briggaman Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Still Lib Dem for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Boulton, I assume. Adam Boulton? How times change I might well be wrong (cue the Surrey mafia :winkold:), I just made that assumption. Edit: No, according to this, it is Boulton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 I think you will see a lot more ganging up on the Lib Dems now, rather than pandering towards them. It's not in either the Tories or Labours interest to allow the Lib Dems to take too many votes. I'll still be voting for them, mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 cameron isnt allowed to say "black man"? FFS I just wondered why he had to point out that he had spoken to a black man? Because the bloke was an immigrant, and Cameron was making the point that immigrants can be opposed to immigration policy - he was making sure that he couldn't be pulled up for being anti foreigner or anti immigrant. It made sense to me as people jump on politicians for "playing the race card" when they aren't. It's very hard to have a discussion about immigration openly without some papers or people trying to twist comments. I don't support Cameron, or his immigration policy, but I do think he should be able to put his views across free from possible racism/little Englander type comments where he doesn't deserve them. He was just slightly clumsily avoiding a potential furore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 :-) can you imagine the Duke of Edinburgh trying to give his views on immigration ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 cameron isnt allowed to say "black man"? FFS I just wondered why he had to point out that he had spoken to a black man? Because the bloke was an immigrant, and Cameron was making the point that immigrants can be opposed to immigration policy - he was making sure that he couldn't be pulled up for being anti foreigner or anti immigrant. It made sense to me as people jump on politicians for "playing the race card" when they aren't. It's very hard to have a discussion about immigration openly without some papers or people trying to twist comments. I don't support Cameron, or his immigration policy, but I do think he should be able to put his views across free from possible racism/little Englander type comments where he doesn't deserve them. He was just slightly clumsily avoiding a potential furore. Why didn't he say that he was talking to an immigrant, then, Pete? Are all immigrants black or are all black people immigrants? No, they aren't. You know that, I know that and so does Cameron. I do agree with you that it was clumsy and I'm not suggesting that Cameron is racist. I am suggesting that those who might have advised him for his prepared lines (and this would have been one of those prepared lines - like the Lexus one) probably advised him to point out that the person to whom he had been speaking was black and I think it was rather foolish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 I agree Snowy, in fact I totally agree. I thought they were all guilty of ticking of little boxes in their heads of the people they had met, the places they had been and ticking of this guy was another box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ricardomeister Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Another factual innacuracy or downright lie (depending on your viewpoint) from Cameron, this time re the Metropolitan Police. Cameron claimed that 400 uniformed officers were working as "form-fillers" in the Human Resources Dep't but in fact 350 of these people are training new recruits/police drivers/pcso's etc. Is Cameron a bumbling buffoon or just a liar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 To be fair to Cameron he probably has a team of people who gather these 'facts' (I use that in the Rafa sense of the word) for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 :-) can you imagine the Duke of Edinburgh trying to give his views on immigration ? It would imagine that a Greek on benefits could possibly add quite a lot to the debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 cameron isnt allowed to say "black man"? FFS I just wondered why he had to point out that he had spoken to a black man? Because the bloke was an immigrant, and Cameron was making the point that immigrants can be opposed to immigration policy - he was making sure that he couldn't be pulled up for being anti foreigner or anti immigrant. It made sense to me as people jump on politicians for "playing the race card" when they aren't. It's very hard to have a discussion about immigration openly without some papers or people trying to twist comments. I don't support Cameron, or his immigration policy, but I do think he should be able to put his views across free from possible racism/little Englander type comments where he doesn't deserve them. He was just slightly clumsily avoiding a potential furore. Why didn't he say that he was talking to an immigrant, then, Pete?... I do agree with you that it was clumsy and I'm not suggesting that Cameron is racist... Don't ask me, ask him! All I was saying was, yes, clumsy, but other than that no big (or little) deal. We'd probably say something similar if we were in his position, who knows? - scrutinised by the media every minute of every day, every word, and knowing how sensitive media can be to stirring things up. So guarding against anything that could be made into controversy. It's why politics is so anaemic so much of the time. It's why we get sound-bites. I don't "connect" with the bloke as a person, I don't like the Tory party, I don't like what they stand for, but there's genuine stuff to go at them for, but not for saying someone he may have met was "Black". It's not perjorative, and wasn't meant to be. If every mildly cumbersome word is pulled up upon, then the things that matter are missed in the noise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 :-) can you imagine the Duke of Edinburgh trying to give his views on immigration ? It would imagine that a Greek on benefits could possibly add quite a lot to the debate PotD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Don't ask me, ask him! I doubt he'd answer my call. :winkold: All I was saying was, yes, clumsy, but other than that no big (or little) deal. We'd probably say something similar if we were in his position, who knows? - scrutinised by the media every minute of every day, every word, and knowing how sensitive media can be to stirring things up. So guarding against anything that could be made into controversy. It's why politics is so anaemic so much of the time. It's why we get sound-bites. I don't "connect" with the bloke as a person, I don't like the Tory party, I don't like what they stand for, but there's genuine stuff to go at them for, but not for saying someone he may have met was "Black". It's not perjorative, and wasn't meant to be. If every mildly cumbersome word is pulled up upon, then the things that matter are missed in the noise. I have to disagree for the reasons(s) that I have already mentioned. This wasn't a 'slip' or a mildly cumbersome word. It was the product of advice, thought and/or tactical decision by either Cameron and advisors or advisors on their own. I suggest it was probably the latter and that Cameron went into it (as undoubtedly Gordo and Clegg did) reading a script when it came to certain responses. I think it was an unnecessary thing to say; it wasn't of major import because of the words that he used but, as these things were quite obviously really prepared for, little things, clearly missed, may tend to signify more (they may not and I don't discount that possibility, I'd hope that you'd understand from my posting history that this was the case). If they do signify more then what do they signify? Lack of attention to detail? Cynicism? Or something else? I'm sorry but dissecting what they say is one of the only pieces of ammunition left. If they cock up, they cock up. They're wanting to run a country not interviewing to stack our local store's shelves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 I doubt he'd answer my call. :winkold: But he's met the entire population of the UK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 I doubt he'd answer my call. :winkold: But he's met the entire population of the UK I'm not on the electoral roll. :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 16, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 16, 2010 I doubt he'd answer my call. :winkold: But he's met the entire population of the UK I'm not on the electoral roll. :winkold: yeah but are you ex-directory too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 yeah but are you ex-directory too? Even better, I don't have a landline (I have a non-registered mobile 'phone). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 yeah but are you ex-directory too? Even better, I don't have a landline (I have a non-registered mobile 'phone). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 yeah but are you ex-directory too? Even better, I don't have a landline (I have a non-registered mobile 'phone). :clap: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted April 17, 2010 Share Posted April 17, 2010 Lib Dem for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts