The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[TJC1]

God is not the only one who has forsaken it, I haven't been there in months. I suppose I'll have to visit it eventually.

 

dude, I know what you mean, the last time was a quick nip in to Nando's on West. st.

it really was a hell-hole. I saw a guy frog marched out of tesco, police cars everywhere, beggers, the homeless (fake homeless) and n'eer do wells causing a nuisance.

 

Then there's the never ending road and building works and just general lack of economic activity.

 

Horrid place.

[Alan Ladd]

...

 

Right. There I was, all ready and willing to be courteous again, and continue giving you the benefit of the doubt...but you're really too discourteous yourself, so let's just show readers how stupefyingly dim you are instead.

 

What did you understand my post #2192 to say? Here it is:

Did that post "defend the indefensible"?

 

Did that post "argue that labour had not borrowed and spent too much"?

 

No it did the exact reverse, because it was in reply to I1L2T3's points

 

drummonds understood my post just fine by the looks, per his post #2193:

 

 

You obviously didn't, and sought to attack my post instead:

 

 

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and asked you about it, courteously:

 

 

And now you've decided to be a smartar5e about it:

 

So, Alan...not content with displaying the reading and comprehension skills of an amoeba, you've now succeeded in associating these with the cognitive capacity of a jellyfish.

 

Well done you

 

You forgot to mention the millionish citizens of Iraq/Afghanistan butchered as a direct result of the dishonest actions of the Blair Brown government.

 

I admit I do find it difficult to be courteous to someone who defends the indefensible, the liars, chancers, war criminals, and incompetents who inhabit a once great political party.

 

Frankly, I dont care, The Labour party spent all our money, took us into illegal wars and has now elected as its leader who is, by any definition an enemy of the state.

 

Bleat as much as you like the people of this country will NEVER elect such a party into power again.

 

Us amoebas have more sense.

[drummonds]

are they going to do something about our god forsaken city centre? - my word that place is terrible.

 

like with the middle east god seems to have forsaken rather a lot in recent years. it is almost as though he doesn't care.

Edited October 8, 2015 by drummonds

[TJC1]

like with the middle east god seems to have forsaken rather a lot in recent years. it is almost as though he doesn't care.

 

 

or doesnt exist

[Vaati]

The pointless bickering is to cease, as is the name calling. Otherwise people are going to find themselves suspended.

[I1L2T3]

Have you read Part 2 of Orwell's Road To Wigan Pier? I heartily recommend his 1930's thoughts on the socialist bourgeoisie opinion on the working classes.

 

That's like asking if I've read Stalin's diaries to find out what Corbyn is going to do next.

[altus]

There is now the too-busy-with-private-stuff-to-see-the-Queen thing: Mr Corbyn is living up to his republican beliefs today

 

It took Cameron 3 months to be sworn in as a privy councillor after he became leader of the Conservatives so Corbyn's got a bit of time before Tory supporters can make too much of him missing his first opportunity to do so.

[I1L2T3]

It took Cameron 3 months to be sworn in as a privy councillor after he became leader of the Conservatives so Corbyn's got a bit of time before Tory supporters can make too much of him missing his first opportunity to do so.

 

Also, he doesn't have to go through the ceremony with the queen to be sworn it. Its traditional for party leaders to do so but not compulsory.

 

---------- Post added 08-10-2015 at 19:53 ----------

 

...

 

Did that post "argue that labour had not borrowed and spent too much"?

 

No it did the exact reverse, because it was in reply to I1L2T3's points

 

:

 

Then you have failed to understand my posts.

 

I agree that when Labour left office the deficit was way too high. I'm not arguing anything different.

 

What I am doing is seeking to explain why it was so high, beyond the myths about it all being planned spending. Which you know it wasn't

[Bonzo77]

Go on, please tell me the dialogue he would plan to have with ISIS or the taliban. Jesus Christ, can you imagine what Putin would make of him?!?!

 

There are times when you need to negotiate and there are times when you can't just invite someone round for a cup of fair trade green tea and free range rice cakes and talk it out.

 

Has he (or you) seen anything that makes you think ISIS can be negotiated with? That will only happen if the world lets go great swathes of Syria and Iraq and that's also assuming they'll stop at those borders.

 

Have ISIS got nuclear weapons? JC has never said that he's totally against using force, has he? He said he'd never use nuclear weapons. Isis need attacking where it hurts them the most, their funding. They earn millions every day from oil. Who buys it? Maybe these are the people that we should engage in debate with? There's more than 1 way to defeat an enemy. For the record, I'm not against using force against them, as long as it's reasonable and precise.

[L00b]

Then you have failed to understand my posts.

Do you want to try your post 2189 again, with a bit more nuance this time, then?

What I am doing is seeking to explain why it was so high, beyond the myths about it all being planned spending. Which you know it wasn't

What I was doing was explain (to Anna...again) why it didn't go so much higher than it could have, beyond the myths about it all being Tory spending. Which you know it wasn't