gods name can anyone support that shower of shit they call Labour nowdays?

Supporting tuition fees and the getting his little mangina wet in support of the cuts policies, pouring buckets of scorn-piss onto the working classes at every turn. Numero you should be Prince Naseem Ashamed of yourself. As for your prediction that the coalition wouldnt last, well thats gone to shit hasnt it?

Basically, his speech said today: 'dont look to me as an alternative to whats going on, dont look to me for leadership, dont come crying when I cut your benefits you bunch of crying faggots, dont think I will even look remotely stylish whilst ripping you people off, dont ask me if I want to suck the bankers off as Im already on my knees with my tongue out, dont ask me to offer an opinion and definately dont vote for me as Im a horrible cunt only here to implement the 2nd chapter not change the story'

 

SD, grow a pair will you.

 

Whatever happens, save for a revolution to overthrow these ribbon gangstas and the monarchy gangstas, we are all truly fucked, economic raspberry cripples. None of these people have a clue.

[cochcaer]

He had a massive mandate. He could have done anything. I'm still waiting for the electoral reform I was promised in the 1997 Labour manifesto. At least we had an excuse for breaking our policies.

 

Wasn't PR rejected by Lloyd George, and only adopted by the Libs in self-interest?

[moof]

Blair's government did more good than this current government ever will.

[dennis tooth]

This is the sort of person who benefitted from Blair, not the working class:

 

Trader was not a hoaxer, says BBC

 

 

Alessio Rastani is an independent market trader and says ''I've been dreaming of another recession''

 

A financial trader who appeared on the BBC was not a hoaxer, the broadcaster has said after doubt was cast on his credentials.

 

It issued a statement after Twitter users suggested that Alessio Rastani was not a trader.

 

"We've carried out detailed investigations and can't find any evidence to suggest that the interview... was a hoax," the BBC said.

 

In the interview, Mr Rastani said traders "dream of recessions".

 

He was interviewed live on the BBC News Channel on Monday and said: "For most traders, we don't really care that much how they're going to fix the economy, how they're going to fix the whole situation - our job is to make money from it.

 

"Personally I've been dreaming of this moment for three years. I have a confession, which is I go to bed every night, I dream of another recession."

 

He then added: "The governments don't rule the world. [investment bank] Goldman Sachs rules the world.

 

"Goldman Sachs does not care about this rescue package, neither does the big funds."

 

After Twitter speculation that he was a member of hoaxers The Yes Men, the BBC press office made enquiries and concluded: "He is an independent market trader and one of a range of voices we've had on air to talk about the recession."

 

On his website Mr Rastani describes himself as "an experienced stock market and forex trader and professional speaker".

[Strontium]

Wasn't PR rejected by Lloyd George, and only adopted by the Libs in self-interest?

 

 

Lloyd George opposed it originally and later changed his mind. I imagine he thought votes for women was enough electoral reform for the time.

 

Lloyd George isn't the be-all and end-all of liberalism though. J.S. Mill wanted to introduce it in the 1860s, when we were in power, so I don't think allegations of naked self-interest hold up. Besides, I think fair political representation is in all of our interests.

[VladimirIlyich]

Quoting somebody from the 19th century when there were only Libs and Tories is a bit like choosing between the republicans and democrats.

 

It hardly makes a difference.