Jump to content

Recommended Posts

er, no mention of Tony Blair after today?.....and at least the others mentioned on here are harmless rather than war criminals. Still, he's Labour isn't he so moral high ground by default for all the Labour voters after the invasion of Iraq. Which is really gobsmakingly hypocritical when you read so much "how people can vote 'Con-dem" is beyond me" shite on social media and the other suspects.....

I don't think you'll find many Tony Blair fans who'd disagree with you on here. I certainly never voted for the cunt and I marched against the invasion.


(know you weren't aiming your comments at me, but I think a lot of people will say similar, and a lot of those that did vote for him probably wouldn't have if they'd known the path he'd take us down)




I haven't actually read any news today (hungover) but I will have a look now.

Before I was old enough to vote I was vaguely involved with some International Socialists and Trotskyist types. They put me right off the left-leaning politics- everything they went on about entailed how to prise money away from other people- and into their own pockets- the hypocrisy and shite was palpable
They all have the same basic aims and since some Labour seats were lost when it was discovered that the candidates were involved in the Militant tendency they are all astute enough not to get themselves involved with the far left overtly, but that doesn't mean that they do not hold those views.

Even if they all did, it's not like they could take the country down a socialist distribution of wealth road if they were in government.


But they could tax the richest a bit more and that would be the right thing to do in my opinion. Certainly they wouldn't lower their tax which is basically just taking the piss out of the rest of us (including most right leaning voters).

El Pibe Wrote:

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

> uncleglen was just showing us how to talk absolute

> shite. selfelss my friend ;)



Now EP, you know there's a difference between absolute shite and absolute bollix (as your new neighbours would probably call it). That is quite another trehad.

"er, no mention of Tony Blair after today?.....and at least the others mentioned on here are harmless rather than war criminals."


sort of what people were taking the thread for on here I thought - light hearted bants and that...


but as you mention it, yeah he's stinking the place up again. but wait what's this? Surely you aren't going to turn this into another one of your..


"Still, he's Labour isn't he so moral high ground by default for all the Labour voters after the invasion of Iraq. Which is really gobsmakingly hypocritical when you read so much "how people can vote 'Con-dem" is beyond me" shite on social media and the other suspects....."


straw-man, net-trawl rants are you?.. .oh. i see



Blair gets no love on here does he?


As for "shite social media"... on my feed: lefties appear to be blaming him for 1500 years of strife in that region, whilst a number of middle-ground or right-wingers are saying hang on he has a point, regardless of the past we nee dto do something here and now


Even your bete noirs ("other suspects?") - like Owen Jones are having a pop at him


So, who exactly are you having a pop at on here?


Sir, I put it to you, that on the evening of Sunday 15th June 2014 it was you talking absolute shite..

Blair is now roundly loathed by all the metro liberal types who fell for him in the first place, and all the proper left wingers for getting them into power and then refusing to do a hard left turn. I think right wingers only say he has a point to wind up lefties. Whether he's talking shite or not is almost beside the point - as far as I can see, nobody is listening.


Going back to the football, it's been shocking to find that often Rio Ferdinand is talking the most sense. Both BBC and ITV pundits have been bland/boring/obvious/cretinous, with occasional outbreaks of cringeworthy Smashie and Nicey style blokery. Shite is too polite a word for it.

I was a couple of months off of my 19th birthday when he came to power in 1997. I didn't vote for him because


1. He had a smile that made me want to slap him.

2. He tried to buddy up with Oasis, and I was a blur kinda guy.



Frankly I feel as though I was probably better off making my political decisions based on that kind of criteria.

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

    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
    • I'd quit this thread, let those who just want to slag Labour off have their own thread.  Your views on the economy are worth debating.  I'm just stunned how there wasn't this level of noise with the last government.  I could try to get some dirt on Badenoch but she is pointless  Whilst I am not a fan of the Daily Mirror at least there is some respite from Labour bashing. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/grenfell-hillsborough-families-make-powerful-36175862 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage-facing-parliamentary-investigation-36188612  
    • That is a bit cake and eat it tho, isn’t it?    At what point do we stop respecting other people’s opinions and beliefs  because history shows us we sometimes simply have no other choice  you are holding some comfort blanket that allows you to believe we are all equal and all valid and we can simply voice different options - without that ever  impacting on the real world  Were the racists we fought in previous generations different? Were their beliefs patronised by the elites of the time? Or do we learn lessons and avoid mistakes of the past?   racists/bigots having “just as much to say” is both true and yet, a thing we have learnt from the past. The lesson was not “ooh let’s hear them out. They sound interesting and valid and as worthy of an audience as people who hold the opposite opinion” 
    • I don't have a beef with you. But I do have a beef with people who feel that a certain portion of the public's opinion isn't valid.  I don't like racism any more than anyone else here. But I do dislike the idea that an individual's thoughts, beliefs and feelings, no matter how much I may disagree with them, are somehow worth less than my own.  And I get the sense that that is what many disenfranchised voters are feeling - that they are being looked down upon as ignorant, racists who have no right to be in the conversation. And that's what brings out people on the margins and drives them towards extremes, like Reform.  Whether you like it or not, the racist, bigot, anti-european nextdoor to you has just as much say in the country as you do. Intellectual superiority is never going to bring them round. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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