Bolitics The New Condem Government

[peterms]

I had a feeling after I wrote my post that some smart arse would go and check

We had council elections earlier this year where I went out and voted Tory so its more me confusing myself coupled with trying to forget I ever voted lib dem

I owe you one buffalo ....

Tony, I have to say I'm concerned.  You organise opinion sampling for a living, if I'm not mistaken.  But you appear to struggle to identify the expressed preferences of a sample of one, in a situation where you seem to have good access to information about how those preferences were exercised.

 

Do you sometimes find your job a little...challenging?

[peterms]

 

 

"Red Ed"? - really? ........ shame

 

 

 he was elected on the strength of his paymasters the Unions, who's leadership supports the left wing of the party and needed a mouth piece for their support .. so it's accurate is it not ?

 

 

The Labour Party was established by the trade unions, as a voice for ordinary people.

 

Why on earth would anyone find it odd that the unions support them financially, and seek to influence who they select and what their policies are?  That's the entire point of setting up a political party.

 

What's bizarre is how they have curtailed the influence of the unions at the behest of the mouth-frothing tory press.  Why would you do what your sworn enemies want?  You're not going to appease them, they're not going to play friendly.  So **** 'em.

[tonyh29]

I had a feeling after I wrote my post that some smart arse would go and check

We had council elections earlier this year where I went out and voted Tory so its more me confusing myself coupled with trying to forget I ever voted lib dem

I owe you one buffalo ....

Tony, I have to say I'm concerned. You organise opinion sampling for a living, if I'm not mistaken. But you appear to struggle to identify the expressed preferences of a sample of one, in a situation where you seem to have good access to information about how those preferences were exercised.

Do you sometimes find your job a little...challenging?

Tbf I find putting my shoes on the right feet challenging

[snowychap]

Tbf I find putting my shoes on the right feet challenging

Sounds like it would help if you didn't have two right feet.

[Awol]

 

Tbf I find putting my shoes on the right feet challenging

Sounds like it would help if you didn't have two right feet.

 

Well he can't go putting his left foot forward.

[peterms]

Here he goes again.  Lord Howell of Guildford, who managed to insult a large swathe of the country a few days ago with his terminally stupid remarks about fracking desolate wastelands.

 

He's gone beyond his insults to the north east, saying oh no, he actually meant the north west.  Insult to injury.  Replay the whole thing again.  Compound the misery.

 

He's so stupid, I find it hard to believe he's related to Osborne only by marriage, not by blood.

 

Lord Howell: I meant frack the North West, not the North East

 

Lord Howell of Guildford has revealed that he meant to suggest gas fracking should take place in the North West, not “desolate areas” of the North East, and described his comments as “a stupid error”.
 

The Tory peer, who is George Osborne’s father-in-law, said it was a slip of the tongue when he suggested in the House of Lords that there were “large, uninhabited and desolate areas” of the North East where there was “plenty of room for fracking”.

In an interview with The Telegraph, Lord Howell said he could “rightly” be blamed for the mistake, which caused a “huge furore” this week.

 

The peer, who was listed as a Government adviser on energy until the row, said he was referring to an area of the country that is already the site of gas exploration.

 

“What was in my mind was much more the drilling going on off the Lancashire coast,” he said. “But it came out of my mouth as the North East, which you can blame me for rightly. And that has created a great furore.

 

“The North East wasn’t in my mind at all. Afterwards, I checked my words again, playing back the debate.

 

“It was a stupid error of mine to mention anywhere at all. The general story is right – that we want the derricks for fracking to be far away from residences in unloved places that are not environmentally sensitive. I don’t want to see gas fracking subsidised like wind farms are. A lot more care must be taken than has been the case with wind farms, which have caused terrible desecration. It’s odd that they’ve decided to do this in sensitive places down in Sussex.”

 

Downing Street distanced itself from Lord Howell on Tuesday when the row blew up. His reservations about drilling in Sussex also do not appear to be shared by the Coalition.

 

Michael Fallon, the Tory energy minister, today dismisses “claims that exploration involves ruining the countryside” as “nonsense”.

 

Writing for The Telegraph, he highlights the “exciting new potential” of shale gas in the “north, south, east and west”.

 

The Government is planning to publish estimates for shale gas reserves in the south of England next March, he says, as this area could have “considerable quantities of gas” to help power Britain’s growth.

 

[peterms]

This is what the tories are stirring up with their racist van.  These are the attitudes to which they give expression, which they legitimise.

 

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/07/31/thug-tells-women-go-back-to-your-own-country/

 

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/times_guardian/news/jewish-attack-3853/

 

 

[Eames]

No I'm sorry Pete I'm not having that.

The people of Sheppey get confused by electricity. They were far more likely to have stoning the bus because they thought it was some sort of monster that hat eaten the passengers.

There is no help for the web toed inbreds on the island....blow the up bridge before its too late.

[peterms]

RL Stevenson, in "Travels With a Donkey in the Cevennes", described being stoned by groups of young children who were alarmed at seeing a stranger. It seems our social attitudes are regressing to those of illiterate, unschoooled peasants, howling in anguish and confusion when someone noticeably different appears.

[tonyh29]

Here he goes again. Lord Howell of Guildford, who managed to insult a large swathe of the country a few days ago with his terminally stupid remarks about fracking desolate wastelands.

He's gone beyond his insults to the north east, saying oh no, he actually meant the north west. Insult to injury. Replay the whole thing again. Compound the misery.

He's so stupid, I find it hard to believe he's related to Osborne only by marriage, not by blood.

Lord Howell: I meant frack the North West, not the North East

Lord Howell of Guildford has revealed that he meant to suggest gas fracking should take place in the North West, not “desolate areas” of the North East, and described his comments as “a stupid error”.

The Tory peer, who is George Osborne’s father-in-law, said it was a slip of the tongue when he suggested in the House of Lords that there were “large, uninhabited and desolate areas” of the North East where there was “plenty of room for fracking”.

In an interview with The Telegraph, Lord Howell said he could “rightly” be blamed for the mistake, which caused a “huge furore” this week.

The peer, who was listed as a Government adviser on energy until the row, said he was referring to an area of the country that is already the site of gas exploration.

“What was in my mind was much more the drilling going on off the Lancashire coast,” he said. “But it came out of my mouth as the North East, which you can blame me for rightly. And that has created a great furore.

“The North East wasn’t in my mind at all. Afterwards, I checked my words again, playing back the debate.

“It was a stupid error of mine to mention anywhere at all. The general story is right – that we want the derricks for fracking to be far away from residences in unloved places that are not environmentally sensitive. I don’t want to see gas fracking subsidised like wind farms are. A lot more care must be taken than has been the case with wind farms, which have caused terrible desecration. It’s odd that they’ve decided to do this in sensitive places down in Sussex.”

Downing Street distanced itself from Lord Howell on Tuesday when the row blew up. His reservations about drilling in Sussex also do not appear to be shared by the Coalition.

Michael Fallon, the Tory energy minister, today dismisses “claims that exploration involves ruining the countryside” as “nonsense”.

Writing for The Telegraph, he highlights the “exciting new potential” of shale gas in the “north, south, east and west”.

The Government is planning to publish estimates for shale gas reserves in the south of England next March, he says, as this area could have “considerable quantities of gas” to help power Britain’s growth.

Exactly as you say his link to Osborne is through marriage of his daughter ... Why do reports feel the need to mention Osbornes name like he's to blame ...

[tonyh29]

No I'm sorry Pete I'm not having that.

The people of Sheppey get confused by electricity. They were far more likely to have stoning the bus because they thought it was some sort of monster that hat eaten the passengers.

There is no help for the web toed inbreds on the island....blow the up bridge before its too late.

Oi....

[peterms]

Exactly as you say his link to Osborne is through marriage of his daughter ... Why do reports feel the need to mention Osbornes name like he's to blame ...

I think the reference to Osborne is not to attribute blame, but to note the very direct channel of influence this moron has on him through his close family connection.  It's inconceivable that when they meet, they never discuss politics.

 

It's also interesting more widely, to note the social attitudes present in the milieu to which Osborne belongs.  He's not alone in his views.  It's the thinking that gives us the bedroom tax, the social security cuts and the rest of it.  They actually do believe the country is there for them to pillage for profit, and the consequences don't matter because they're invisible to the landed gentry.  What is surprising about this oaf's comments is not that he holds these views, but that he was stupid enough to express them.  They are supposed to be more guarded, when speaking in public.  Don't let people see the utter contempt this clique have for them.

[Risso]

This is what the tories are stirring up with their racist van.  These are the attitudes to which they give expression, which they legitimise.

 

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/07/31/thug-tells-women-go-back-to-your-own-country/

 

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/times_guardian/news/jewish-attack-3853/

 

Nothing like that ever happened before the advent of the stupid vans, ever.

[colhint]

 

Exactly as you say his link to Osborne is through marriage of his daughter ... Why do reports feel the need to mention Osbornes name like he's to blame ...

 

 

 

 

I reckon Osborne should just punch someone, then you wouldn't be allowed to mention him on VT

Edited August 1, 2013 by colhint

[peterms]

 

This is what the tories are stirring up with their racist van.  These are the attitudes to which they give expression, which they legitimise.

 

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/07/31/thug-tells-women-go-back-to-your-own-country/

 

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/times_guardian/news/jewish-attack-3853/

 

Nothing like that ever happened before the advent of the stupid vans, ever.

 

 

I can't tell if you're misrepresenting for effect, or you really don't understand the point. 

[Risso]

"This is what the Tories are stirring up....."

 

There isn't much to misrepresent there, or to misunderstand.

[Xann]

They are supposed to be more guarded, when speaking in public.  Don't let people see the utter contempt this clique have for them.

 

 

They could do with some fear in their lives.

[peterms]

"This is what the Tories are stirring up....."

 

There isn't much to misrepresent there, or to misunderstand.

 

I'd have thought so.  Yet you've managed anyway, it seems.

[Risso]

 

"This is what the Tories are stirring up....."

 

There isn't much to misrepresent there, or to misunderstand.

 

I'd have thought so.  Yet you've managed anyway, it seems.

 

 

"This is what the Tories are stirring up with their racist van".  An attack by a drunken ex-forces bloke who admitted it was because he didn't like Muslims and was upset over the death of Lee Rigby.  I think it's fair to say that he's the sort of moronic scumbag who had fairly entrenched racist views and wasn't stirred up at all by the vans.

[peterms]

 

 

"This is what the Tories are stirring up....."

 

There isn't much to misrepresent there, or to misunderstand.

 

I'd have thought so.  Yet you've managed anyway, it seems.

 

 

"This is what the Tories are stirring up with their racist van".  An attack by a drunken ex-forces bloke who admitted it was because he didn't like Muslims and was upset over the death of Lee Rigby.  I think it's fair to say that he's the sort of moronic scumbag who had fairly entrenched racist views and wasn't stirred up at all by the vans.

 

 

Yes, I'm sure your description of his views is likely to be correct.  Whether he would have acted on them a couple of years ago, who knows.  Incidents like this are increasing, so it's clear that some people who wouldn't previously have acted on their prejudice are now more likely to do so.

 

My concern is that there is happening a change in the climate of opinion, where views which might have stayed private before are more likely to be expressed, where people who might have wanted to do things feel a little more emboldened to carry them out, and so on.  Things like the racist van don't create a climate of opinion by themselves and out of nothing.  In fact it's more likely that the van was introduced because of a perceived shift in attitudes, rather than trying to lead opinion.  But these things do help to legitimise a shift in opinion.  In this example, they are pandering to the idea that the country is flooded with illegal immigrants.  In other examples, they have focussed on benefit recipients, to the point where large numbers of people actually believe that most benefits go to unemployed people. 

 

If I understand them right, that's why the Lib Dems are so uneasy about this approach, not simply that they think it's ineffective or in bad taste.