tonyh29 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 Failed to build housing as promised Currency crises Widespread food shortages Gave jet engine technology to Russia New Colonialism of Africa Charges for dentistry and eye tests Just saying like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 Without doubt the greatest Prime Minister ever. Such an unassuming man in stature, but a true giant. When you think of the time he came to power, just after a World War, with the country virtually bankrupted by that great conflict, his and that great Labour governments achievements were quite staggeringly wonderful. Just saying like. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 England's greatest Prime Minister was Lord Palmerston! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 25, 2013 Moderator Share Posted April 25, 2013 John Pilger remembers Thatcher 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Well worth a read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 £3.5m to the taxpayer for the funeral.... nowhere near the £10m figured being banded around by the ungrateful lefty mob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brommy Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 It's £3.5m too much for the principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 No amount of our money should have gone towards that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted April 26, 2013 Share Posted April 26, 2013 With this talk of Attlee, just wondering, as I wasn't around at the time How did the Churchill fronted tories get hammered in an election so soon after the end of what would have been viewed at the time as a triumphant war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted April 26, 2013 Share Posted April 26, 2013 (edited) People wanted social change. It was a great chance to build a fairer society and Atlee's Labour were more likely to deliver. Tories are still Tories, after all. Churchill was an anomaly rather than the rule in many aspects, so I'm not keen on people referring back to him, and using him as a sort of marker to hold Prime Ministers against. Edited April 26, 2013 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted April 26, 2013 Share Posted April 26, 2013 With this talk of Attlee, just wondering, as I wasn't around at the time How did the Churchill fronted tories get hammered in an election so soon after the end of what would have been viewed at the time as a triumphant war? Perhaps people viewed the war as showing the value of collective effort, not every man for himself. Probably they were convinced by the programme of national rebuilding offered by Labour (and unimpressed with Churchill's stupid slur that it would need a "Gestapo" to implement). The 1945 manifesto remains the high water mark of the Labour Party. And probably because they didn't view success in the war as the achievement of one man who should be rewarded with a further stretch in power, but took a more realistic view of who and what had won the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted April 26, 2013 Share Posted April 26, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts