***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 6 *****
Continued political chat.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 21 Apr 14 at 21:46
|
Harriet Harman has now issued a clear statement:
www.harrietharman.org/nccl-statement---24022014
OTOH her appearance on Newsnight last night was a mistake. An item previously limited to Mail and a few columnists got the legs to be headline news.
|
She has used the word 'smear'. OED - smear - unwarranted or untrue accusation.
If she has been accused of something discreditable which is untrue, why doesn't she sue the Daily Mail? She and the Labour Party have got plenty of money. I would, if it were me.
Jack Dromey? I am old enough to remember Grunwick, all he is any good for is stopping people from going to work.
|
The Mail is practised enough not to actually accuse her of anything. If you read the article carefully it recites a number of facts, some of them in pejorative terms, and invites the reader to draw a conclusion.
|
|
Why did Harman refuse to say the decision of the NCCL to affiliate with the Paedophile Information Exchange was a mistake on Newsnight? I dont understand why she refused the open goal, it clearly was a mistake and in her case, not one she was responsible for as far as I can tell.
|
Stu,
I'm not clear why she avoided the opportunity to express regret other than to avoid Mail claiming a propaganda victory. She seems to have gone further now though:
www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/25/harriet-harman-regrets-employer-link-paedophile-lobbyists
Incidentally PIE affiliated to NCCL, not other way round. As far as I can see affiliation was effectively membership for groups and at time there were something like 1000 affiliate organisations. It seems those behind PIE saw the work NCCL was doing on Gay rights andd hitched there wagon to the campaign, including disgustingly conflating homosexuality and paedophilia.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 25 Feb 14 at 14:33
|
>> I'm not clear why she avoided the opportunity to express regret
...and neither is anyone else
>> other than to avoid
>> Mail claiming a propaganda victory.
If that's the case, it's backfired on her.
It shouldn't be that difficult.
Not even the most rabid right winger would think she or Jack Dromey were involved personally in paedophilia...so why not just put it all to bed (sorry)..and come out with some statement vilifying PIE and declaring regret that the NCCL of which she was an integral part, wasn't more robust about things at the time.
What's the point of moaning about the Wail being partisan etc...next week it'll be a left wing rag doing the same or similar to a Tory...and if there's teeth to it, it'll run, in which case deal with it..and if not it'll go away.
|
>>It seems those behind PIE saw the work NCCL was doing on Gay rights andd hitched there wagon to the campaign, including disgustingly conflating homosexuality and paedophilia.<<
NAMBLA were doing the same thing in the 90's, I know because as a teenager on the internet in those days I came across their members and supporters quite frequently in the very unregulated chat rooms that existed back then where grooming was hard to escape from.
They came at you from the gay perspective and then tried to talk you around to their way of thinking although they were not especially subtle tbh, anyone who couldnt spot them a mile off would have to be extremely naive, I didnt know what I do now but even as a 14 year old I knew they were wrong'uns.
|
>> disgustingly conflating homosexuality and paedophilia.
Vladimir Putin does the same thing. Perhaps it's a tendency among national leaders who are in denial about the whole phenomenon.
If homosexuality so unnatural and un-African, why do Uganda and Nigeria for example (two countries I know and like) feel obliged to ban it by law? Governments - not just African ones - need to learn to mind their own damn business and leave people alone.
|
I must say, when the Left get shouty they really go for it dont they.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-partys-paedogeddon-theyre-never-3182595
Quite a headline.
|
>> I must say, when the Left get shouty they really go for it dont they.
>>
>> www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-partys-paedogeddon-theyre-never-3182595
Quite a good article.
Hell, will I morph into a Mirror reader?
|
>> Hell, will I morph into a Mirror reader?
When you've recovered from the years of canteen culture, Wp, if I'm still alive I expect you to become a slightly curmudgeonly left-of-centre borderline bunny hugger actually. But I may not live that long.
|
I've no time for Harperson normally, but back in the seventies the centre and right were on the back foot and all sorts of weirdos and sinister types were given a public platform. It was considered deeply uncool to condemn and as we'd not that long shrugged off the straight laced conformity of the fifties and early sixties society didn't really know how to handle the new found freedom of expression.
I blame the Beatles.
|
>NAMBLA were doing the same thing in the 90's, I know because as a teenager on the internet in those days..
Ah, I'd forgotten about that lot. Usenet in those days was pretty much "anything goes" in the unmoderated newsgroups. Not a place for the un-wary or easily offended.
Trivia fact:
Ginsberg was a member.
Last edited by: Kevin on Tue 25 Feb 14 at 22:29
|
|
Time to rename this thread, Mods -it's nowt to do with UKIP!
|
>> Ginsberg was a member.
I met Allen Ginsberg in 1957 or 8. I was a huge admirer being young and a bit tired of classical English Lit which I was supposed to be studying, idle little brute that I was. One of his first remarks to me was 'I kinda like boys'. He was always a nice kind man, far too intelligent to make passes at a non-homosexual. And he was a pederast, not a paedophile.
Later I was introduced to William Burroughs whose best work, The Naked Lunch, I had just read. He was off heroin at the time and living in a huge sleazy hotel in Lillie Road. I obliged him by getting him marijuana from a café I knew in Cable Street, Stepney, supplies being a bit tight in Notting Hill just then. He was very entertaining company and also a nice, kind, highly intelligent individual with whom I spent many companionable hours smoking his weed, drinking a bit and talking about this and that.
A lot of people didn't get The Naked Lunch and were horrified by it instead of rolling around on the floor howling with laughter like an intelligent person with a bit of literary nous. Hence the puritanical, philistine, ignorant and inaccurate piece of rubbish in the current Private Eye giving my old buddy Miles a kicking for his latest doorstep book on Burroughs, the most recent product of a hard-working life as a sort of beat Boswell. Miles can look after himself of course but the Burroughs crap is nauseating. The LRB did a similar pathetic sneering piece a few years back. I wonder if the same twonk wrote it.
|
>I met Allen Ginsberg in 1957 or 8.
A friend in Texas was a friend of Kerouac and shared an apartment in San Francisco with him for a short while. He knew Ginsberg too. Their regular watering hole was a place called Vesuvio across from The City Lights bookstore. I first visited it around 1995 or so and it's a bit of a shrine to the Beat Generation.
Rick, my friend, spent some time in Europe with a couple of other guys in the 60s. They bought a clapped out camper van and toured all over sleeping in the van, venturing as far as North Africa. Arriving in Brussels in the early hours one morning, tired and stoned, they parked up and passed out.
They were woken a few hours later by someone banging on the van. Pulling back a curtain they saw a bunch of guys laying out tables and chairs - they'd parked on the pavement outside a cafe in Grande Place :-)
The cafe let them use the loos, gave them a coffee and sent them on their way.
Sadly, he died in 2001 from a meth o/d.
|
|
If Hewitt can apologise, why can't Harperson?
|
order-order.com/2014/02/26/money-trail-leads-back-to-bone/
Oh dear. Still we have a UKIP candidate ready and waiting just incase Cameron gives him his 'full support'.
|
Farage is correct to say
"It is utterly pointless setting immigration targets when you can't even decide who comes into this country."
There is very little in the way of levers to control it. Analogous to saying you will reduce the number of northerners moving to the south east.
|
. Analogous to saying
>> you will reduce the number of northerners moving to the south east.
>>
Northerners can't afford to move to the South East :-)
|
>> Northerners can't afford to move to the South East :-)
Ha ha. Probably true now. Quite a lot of us did!
|
There could have been a ratio of 95% English speakers to other languages before an English speaker was heard! Default position on SE transport is tight lipped silence:)
|
Mr Vuvuzela may be bouncy, juicy and engaging - even endearing to those of bad habits and multiple addictions - but the fact remains that he's mischievous, playing with fire, by pandering to the deep British vein of xenophobia. It's misleading, and it encourages all the racist idiots in the population (present company excepted of course, he added not without a certain waspishness).
The other parties are largely to blame for getting their knickers in a twist instead of dismissing the stuff properly, by confronting it intellectually. But that's a bit difficult because it means admitting a few things. Mainstream political discourse of every stripe is sick-making as often as not.
|
>> Mainstream political discourse of every stripe is sick-making as often as not.
If that seems vague, what I mean is that it is admirably and dazzlingly bold and arrogant on some levels while being despicably wimpish and evasive on others.
But those are the ground rules. Who'd be a politician? Not many can get away with it.
|
>>the fact remains that he's mischievous, playing with fire, by pandering to the deep British vein of xenophobia
"It is much easier to be critical than correct."
Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of England.
|
>> Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of England.
Now he was one who could get away with it Perro. Much easier of course when you seek support from the thinking rather than drinking classes. Mr Vuvuzela is making the Enoch Powell mistake, an elementary one. Powell's career never recovered.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sat 1 Mar 14 at 22:34
|
>> "It is much easier to be critical than correct."
>> Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of England.
In absence of devolution way back when I suspect Dizzy's PM ship extended well beyond just England.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 1 Mar 14 at 22:39
|
>>In absence of devolution way back when I suspect Dizzy's PM ship extended well beyond just England.
Correct, I'm a cut-and-paste merchant, no worse though than Mr Coussine's incorrect use the word xenophobia when referring to Nigel Farage.
|
AC didn't say that Farage was xenophobic. A lot of people are though, not just in the UK, and Farage does appeal to that element of human nature. He in an intelligent man and knows exactly what he is doing and it is a dangerous stratagem.
|
>>>AC didn't say that Farage was xenophobic. A lot of people are though, not just in the UK, and Farage does appeal to that element of human nature. He in an intelligent man and knows exactly what he is doing and it is a dangerous stratagem.
You're not related to Neville Chamberlain are you by any chance?
|
>> AC didn't say that Farage was xenophobic. A lot of people are though, not just
>> in the UK, and Farage does appeal to that element of human nature. He in
>> an intelligent man and knows exactly what he is doing and it is a dangerous
>> stratagem.
Hmm..I see it as wider than that.
Yes Mr Xenophobia will be amongst those who support UKIP...but...are there in reality that many people who are truly xenophobic?
How about the multitudes of people in this country in the middle, that are not xenophobic in the true sense of the word*, but nevertheless have real concerns about unchecked immigration.
I consider myself one of them.
I don't mind some migrants and very much think they are good for the country...I do mind some migrants and think they do not contribute much or are of such dubious character they should have been told to sod off at the first hurdle. I think we should have a system like Oz's that differentiates who comes in..and we only let the ones in that are good for our country ...with an agreed number of deserving welfare/asylum cases etc.
*Xenophobia has been bandied around so much and chucked at those who join the immigration debate, so that it now seemingly means all who oppose unfettered immigration, rather than it's true meaning:..."intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries".
Last edited by: Westpig on Sun 2 Mar 14 at 09:38
|
>>AC didn't say that Farage was xenophobic
I didn't say he did.
|
|
British people don't talk on trains, surely Nigel knows that.
|
>> British people don't talk on trains, surely Nigel knows that.
>>
He must be a foreigner if he doesn't know that!
Who was it that wrote a jokey piece something along the lines of "how to behave in England"?
One of the 'pieces of advice' was when entering a train compartment, introduce yourself and shake hands with everyone!
|
>> Who was it that wrote a jokey piece something along the lines of "how to
>> behave in England"?
>>
>> One of the 'pieces of advice' was when entering a train compartment, introduce yourself and
>> shake hands with everyone!
>>
Gerard Hoffnung?
|
Apart from encouraging racists and xenophobes in the population, more numerous than some here suppose, Farage makes fools of his followers by implying that this country isn't independent or European, when as any fule kno it is both.
But I'm not arguing about it. That would be pointless. Some can never understand the simplest thing if they don't want to. There are fules, and then there are fules. Takes all sorts to make an asylum.
:o}
|
>> Apart from encouraging racists and xenophobes in the population, more numerous than some here suppose,
I'm not convinced that the real Xenophobe is great in number. The EDL or BNP type have always had small numbers, thankfully.
Those like me who do have concerns in some areas, but will generally live and let live, well yes, there's seemingly loads of them...but are they really xenophobes?
>> Farage makes fools of his followers by implying that this country isn't independent or European,
>> when as any fule kno it is both.
IMO it isn't independent enough when a European court can overrule a home grown one..or a European politician can dictate what goes on here. To me this is completely unacceptable and it would seem many others think similarly. So in that respect Nigel Farage is correct.
>>
>> But I'm not arguing about it. That would be pointless.
Why? Teach me something.
Some can never understand the
>> simplest thing if they don't want to. There are fules, and then there are fules.
>> Takes all sorts to make an asylum.
What happens if the fool was right all along?
|
>> What happens if the fool was right all along?
He often is, just in the nature of things. No one's always right, and it takes a sort of genius to always be wrong.
|
>> Apart from encouraging racists and xenophobes in the population, more numerous than some here suppose,
>> Farage makes fools of his followers by implying that this country isn't independent or European,
>> when as any fule kno it is both.
>>
>> But I'm not arguing about it. That would be pointless. Some can never understand the
>> simplest thing if they don't want to. There are fules, and then there are fules.
>> Takes all sorts to make an asylum.
>>
>> :o
You speak from your lofty ivory tower AC, from whence you look down upon those who do not share your views as "fules"; you then assume that because you are educated and can string together a few words, that your view is more valid than that of the "ordinary" people whom you so clearly despise.
|
>> assume that because you are educated and can string together a few words, that your view is more valid than that of the "ordinary" people whom you so clearly despise.
Clearly not everyone can understand a few words strung together. If you could, Roger, you wouldn't accuse me of that sort of empty vainglory and conceit. But that's life. I'm sure you aren't alone in your misunderstanding. I've given up being hurt by it.
|
|
See what I mean Rastaman? Three green thumbs and a constipated face already. That means at least four others here are like you and can't actually read.
|
"That means at least four others here are like you and can't actually read."
……….. and some fules can't spel?
|
>> and some fules can't spel?
They can really. They just enjoy breaking the odd rool, in the tradition of Nigel*.
*No, not that carphound. Nigel Molesworth is the one I mean.
|
"No, not that carphound. Nigel Molesworth is the one I mean. "
Pretentious …………. moi???
;-)
|
>> See what I mean Rastaman? Three green thumbs and a constipated face already. That means
>> at least four others here are like you and can't actually read.
>>
Which bit is it that I cannot read?
...although presumably you mean digest, as the art of simple reading is usually achieved by most.
|
>> Which bit is it that I cannot read?
>> ...although presumably you mean digest, as the art of simple reading is usually achieved by most.
Surprisingly not... quite a large proportion of well-educated people habitually fail to take in what quite simple texts really mean. They get the gist and think that's all there is to it. But I suppose you're right, what I mean is people don't take in the full meaning of what they read.
It was of course disagreeable of me to clip Roger round the ear alleging he can't read. Schoolmarmish if you like. But it's quite disagreeable being accused of something that only stupid (if sometimes ostensibly 'educated') people do: confuse upbringing and experience with native intelligence and despise and look down on 'ordinary' people, whoever they may be.
Anyone who thinks I am like that simply hasn't understood what I've written. Either I write badly or I am failing to explain everything four or five times for the benefit of the dullards at the back of the class. Well, too damn bad. I won't eat my heart out. I wouldn't rate many here as dullards, none really, except Roger in this particular connection.
|
See what I mean?
Rastaman, Mr Vuvuzela -- appellations designed to belittle and diminish the people to who they are applied!
|
>> Rastaman, Mr Vuvuzela -- appellations designed to belittle and diminish the people to who they are applied!
Hey Roger, Rastaman is meant to tease you a bit for reasons that should be obvious, but in my book it doesn't belittle or diminish any more than it flatters. I can assure you that Rastafarianism has an interesting side, and also a virtuous side. You aren't meant to be hurt by it at all, just slightly stung in your deplorable overtly racist aspect. I'm sure you wouldn't dream of being rude to a brown person for no good reason, but I think you did once say you were racist.
'Mr Vuvuzela' is derived from a cartoon in the comic ages ago. As I keep saying, I find him quite amusing and personable on many levels, but I can't help thinking he's wrong. And he's by far the most comic politician on the stage at present. I tend to see them all in these cartoon terms, it's my nature, I see it as the human comedy with a liberal scattering of tragic or obscene bits.
|
>> Gerard Hoffnung?
'How to be English', by George Mikes I seem to remember.
|
An very interesting (IMO) debate on immigration published in October 2013, it runs for 1hr 48mins and includes the likes of Ken Livingstone and Nigel Farage so you gotta be keen:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciZEUGor-p4
|
Crawls out of the woodwork:
tinyurl.com/l4uwry9
Racist diatribe sent to Tory MP by man who was his UKIP opponent at last election.
|
That would be an EX UKIP nutter. Wouldnt get far now, the knives are out for anyone who thinks along those lines, I notice a few people have quietly shuffled off who got the message.
It is your Far Left mates Bromp that we have trouble with in 2014, looking for a home, all gob no ideas though, especially how to pay for anything. They dont last long, tend to stomp off when challenged, one expects to a protest march somewhere.
|
>> It is your Far Left mates Bromp that we have trouble with in 2014, looking for a home, all gob no ideas though, especially how to pay for anything. They dont last long, tend to stomp off when challenged, one expects to a protest march somewhere.
Must say it surprises me a bit, the idea of a flood of Far Left people jostling to join UKIP... perhaps their gob and lack of ideas make them seem more numerous than they really are.
:o}
Among the mass of old bumf I have been going through there are a lot of pieces about British politics in the early 1980s when far left, mainly Trotskyist, groups were ensconced in many local Labour Parties. Labour at that time, and these left groups, were blowing hot and cold in rapid succession on EC membership. Most of the pieces are in French but not all of them. Those were a very busy couple of years for me. Apart from quite staggering detail on the factions and splits in the Con, Lab and Lib parties, there's a lot about the appearance of the SDP and the workings of the police, the army and their equivalents in Northern Ireland... plus odd bits about things like British regional accents (damn good even if I do say it myself) and the Follow-On Rule in cricket... I did my best to educate those Frogs, and they quite liked it or some of them did.
Very little of that stuff can be recycled being brief news stories about things now long forgotten. It's a sad thing to have been a news hack. Deathless prose is wasted on ephemera.
|
I think there may well be a few new members who have joined UKIP recently with the intent of causing trouble by uttering opinions which would tend to bring the party into disrepute.
We had a couple of such folk a few weeks ago, trying to muscle in on our branch.
There are also, without much argument to the contrary, substantial resources being put into (not only by the old-guard parties, but by the the E.U. itself) rubbishing the party on a personal rather than policy basis.
|
>> I think there may well be a few new members who have joined UKIP recently
>> with the intent of causing trouble by uttering opinions which would tend to bring the
>> party into disrepute.
>> We had a couple of such folk a few weeks ago, trying to muscle in
>> on our branch.
>> There are also, without much argument to the contrary, substantial resources being put into (not
>> only by the old-guard parties, but by the the E.U. itself) rubbishing the party on
>> a personal rather than policy basis.
>>
Is there any evidence for the bolded bit? ?
|
|
I'll try to find it - but I'm off to a branch AGM now!
|
>> I'll try to find it - but I'm off to a branch AGM now!
I posted in haste about the EU funding to specifically target UKIP.
Sorry - It seems I exaggerated , BUT it seems they are targeting any Eurosceptic party:-
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/EU-to-set-up-euro-election-troll-patrol-to-tackle-Eurosceptic-surge.html
So I guess we ARE included!
|
>>Must say it surprises me a bit, the idea of a flood of Far Left people jostling to join UKIP... perhaps their gob and lack of ideas make them seem more numerous than they really are. <<
I often wonder if they have read many UKIP policies, especially the economic direction much of the party leans, posh boy Owen Jones wouldnt like what he hears.
My only thought is that it boils down to an anti-establishment thing and they see UKIP as the most effective vehicle to kick Labour to the Left, there is a genuine and growing element to the UKIP mission concerning the working classes though, many might find us somewhat softer to the plight of those voters than many will expect. Labour sort of abandoned them under Blair and my goodness they are angry, far more so than any Tory I have ever met.
|
>> I often wonder if they have read many UKIP polices
Almost certainly not because there aren't any. Apart from banging on about immigration that is. UKIP have no cohesive and costed policies. They threw away their last manifesto and are yet to decide what they stand for.
|
>>Almost certainly not because there aren't any. Apart from banging on about immigration that is. UKIP have no cohesive and costed policies. They threw away their last manifesto and are yet to decide what they stand for.<<
Untrue. Members know what they stand for, the undecided bit is what policies will best support those aims. Policy is currently being approved by the NEC and costed by an outside organisation.
At the Spring Conference many speakers gave a good indication of the policy direction from their various policy working groups, I certainly have a good idea of what is coming up but then I take the time to listen.
The local manifesto is going to start being developed soon ready for 2015 in terms of local policies ( in addition to the framework nationally ), we have a fair idea of what will be in it but again it has to be approved by committee.
It is rather funny that you would criticise us for not developing a proper manifesto, then when we take the time to do so you criticise that too, cant have it both ways.
|
>Must say it surprises me a bit, the idea of a flood of Far Left people jostling to join UKIP...
I grew up in Yorkshire and mum still lives there. The area was always staunchly Labour until a few years ago.
What I hear up there is that traditional Labour voters are P'd off with leftie luvvies splashing cash on their own PC pet projects while ignoring basic maintenance of infrastructure. The local council recently tried to close a local sports facility blaming govt. cuts. When challenged, they produced a financial report with grossly inflated running costs. It went to court and the dodgy figures were revealed.
They're tired of Labour lies now that the money has run out.
They won't vote Tory because no-one in their family ever has.
UKIP is a handy vehicle for them to give complacent politicos a kick up the rear.
|
>> It is your Far Left mates Bromp
I'm Croslandite moderate Labour.
Even today views like those of Tony Crosland, Denis Healey, Roy Hattersley etc hardly look hard/far left even if (absurdly) they look to left of mainstream Labour.
|
>>Even today views like those of Tony Crosland, Denis Healey, Roy Hattersley etc hardly look hard/far left even if (absurdly) they look to left of mainstream Labour. <<
Well Labour is, like the Tories and Lib Dems, essentially a centrist party now, I think the Greens are the real Left and UKIP the Right ( ish ).
I often wonder quite what the difference between Labour and the Lib Dems is, they seem to occupy exactly the same ground more or less.
|
>> I often wonder quite what the difference between Labour and the Lib Dems is
Why do you wonder even? I thought you were a dyed-in-the-wool three buttocks man (tchah!) who never thought there was any difference worth mentioning between any of the mainstream parties.
I've just looked through one of my bits of French bumf covering the Labour conference in Brighton at the beginning of October 1981. The conference had voted overwhelmingly in favour of withdrawal from the EEC. However senior party figures made clear that it wasn't going to happen just like that...
Annoyingly interesting stuff at close quarters, politics. But it changes by the hour.
|
>>Why do you wonder even? I thought you were a dyed-in-the-wool three buttocks man (tchah!) who never thought there was any difference worth mentioning between any of the mainstream parties <<
Because it is an interesting question. LibLabCon, three cheeks blah blah blah, I cant stand all those sayings tbh, just inter-party insults, no value in them.
I can stand back and see small Tory/Labour differences but I cant say I can think of a Lib Dem/Labour difference in terms of general policy, I mean a proper difference, not differentiation for the sake of winning elections.
|
Mr F has come under fire over using EU money to pay his wife and publicity officer. Story spiced by allegation that latter was also his former mistress.
As a consequence Michael White in the Guardian's political blog explored reasons why 'intrusion' into a politician's private life might be justified. After briefly traversing the 'Nigegate' facts White turns to Roy Jenkins and recent revelation that he and Labour intellectual Tony Crosland had a fling together before their respective marriages.
Then went on to describe Jenkins as "a tremendous pork swordsman*" who, with knowledge of his wife had a long term affair with (a) the wife of Tory 'wet' Ian Gilmour and (b) Leslie Bonham-Carter (a woman in spite of the masculine spelling). Worth linking to the Mail article White mentions.
All apparently well known at time but not reported.
Politics in another era. Imagine the furore today if it emerged the Chancellor was tupping a Shadow Minister's wife.
* Tea on keyboard moment there!!.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 13 Mar 14 at 17:50
|
>> tupping <<
What a horrible phrase.
Pat
|
We, and the politicans, confuse someone that we would like to take legal, financial and economic control of the country with someone we wish to be our moral guardian, or a moral example.
I could not give a stuff who is banging who or how often, just so's they are good at the job they are paid to do.
|
>> >> tupping <<
>>
>> What a horrible phrase.
>>
>> Pat
Genuine open question - Why?
|
A tup, and tupping is respectively an uncastrated male sheep, and the process by which lambs are made. I've always thought of it being a northern term, although I don't know the origins.
If you move around sheep farming folk - perfectly normal to use those words really.
|
|
That's where I heard it first too. Not the most gentile of descriptions but far from the worse.
|
>> tupping
It's in Shakespeare. Iago uses the expression in Othello to wind people up... 'The black ram is tupping the white ewe...'
|
>>If you move around sheep farming folk - perfectly normal to use those words really.<<
I agree when used in relation to sheep.
Very derogatory to a woman involved though, and I was surprised Bromp didn't see it as such.
Pat
|
>> >>If you move around sheep farming folk - perfectly normal to use those words really.<<
>>
>> I agree when used in relation to sheep.
>>
>> Very derogatory to a woman involved though, and I was surprised Bromp didn't see it
>> as such.
>>
>> Pat
I genuinely didn't think of it as derogatory to the woman. As a Northerner it's just another of many slang terms for the (human) sexual act.
|
>> Mr F has come under fire over using EU money to pay his wife and
>> publicity officer. Story spiced by allegation that latter was also his former mistress.
How many UK M.P.s employ family as secretarial assistance?
A heck of a lot, I bet.
|
>> How many UK M.P.s employ family as secretarial assistance?
>> A heck of a lot, I bet.
Why shouldn't you? It makes a lot of sense.
|
>> Why shouldn't you? It makes a lot of sense.
In general terms I agree. A lot of unnecessary fuss is made about the subject and there are plenty of cases of secretary becoming wife!!
Did find it slightly ironic for Nige who rails against EU waste to be keeping two women on his MEP allowances. And it counters allegation that EU are supporting UK campaign against UKIP.
|
>> Then went on to describe Jenkins as "a tremendous pork swordsman*" who, with knowledge of his wife had a long term affair with (a) the wife of Tory 'wet' Ian Gilmour and (b) Leslie Bonham-Carter (a woman in spite of the masculine spelling). Worth linking to the Mail article White mentions.
>>
Linky thing
tinyurl.com/lt7q5em
|
Don't forget the many local council elections being held on May22nd.
We are hoping for a bit of "bleedover" from UKIP MEP votes.
|
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10776305/European-elections-Conservatives-face-poll-humiliation-as-one-in-three-Tory-voters-defect-to-Ukip.html
>>
>> :-) :-) :-)
Not worth much really. European elections will have a pretty low poll and 'protest' voters will be heavily over-represented amongst those who turn out at all. It will though cause Cameron a nasty turn and give power to the elbows of his eurosceptic wing.
General election still on course for Labour as largest party according to sidebar.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 20 Apr 14 at 10:20
|
I think most people have priced in a Labour victory, listening to Tory commentators predicting some sort of suprise Tory majority based on Milliband being vacuous seems very misguided, he can pretty much go on holiday for a year and still win. He will pop up once in a while with a speech of meaningless waffle, punctuated with phrases like 'cost of living' and yet another policy paid for by the bankers bonus but I cant see any big Labour offer coming through, they dont need one now the Lib Dems have collapsed.
One of the Labour candidates around here for 2015 is awful, I saw him in a debate recently and he was all over the place, lacking both facts and a coherent message, but Labour dont need to win here so they seem to have done selection based on a lucky dip, very much a party in cruise control.
|
|
Fortunately for Labour huge swathes of the North will automatically vote for them due to the "me mam and dad would turn in their graves if I don't" syndrome. But how even they can still vote for them after what President Bliar and the idiot Brown have done to our country and the economy is beyond me !
|
>> Fortunately for Labour huge swathes of the North will automatically vote for them due to
>> the "me mam and dad would turn in their graves if I don't" syndrome. But
>> how even they can still vote for them after what President Bliar and the idiot
>> Brown have done to our country and the economy is beyond me !
Fortunately for the Tories swathes of Southern and 'Middle' England, particularly in suburbs will automatically vote for them as they're the party of aspiration, low taxes and anti immigration and for 'people like us'. How they can do so when on a rational examination Labour policies on childcare, education and the NHS being better for them/their families and in spite of havoc wreaked by Tories as far back as Heath is beyond me!
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 20 Apr 14 at 11:58
|
>>How they can do so when on a rational examination Labour policies on childcare, education and the NHS being better for them/their families and in spite of havoc wreaked by Tories as far back as Heath is beyond me!<<
Delivery for the individual I suspect. Policy is one thing but outcomes for the individual voter is something else, a quick look at the NHS under Labour in Wales is a case in point, seem to be alot of unhappy folk over that way judging by the mauling the Labour rep got on QT earlier this year from the audience.
|
If you have a big mortgage, vote Labour. Raging inflation won't be far away as they reward their clients voters with pay rises and extra benefits.
If you have a pile of savings you plan to live on for the rest of your life, you need another plan.
The only way the government can cope with the debt is to keep interest rates below inflation. I'd rather zero interest rates than high inflation.
|
>> If you have a big mortgage, vote Labour. Raging inflation won't be far away as
>> they reward their clients voters with pay rises and extra benefits.
And raging inflation last happened when? Was it a feature of the Blair years?
Last time it got anywhere near 10% Lawson, Major and Lamont were doing their quickstep through the office of Chancellor.
|
>> >> If you have a big mortgage, vote Labour. Raging inflation won't be far away
>> as
>> >> they reward their clients voters with pay rises and extra benefits.
>>
>> And raging inflation last happened when? Was it a feature of the Blair years?
>>
>> Last time it got anywhere near 10% Lawson, Major and Lamont were doing their quickstep
>> through the office of Chancellor.
Fair point.
I think the difference now is the reluctance to raise interest rates (in so far as the government can influence it) and the need to keep inflation higher than the interest cost on the debt so it reduces in real terms. The higher the interest rate, the faster the debt grows and the greater the relative inflation needed to prevent in getting beyond control.
The debt is still growing.
|
>> vote for them as they're the party of aspiration, low taxes and anti immigration and
>> for 'people like us'. How they can do so when on a rational examination Labour
>> policies on childcare, education and the NHS being better for them/their families and in spite
>> of havoc wreaked by Tories as far back as Heath is beyond me!
>>
Whats wrong with being aspirational ? My grandfather used to say that all Labour want the working man to have is his beer, cigarettes and a week at the seaside ! Childcare is the responsibility of the parents, not the state. Teachers by and large are a bunch of Guardian readers whose loony lefty leanings have damaged the education of several generations of children and the NHS was no better off under Labour than it is now.
As someone said on here recently "Labour tax those of us who work to pay those who won't".
|
>> Whats wrong with being aspirational ? My grandfather used to say that all Labour want
>> the working man to have is his beer, cigarettes and a week at the seaside
>> ! Childcare is the responsibility of the parents, not the state. Teachers by and large
>> are a bunch of Guardian readers whose loony lefty leanings have damaged the education of
>> several generations of children and the NHS was no better off under Labour than it
>> is now.
Nothing wrong with aspirational but if it becomes a proxy for 'people like us' then it's no less (or more) tribal than you suggest Labour is in the North.
If that's what you really believe about teachers debate is pointless. Those I know locally though are pretty much a cross section of the electorate.
|
>>One of the Labour candidates around here for 2015 is awful
Like this one:
www.cornishguardian.co.uk/Labour-axes-St-Austell-Newquay-MP-candidate/story-20953255-detail/story.html
I believe no one here has mentioned the debates between Nick 'n Nige, I watched both and thought Clegg gave a good account of himself - he's a good politician i.e. devious, cunning, and avoids giving a straight (or any) answer.
Farage was basically himself really, shoots from the hip and speaks from the heart.
I listen to LBC a lot lately since it's been available on DAB, I was listening to an LBC phone-in program recently about the 95,000 foreign-trained doctors working in the UK, many of whom wouldn't pass the exam that their UK-trained counterparts had passed, the obvious language problems and the possibility of mistakes being made.
The relatively high number of medical students in this country being rejected was also mentioned - crazy or what!
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27076216
|
>>Sweetness and light <<
She is quite personable yes, as ever though, expressing libertarian views is a minefield. I know what she meant and it was about the freedom of the individual but freedom of conscience isnt fashionable these days.
It is interesting that she said gay, straight, Muslim, Christian and the headline only mentions gay people, nothing like a catchy headline to outrage readers.
|
|
Intolerance and resentment disguised as libertarianism. Only to be expected. Fruitcake territory.
|
Not just fruitcake..
One living in a parallel universe where rants like hers do not lead to loss of job in UKIP and Geoffrey Bloom did not exist.
Plain stupid.
|
I dunno, I agree up to a point. Libertarianism shouldn't have too many tight limits or it isn't libertarian, it's something else.
Personally I like fruitcake. Not that convinced by the kippers though.
|
Somehow I think that the arguments, indeed struggles, of JS Mill and other luminaries, in debating libertarianism and utility, are lost on the UKIP brigade and their camp followers.
From JS Mill: "The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."
Not exactly a free-for-all, is it?
|
>>are lost on the UKIP brigade and their camp followers <<
Based on the notion that everyone that supports a political party should be a wonk with nothing to do with their time but read about political ideology and discuss it with fellow weirdos.
Libertarianism in UKIP is not expressed in its pure form, it is mixed in with many other strands of thinking. There may be genuine libertarians in the party but I dont think there are that many. Most, like people in general, are a hybrid of different ideas. Ideological purity is, for me certainly, too narrow and I am grown up enough to recognise it doesnt suit me.
It isnt about a free-for-all, it is a debate about the point at which you step in and tell people what to do rather than let them decide.
|
|
How many people are in fact positive supporters of UKIP versus the number of people who are actually supporters of "the only viable opportunity which is NOT Labour, Conservative, Liberal, etc."?
|
>>How many people are in fact positive supporters of UKIP versus the number of people who are actually supporters of "the only viable opportunity which is NOT Labour, Conservative, Liberal, etc."?<<
We will only know the answer to that in 2015 when the question of bleed back to the three main parties is answered.
One thing you hear alot in my position is 'never voting Tory or Labour again'. Whether that means they vote for us more than once, time will tell, it is up to us to deliver when given the chance in the hope that they do.
|
The way forward is not, I feel, to worry about the shape, beliefs, behaviour, honesty or priorities of the political parties.
The main step forward will be achieved by improving or changing the behaviour of the electorate. On the basis that as far as I can see the main desire of any politician, including UKIP's bunch, is to be elected and in power. Their views are entirely secondary to anything that they feel may help them achieve that.
Change the criteria of the voters and you will change the performance of the politicians.
I am 100% sure this is the right answer.
I have 0% of a clue about how to do it.
|
>> How many people are in fact positive supporters of UKIP versus the number of people
>> who are actually supporters of "the only viable opportunity which is NOT Labour, Conservative, Liberal,
>> etc."?
>>
Ukip will do VERY well in the European elections, but despite what everyone says about never voting for the old parties again, come the general election that is exactly what they will do. The north will by and large vote Labour and the more intelligent southerners will vote Conservative :-) Perhaps it would be better if there was a change in the old voting habits, but there won't be, not in this country. We will always go with what we know
|
|
Umm. This "political ideology" is more philosophy. Perhaps is something with which a moderately well-educated potential representative should have some passing acquaintance? Especially before stating a position which is then reneged on.
|
>>Perhaps is something with which a moderately well-educated potential representative should have some passing acquaintance? Especially before stating a position which is then reneged on.<<
I am poorly educated. What position?
|
I saw a TV program recently, 'on benefits and proud' I think it was called. Featured Romanians in this country.
Was it a UKIP party political broadcast?
|
|
One Donna Edmunds who said " "I'm a libertarian so I don't think the state should have a role on who business owners serve." The state should have no role in dealing with discrimination? Short memories some people have.
|
>>The state should have no role in dealing with discrimination?<<
My view is that it should have a limited role, but on a small number of types of discrimination, it is regrettable but vital. Idealists think it should be even less and on that I do disagree with Donna but I know very well that her intent is anti-state rather than pro-discrimination of the type that you wish to pin on her.
In an ideal world you would not need to protect from discrimination but the world is not and is unlikely to ever be ideal.
|
|
Could you please specify the types of discrimination for which you believe there should be no legal redress?
|
>>Could you please specify the types of discrimination for which you believe there should be no legal redress?<<
I believe that the current areas of discrimination covered such as race, sexuality, religion and gender are the ones that matter and should be enforced through the law, as they currently are.
An example of what I dont think should be covered is a ban on wearing jeans at a golf club and I dont anticipate people wearing denim marching the streets to change that either, if a business wants to discriminate against people looking scruffy, I say fair enough.
|
Has anybody ever suggested that jeans/scruffy is a protected characteristic?
The only issue I can see with clothing is where, deliberately or not, a dress code might constitute indirect discrimination. An example would be a requiring women to dress in a way which some cultures regard as immodest.
|
>>Has anybody ever suggested that jeans/scruffy is a protected characteristic?<<
I expect someone has at some point although I would guess that age discrimination will be the next one which becomes more important as the population ages.
|
I mentioned in another thread I went to my first Equality and Diversity training session last week. I discovered, (incidentally to the trainer's surprise), that although there are nine protected characteristics in law, we have, by virtue of our policies, created a tenth, which is indeed appearance. That is, it is a disciplinary and I suppose ultimately sackable offence to discriminate against someone because of how they look or what they wear. No idea whether that's common or just us.
Goodness knows whether that would actually play out as they intend in reality, but it's in the staff handbook.
|
>> it is a disciplinary and I suppose ultimately sackable offence to discriminate against someone because of how they look or what they wear. No idea whether that's common or just us.
Who are 'us' Crankcase? Local authority, govt department, private concern?
I have to say that nothing would induce me to go to an 'Equality and Diversity training session'. It would cause me to commit acts of great verbal and perhaps even physical violence, if I didn't die of apoplexy first.
|
I wasn't exactly leaping up and down about the idea but it was expedient to go. It was better than I'd anticipated and I did learn a couple off things.
Employer is, loosely, the University.
|
>> Employer is, loosely, the University.
Ah, of course, enough said. All that finicky modern stuff is a doddle for academics who do it without even thinking... a lot of the people I know are academics or ex-academics.
It can be a nice little earner and a comfortable life for some. But it doesn't suit idle impatient people although those are only two of the vices common among academics. They have all the others too.
I gather it's quite common for academics to conceive a great hatred for students.
|
|
Ah now, I'm not employed as an academic. That requires a mind set I don't have.
|
>>> ultimately sackable offence to discriminate against someone because of how they look or what they wear
Only last week when the sun came out I was recalling my first job for Lloyds bank in the 70s. Suits were mandatory and as the year rolled on and it became a little warm to wear the jacket at some point one sunny morning the chief cashier would go through to the manager and request we should be allowed to remove our jackets... and then it had to be all of us... or none of us.
In extreme August temperatures we would campaign for rolled up shirt sleeves and this was granted only in exceptional circumstances... and again only if we all did the same.
Women could wear what they wanted and the shortest of 70s skirts were OK... but only as they had to wear a 3/4 length overall at all times which made them look a bit like a cleaner.
I assume it's different these days.
|
>>Only last week when the sun came out I was recalling my first job for Lloyds bank in the 70s
Same in Nat West, 1973-78, but happily the women didn't have overalls.
Weskits incidentally were not allowed with the jacket! Not that you would want to wear one in the heat that was needed for "jackets off".
|
>> I mentioned in another thread I went to my first Equality and Diversity training session
>> last week. I discovered, (incidentally to the trainer's surprise), that although there are nine protected
>> characteristics in law, we have, by virtue of our policies, created a tenth, which is
>> indeed appearance. That is, it is a disciplinary and I suppose ultimately sackable offence to
>> discriminate against someone because of how they look or what they wear. No idea whether
>> that's common or just us.
As a policy that makes good sense and I think it's quite widespread. Mocking/discriminating on appearance or belittling offends anyway but it's also quite likely to directly or indirectly engage a protected characteristic such as race, gender or disability.
|
>> wearing
>> jeans at a golf club
..as an aside, I've never 'got' that.
A ne'er do well in a pair of £5 slacks from a charity shop would be welcomed in...but the fellow in a pair of £70+ Jeans wouldn't be welcome?
...and as for the bloke walking round looking like Rupert the Bear?
Probably why I'm not a golfist.
|
>>..as an aside, I've never 'got' that.<<
Me neither.
>>.and as for the bloke walking round looking like Rupert the Bear?<<
I know a chap who wears that kit to go to the shops, not a golfist either!
My mum brought me back a loud shirt from the Caribbean last week, got some funny looks in Tesco...
|
>> >>..as an aside, I've never 'got' that.<<
>>
>> Me neither.
..and why does every golf club do the same? Is there an ancient rule written somewhere?
|
"I believe that the current areas of discrimination covered such as race, sexuality, religion and gender are the ones that matter and should be enforced through the law, as they currently are."
So you you endorse the laws on discrimination as they stand, since I am unaware of any law banning of jeans. Is ti the official UKIP position and as such promoted by other member of the party?
|
As most golf in England is played at private clubs, they can have their own rules about dress as long as the rules don't break any anti-discrimination laws. Not bothered either as I don't play golf.
Situation in Scotland is a bit different as although there are high class golf clubs, there are a lot of municipal golf courses and the game is seen as a sport for every social class, quite unlike England.
|
I'm intrigued to see how the latest discrimination top trumps pans out. Nurse sacked because she told colleague homosexuality is not in line with Christian teaching claims unfair dismissal on religious grounds.
Bets anyone?
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04/20/christian-nurse-gay-sin_n_5181835.html
And many other sources of your choice.
|
Mail/Harman/NCCL - Bromptonaut
