Awol

As someone who thinks that on balance she did more good than harm, I will: Selling off critical national infrastructure built with tax payers money to private interests was a huge mistake - and morally wrong too. As bad was then continuing to subsidise the private companies with more tax payers money while the revenues went to private shareholders. Further to that transport networks, energy, water and others constitute strategic assets that should never be in the hands of private companies, imo. They are there to underpin the basic operation of the country and as such should not be privatised. That is not to say they could have been run far better and more effectively than they were before privatisation, but there the union problem rears it's head again.

For the guests at that kind of party they'd be essential.

That's a pretty fair summation imo, although omitting the fact she quite literally saved the country from Unions that had been hijacked by far left Marxists with greater affinity for the Soviet Union than their own nation. She was also instrumental in bringing down the evil USSR and ending the cold war through her influence over Ronnie Regan, thereby creating the conditions for eastern Europe to liberate itself from 55 years of Communist tyranny. Not a bad effort for a grocer's daughter.

I think it's more a case of buying the papers (well, the broadsheet types) for the analysis of the information, rather than the raw information itself.

I give it a week before someone accuses him of being a nonce..

Imagine the multiple choice questions on the exam for that job.. You fear that a 12 year old in the school may be carrying a weapon. Do you: a ) Shoot them in the face b ) Brass up the whole corridor - just to be sure c ) Throw a grenade d ) Not take the job because the idea of shooting kids for a living makes you want to commit suicide

Unbelievable second goal, if we can hold out here it'll be bloody fantastic!

Stanley Road - Paul Weller.

You'll get no argument from me that PFI was ill thought out and is an unmitigated disaster, but I sometimes wonder if your political heart wouldn't be more at home in the various socialist paradises of South America!

Any recent opinion poll you care to look at reflects an overwhelmingly positive public view of the Monarchy, OT isn't a great barometer of broader public opinion in my experience! Labelling the views of others as repugnant is dodgy territory imo and reflects a certainty in one's own opinion that doesn't allow for dissent and debate - rarely a constructive position. Then again as a 'xenophobic closet racist' with morally repugnant views... I probably would say that.

Indeed. She needs a regular infusion of fried egg and bacon sarnies.

Stacks of goodwill towards the Royals at the moment, no doubt the media will conspire to piss that away with nine months of sustained, inane commentary that no one in their right mind could possibly give a shit about.

Or take one of her friends out. If she isn't bothered, forget it.

Zing! Nah, I'm interested to know what Drat thinks their real agenda is but the implication is that it must be something bad, so if he has an inside track on what they are really about I'd be grateful if he shared it. I'm also trying to understand "borderline racism". Is that like being a little bit pregnant?

What are their real motives? What is "borderline" racism?

Congratulations mate, quality name too.

Yes, if the BNP candidate says that it must be true. The similarities begin and end with the policy of withdrawal from the EU. Other than their vile and unique (in UK political culture) racism the BNP is the "Labour Party your grandparents voted for", as Mr Griffin puts it. Politically they are the opposite end of the spectrum from UKIP, favouring mass nationalisations of everything in sight, among other things.

No I'm not trolling Drat, merely asking the question based on your statement earlier in the thread that you agreed with Cameron that UKIP were fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists. You don't have to be so confrontational in your posting style btw, it would make for a much better discussion. I'm interested to know which of UKIP's policies you find so offensive and why?

On the UKIP results across three seats (and Corby a few weeks ago) I think it shows them on a steady vote of 10-15%, the 21+% in Rotherham clearly was in part a bounce related to recent events. Interesting that they have now finished above the Lib Dems in the last 4 by elections though. If they simply maintained a stead state in terms of popularity they will cost Cameron any chance he may have of a majority at the next GE. Having repeated his "closet racist" comments of 2006 the other day it's hard to see how any rapprochement of the centre right vote is possible under Cameron's leadership.

Rotherham has been a Labour seat since before WWII, it was hardly a surprise they won - even though it was a greatly reduced majority. Boro' and Croydon are also safe seats but obviously overall it's what Miliband needed. That's 6 from 6 for Labour in the most recent by elections. Indeed, although I think calling it the end of Clegg and the Lib Dems is a little hyperbolic. Lol. UKIP were handed a golden electoral opportunity by the political discrimination of Rotherham Council, every party would have used that to their advantage in the circumstances. Do you think those Rotherhamites who voted UKIP are closet racists?

We don't know all of it because the council are refusing to disclose the outcome of their internal investigation. I'm sure that has nothing to do with today's by-election... We do know what Thacker herself said to the BBC which was that these children were removed solely because the foster parents were UKIP supporters. Why some on here are so loathe to acknowledge that simple point I don't know.

Damaging to whom? The previous ethnic minority kids they cared for (which earned them a reputation as exemplary foster parents), or three latest kids who were happy in their home, whose language the carers were learning, and who have now been split up?

Which makes you wonder why Thacker's main reasoning for moving them was consideration the children's long term cultural and ethnic needs... Or maybe that was just BS.

On a different note, with the right financial backing British engineers are still some of the best in the business.

What difference does speed make? If you're on an airliner at 30,000 feet and it goes wrong then you're f***** regardless.