Bolitics The New Condem Government

[drat01]

I didn't say it made sense and I not speaking for anyone else either; Labour went into the election planning to make the same level of cuts as the Tories but taking an extra 12 months to do it. The difference is Osborne's tough talk was enough to convince the UK's creditors that HMG was serious about getting borrowing under control and the escalating euro crisis assisted him by focusing the attention of creditors on even bigger basket case economies instead of paying attention to the true state of the UK.

The fact that the cuts made so far have been at best marginal hasn't stopped Balls et al from screaming their sound bites about "ideological cuts" etc, but to be fair the previous Labour plans were drawn up by Darling while he was Chancellor, not by Ed Balls who is possibly the only MP less suited to the role than Osborne..

Again you make no sense. You talk about levels of cuts as though they are the same between all parties. As said and conveniently missed by you and fellow Tory supporters again and again was that Labour had a proposal for a series of cuts that would address certain issues. Unlike the Tory cuts that we have suffered, and again unacknowledged by you and fellow Tory supporters, is that the Tory cuts were very much idealogically led, had no provision for changes in circumstances and were in the main to support people closer to the Tory party than the UK in general.

You talk about Gideon and tough talk, with is laughable especially as we are now seeing this "talk" being ridiculed from all quarters. The answer as usual from Tory party and its supporters is one of deflection rather than admitting that Gideon, Cameron et al had a totally flawed policy and neither have the willingness or ability to change it. The only answer seems to be one of "Ahhh but Labour ....." which is now becoming laughable for its predictability and its exposure of weak Gvmt by the Tory party

Also as normal the Tory response contains the reply that "Ed Balls ....", why? Again it shows the desparation that the only justification that Tory party and its supporters seem to have for their inability and ineptitude is to make a personal reference to a shadow chancellor.

Overall this Tory Gvmt has proven time and time again that it lied during the election, now (and only with support from the Lib Dems) can it try and impose flawed and failing policies based on imposing long term hatred policies rather than what is right for the country and the men leading this policy are liars, hypocrites and unsuitable for the offices they hold. They are the ones in Downing Street and all the "ahhh but Labour" deflection shows the Tory Gvmt to be failing miserably at what they are supposed to do. What will be the next disaster that arises this week?

[drat01]

This morning Cameron has tried to appeal to the "blue rinse" brigade of the Tory party with some hot air rhetoric re crime, but already his BS is being ripped apart by so many political commentators for its lack of substance (i.e. its marketing spin) and the fact that it has more holes in it than a tramps sock.

Apparently there is no money to back this scheme, it will be carried out by private companies and charities (he must be a real sucker for punishment or like pain to continue with that as the basis of every policy), and it already seems to be nothing more than a PR stunt.

On Mitchell despite what Tony would have you believe that he lost his job because of the Media, Labour and posters on VT, more and more is coming out that the Tory party members were the key drivers. The Cameron "camp" wanted one of their own to remain, people like May basically admitted yesterday that she was against him remaining in his job and when you have old schoolers like Tebbitt jumping in and stating

"This dog of a coalition government has let itself be given a bad name and now anybody can beat it … The abiding sin of the government is not that some ministers are rich, but that it seems unable to manage its affairs competently."

you have to wonder how much longer Cameron can remain as leader of the Tory party.

Some of us older VT'ers remember how the Tory party got so fragmented in the last days of Major, this is now far bigger and the arrogance of some of the Tory party with the "don;t you know who I am" as the only basis for demanding support has resulted in a Tory party that is knackered.

[tonyh29]

the arrogance of some of the Tory party with the "don;t you know who I am"

if you are making a case around something that oesn't 't actually appear to have been said then you need to try a bit harder

talking of trains , remember this from Labours Karl Turner

Turner was travelling on the train to Hull and the guard politely asked him not to steal newspapers:

“Witness reports say the usual “don’t you know who I am”… “no” routine was deployed when the train manager had to intervene and “a very unpleasant scene” prevailed which saw Turner “draw himself up to his full 5’6 ins and launched into a tirade of abuse against the man”. The wobbler apparently continued on the platform after arrival at Hull station, with Turner claiming he wanted a written apology from the train company.

seemssome of the older VT'ers also have short memories

believe that he lost his job because of the ....... and posters on VT

you do know that line was a joke right , I mean Cameron may be a Villa fan , but i somehow doubt he reads this thread

[tonyh29]

So hold on Tony, who hounded him out again? Labour, the media or the Tories? Make your mind up

oi you .... go back to your conspiracy theories

bit of all 3 , but you forgot to Add members of VT

[tonyh29]

we don't seem to have a thread for this , but the ideological cuts to "address certain issues" doens't seem to have gone down well does it

[villaajax]

He wouldn't need to have been 'hounded' if he'd done the right thing to begin with and resign rather than dragging it out before doing so. Oh well, this farcical Tory lot keep me amused, I wonder what we have in store for us today?

[drat01]

Tony the whole basis of your argument is "ahh but Labour ....", you called for debate the other day but that is deflection and nothing else.

Is yours and many Tory supporters only way of justifying the flawed Tory policy is to try and attack Labour? It shows how little you and the others actually have to defend if that is the case. This Gvmt, easily one of if not the worst I can remember, is making error after error after error based on nothing more than long held idealogical policies of the right wing. These are policies that have no place in a tolerant society and certainly no place in a modern world.

The Tory party for all its many millions supplied by Tax dodgers like Ashcroft and the like, are failing to even buy its own traditional supporters in the media. The "nasty" party is being shown for all it is about. The fact that Clegg and his parliamentary LibDem's support these is equally a disgrace but we all know that the Lib Dems are now pretty much finished as a party as a result. The Tory party is a toxic one, one of arrogance and vindictiveness, one with little regard to the general public of the UK and even less regard to what happens as a result of them looking after themselves policies.

[snowychap]

i've not seen the 2:1 support in his favour figure tbh

That was the kind of ratio that Newsnight went with.

Michael Crick went with four MPs critical of him and 12-15 supporting (perhaps only cautiously and for reasons about party unity rather than love for Mitchell) - link to twitter.

A bod on Tory Home (here) claimed it was more like 50/50 but then added:

21.45pm Update A very senior source insists that the Crick tally was correct. I am recording his view to reinforce the point that, as I note above, "memories don't always tally".

[snowychap]

if you are making a case around something that oesn't 't actually appear to have been said then you need to try a bit harder

And yet you are making a case of something that seems to have been solely reported by Guido (linking to the site from which you quote is still required by VT, isn't it?).

That isn't to say it didn't happen, by the way. It quite possibly did but you've reported as fact something said in Guido's blog after pooh-poohing as untruth the one side of a story that someone believed rather than the official side which you have believed.

[snowychap]

we don't seem to have a thread for this

No thread in which to post your criticisms of the (new) leader of the labour party?

[colhint]

Tony the whole basis of your argument is "ahh but Labour ....", you called for debate the other day but that is deflection and nothing else.

Is yours and many Tory supporters only way of justifying the flawed Tory policy is to try and attack Labour? It shows how little you and the others actually have to defend if that is the case. This Gvmt, easily one of if not the worst I can remember, is making error after error after error based on nothing more than long held idealogical policies of the right wing. These are policies that have no place in a tolerant society and certainly no place in a modern world.

The Tory party for all its many millions supplied by Tax dodgers like Ashcroft and the like, are failing to even buy its own traditional supporters in the media. The "nasty" party is being shown for all it is about. The fact that Clegg and his parliamentary LibDem's support these is equally a disgrace but we all know that the Lib Dems are now pretty much finished as a party as a result. The Tory party is a toxic one, one of arrogance and vindictiveness, one with little regard to the general public of the UK and even less regard to what happens as a result of them looking after themselves policies.

you must have a really really really short memory

[drat01]

you must have a really really really short memory

No I have a very long memory, but thank you for the concern

Interesting that even in staunch Tory comments bit of the Telegraph today we see things such as

The PM is out of his depth and has been since before the election. He could not even win a majority against the most reviled PM Britain has had since Thatcher.

While Cameron is doubtless a decent man in private life, he lacks political substance and is inclined to bluster and spin as PM. He is a child of privilege with no "real-world" experience. Being upper class is no obstacle to being successful as PM. Often in the past it has been no bad thing, but coupled with other weaknesses it can be fatal.

Cameron self-evidently lacks judgment. Brooks, Coulson, Hunt, Mitchell, the ridiculous nutcase conservative special adviser fellow who went off to the US - the litany goes on. He is equally evidently inclined to limit his association with and appointments of people to those who are in his clique. This limits his horizons and experience, is unhealthily self-reinforcing and contributes to his lack of judgment.

The PM lacks vision, or at least is not articulating whatever vision he has for Britain. Policy is being made up on the hoof (viz energy pricing and policy, some of the NHS reforms under Lansley, the shambles over immigration etc) and is often nonsensical, hence the U-turns.

For a PR man, Cameron has a surprising inability to get a message across. Perhaps he was never any good as a PR man. One has to query whether Cameron has any real distinguishing intellect or capabilities or whether privilege and access brought him on rather than anything else.

The impression the thinking public is left with is that the PM is an arch-political creature who is not to be trusted, is not particularly bright, is lacking in basic judgment, is detached from the reality of everyday life in Britain, and is heading up a government with no vision making up policy on the hoof. That impression is becoming very hard to shake.

The only saving grace for the PM is that the Shadow Front Bench is even less competent and pallatable, being polluted by the presence of creatures like Harman, Balls, Byrne and indeed Miliband - all of whom were in the Labour governments that ruined us.

God help Britain if they ever get back into No 10.

This is just an indication of many similar comments from obvious Tory supporters. (Note: the use of the word "creatures" shows that the Typical Tory is alive and well)

[tonyh29]

The only saving grace for the PM is that the Shadow Front Bench is even less competent and pallatable, being polluted by the presence of creatures like Harman, Balls, Byrne and indeed Miliband - all of whom were in the Labour governments that ruined us.

Does your posting of this article as an endorsement of Cameron's incompetence , mean you also endorse the comments in the same article about the shadow cabinet :-)

ooops

[tonyh29]

That isn't to say it didn't happen, by the way. It quite possibly did but you've reported as fact something said in Guido's blog after pooh-poohing as untruth the one side of a story that someone believed rather than the official side which you have believed.

I understand your point ,although I'm not sure I reported anything as "fact" , it was just to show that alleged abusing of guards on trains isn't sole preserve of the Tory party

On the Osborne and indeed Mitchell scenario I've tended to try and put forward the other side of the one sided argument that is all that is being posted in this thread ... someone can of course post in defence of Turner if they are so inclined

[drat01]

Does your posting of this article as an endorsement of Cameron's incompetence , mean you also endorse the comments in the same article about the shadow cabinet :-)

ooops

:-) desperate attempt there Tony.

See you are not even reading what is posted now and certainly not the context or are you playing again?

[bickster]

Why would we bother, Turner was also clearly being an arrogant arse. Just like Geor....

[drat01]

if you are making a case around something that oesn't 't actually appear to have been said then you need to try a bit harder

talking of trains , remember this from Labours Karl Turner

seemssome of the older VT'ers also have short memories

you do know that line was a joke right , I mean Cameron may be a Villa fan , but i somehow doubt he reads this thread

Using Guido Fawkes as your sources now eh Tony?

As Gareth rightly points out why should he be defended and using your logic the one negates the other? ridiculous !

Gideon (the oik as he was known by his Bullingdon chums) has a real problem with his arrogance and the fact that he is in such a position of power the lack of any sort of humility etc pisses on any bonfire the Tory party starts up to try and rid themselves of their "nasty party" title.

Osborne got caught out (again as it turns out), his career is littered with ill thought out judgement calls, much in the same way Cameron's is. Inept and poor at their jobs, and as said you can see why some Tory supporters want rid of them before the party is back where it belongs out of office

[tonyh29]

:-) desperate attempt there Tony.

See you are not even reading what is posted now and certainly not the context or are you playing again?

I quoted from an article you posted ... you didn't say read the following article , part A is true and the author has seen the light ..but B is baloney and the word of this author isn't to be trusted ... so therefore I took it to mean you endorsed its content ....

So , clearly I did read it , where as possibly you stopped half way down and thus missed the part where he criticised the shadow cabinet

[colhint]

:-) desperate attempt there Tony.

See you are not even reading what is posted now and certainly not the context or are you playing again?

I'm not really sure why you think its a desperate attempt. You quoted an article which highlighted the flaws in David Cameron, but the article implied that the alternatives are worse, or have I missed something

[Eames]

According to quoted articles it seems that gideon warned civil servants in 2010 that if they travelled 1 st cass on the trains they would get their budgets cut. Ooops

Not quite the same though is it? How many average commuters will be able to identify the Civil Servants from ANY department - Osbourne is a little more conspicuous wouldn't you say?

Personally I have no problem with anyone using 1st class if they feel so inclined. As long as expenses are paid back at the rate of a Standard fare there really is no issue.