andyofborg Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 Because the Catholic Church told them it was. it was a sin in this country too and this country hasn't listened to the catholic church for 500 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 whatever unthinkable things he thought about clearly weren't what Blair wanted him to think because Blair reshuffled him out of the way. if your a working man then you wont need social security payments which is, of course, ultimately the problem. Frank Field has an awful lot to say about recipients of social security and anti social behaviour; but in common with much of New Labour he has very litlle to say about tax evasion and the anti social behaviour of the financial services and the rich and the powerful. That's presumably why the right wing press coo and fawn over him. He's often hailed as a 'radical', though I think that's a misnomer as he really is a reactionary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 Frank Field has an awful lot to say about recipients of social security and anti social behaviour; but in common with much of New Labour he has very litlle to say about tax evasion and the anti social behaviour of the financial services and the rich and the powerful. That's presumably why the right wing press coo and fawn over him. He's often hailed as a 'radical', though I think that's a misnomer as he really is a reactionary. He has no politics, he is a user. A manipulator, a stooge. As Adolf would have called him, a useful idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 He has no politics, he is a user. A manipulator, a stooge. As Adolf would have called him, a useful idiot. Not so useful when he manages to get all the right wingers on the forum and the Daily Mail fawning over him, only to find his report actually recommends spending some money on poor families leaving Cameron and Osborne with the embarrassment of trying to work out how to quietly drop it, whilst basking in the false premiss that anything he has said is actually an endorsement for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 Not so useful when he manages to get all the right wingers on the forum and the Daily Mail fawning over him, only to find his report actually recommends spending some money on poor families leaving Cameron and Osborne with the embarrassment of trying to work out how to quietly drop it, whilst basking in the false premiss that anything he has said is actually an endorsement for them. To be honest I do not believe anthing he says. He is to close to Blair type people for my liking. He just seems to have a bad odour about him. I dont trust him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 To be honest I do not believe anthing he says. He is to close to Blair type people for my liking. He just seems to have a bad odour about him. I dont trust him. His ideas on National Service are pretty bizarre, the last thing our military needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.