Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Women are suffering more than men, proportionately, from the cuts, and there is his habit of patronising women in parliament, even if it is cross-party (his rudeness, at least, is democratic). He said "calm down dear" to Labour MP Angela Eagle during a debate; it was Prospect who compared him to a private gynaecologist and he is in that incarnation, all bulging blue eyes and false concern. Last week he called his own MP Nadine Dorries "frustrated" during prime minister's questions. He then giggled and apologised ? government by U-turn and giggle.

He not doing women any favours with attitude.



http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/jan2011/8/4/image-1-for-paper-pics-18-jan-2011-gallery-553268354.jpg

Women are suffering more than men, proportionately, from the cuts


UUUURRGH! More of this Fawcett Society crap. Women are 'suffering' proportionally more than men because women *benefit* proportionally more than men from government spending. More women than men are employed by the PS. Plus also the FS mistakenly included child benefit payments as female income.


I didn't hear any complaints during the good years that men were benefiting less from Budget announcements.


As someone once quipped, if there was a major catastrophe the Guardian headline would read, "WORLD COMING TO END - WOMEN DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED.

It not just the cuts Lol it is the way he perceives women that old Tory hooray henry type the little women at home thing going on. I think the reason why women voters are put off him is women in tend bare a grudge when you piss them off not to mention his patronising comments recently.
As for the other stuff, I think he is realising it is a problem. The PR people are onto it (though the list of stuff released yesterday to attract the female vote was rather laughable). He'll change his spots quickly enough now he realises it could cost him votes.

Ridgley Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Last week he called his own MP

> Nadine Dorries "frustrated" during prime

> minister's questions. He then giggled and

> apologised ? government by U-turn and giggle.


Ah yes, this is the one where the slow news day at the Guardian took this completely out of context. Did anyone see Nadine Dorries on Newnight after this?


And I say this as someone who isn't a fan of Cameron either.

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> a Guardian-reading pedant writes:

>

> if you google Nadine Dorries frustrated you get

>

> this - heavy on the Mail, less so on the Guardian


I wasn't using this as an opportunity to take a pop at the paper, it happened to be the only one that I'd read and was able to comment upon. As I said, Newsnmight will put you straight on the Nadine Dorries story. No need to be so defensive Guardianistas.


Nuclear war every 28 days!!!!!!!!!!


PS politicians changing their spots when they realise it could cost them votes?! Pass the smellng salts please :)

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Crikey, £4 plus does seem excessive for one card, let alone twelve at that price! Did he explain why he wanted to spend so much? There could be many reasons. Did the recipients also send expensive cards? If so, rather than putting them in the recycling bin, you could just cut the handwritten bit off and send them to a different relative the following Christmas!
    • Does anyone have one they no longer need? Thanks 
    • Hi Dogkennelhillbilly, North of East dulwich station is not covered by the Dulwich Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Suburban requirements.  And 1978 was before this guidance was agreed.  Hi Jenijenjen, We have vacant sites and sites that for certain heights would likely become available. Giibs & Dandy vacant builders yard - neighbours I've spoken to of this site are extremely concerned about what the council may now approve. Kwik Fit, Goose Green Trading Estate instantly come to mind as sites where tall buildings would bring a significant offer to the freeholders to see the sites up. The Southwark Plan treats Giibs & Dandy + Kwik Fit as one site suitable for residential redevelopment. It also lists the Trading Estate for this as well. See page.84 https://www.southwark.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-09/Southwark Plan 2022 reduced 1.pdf Do you think developers having seen the council approve a 9 storey redevelopment are more or less likely now to seek the same at other East Duwlcih locations?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...