Happy Tory New Year!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/dec/31/new-year-honours-business

 

The New Year honours list is really the most hilarious f*** you to the British public about the contrition of the ruling elite for the financial crisis. What crisis? Nothing to see here, move on.... (Give the man who bet on the collapse of Northern Rock a knighthood... What? You just did? Good work, now lets get back to stripping the national assets for what they're worth.)

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/30/cameron-brutal-cuts-bleed

Tories always look after their own.

They made money on the backs of others and one of them even went to prison and was fined £5 million,yet still gets an award.

Pathetic.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/dec/31/new-year-honours-business

 

The New Year honours list is really the most hilarious f*** you to the British public about the contrition of the ruling elite for the financial crisis. What crisis? Nothing to see here, move on.... (Give the man who bet on the collapse of Northern Rock a knighthood... What? You just did? Good work, now lets get back to stripping the national assets for what they're worth.)

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/30/cameron-brutal-cuts-bleed

 

Oh, do one! I remember having an argument on here with someone a while back as to why the Guardian was as bad as the Daily Mail. These articles just further justify my point.

Oh, do one! I remember having an argument on here with someone a while back as to why the Guardian was as bad as the Daily Mail. These articles just further justify my point.

 

The Mail is also ranting about it.

It does seem rather unwise, but in the scheme of things it's not a very big story.

:facepalm:The title is a contradiction of terms

It does seem rather unwise, but in the scheme of things it's not a very big story.

 

Let me understand this Dune......."The year ends with the country in a worse state than the government's severest critics expected. Yet worse is to come, as 2012 slides towards the second recession in three years.......The cuts will bleed harder this year: each job loss is a family tragedy, full of bitter personal humiliation as well as hardship. Some 1,829 people a day are losing their jobs, not numbers but people – and the pace is accelerating........ "This is a rich country: how that wealth should be generated, invested and shared is our choice"

 

"The IFS predicts another 600,000 poor children (in the UK) in the next two years but shamelessly Cameron and Clegg still promise social mobility, knowing the IFS says it is already reversing. As Warren Buffet says of the class war: "My class has won.""

 

And this is a non story?

:facepalm:The title is a contradiction of terms

 

Also, having Happy and Tory in the same sentence = oxymoron methinks.

Also, having Happy and Tory in the same sentence = oxymoron methinks.

 

True. Still, I guess they have to make hay while it lasts. It's remarkable that the Tories have not won an overall majority in Parliament since 1992 - almost twenty years ago! And even then, their overall majority of 20 or so had been whittled down to just one in 1996 after a series of defections. The chances of this happening now, in an increasingly fractious coalition, are far higher, so expect the Tories to resume their long-term existence in the political wilderness quite soon.

 

Maybe it will eventually be a Happy, Tory-free 2012 after all.

I can cope with Tories looking after themselves, it's what they do. It's the Labour types that do it that annoy me.

 

Google "Tom Watson Expenses" and report back. Or google "John Denham Expenses" and tell me what it says. It's these snout in the trough Socialists that are the real hypocrites because they pupport to be representing the working classes.

Come on my bitter (oh woe is me) Socialist forum friends. Tell everyone about your heros Watson and Denham. We all need to know where these representatives of the working classes stand.

 

We are waiting....

Cameron will be the FOURTH Conservative leader to fail to lead the Party to an overall majority - joining the hardly stellar line-up of John Major (failed 1997), William Hague (failed 2001), Iain Duncan Smith (failed 2003), and Michael Howard (failed 2005).

Verbal takes to the crease, and a bouncer whistles past his ear as he flaps out with a weak reply.

 

We are still waiting to hear about the behaviour of YOUR working class representatives.

 

Oh My God, shock horror, Tories look after themselves. This isn't a story, but what is a story is how the forums pet Socialists whinge and bleat about it whilst turning a blind eye to the hypocrites in their own party.

I'm sure that you can understand this Tristan, that it quite easy to despise those who supposedly represent us that have their nose in the trough as well as those that have been rewarded for their political donations in the honours list.

 

One does not exclude the other.

I undesrtand this David, but the point i'm making is that you expect it with the Tories, but Labour are supposed to for the working man, that is supposed to be the essence of what the party is about.

Edited 31 December, 2011 by dune

a bloke I know from work has got an MBE...

a bloke I know from work has got an MBE...

 

That could be you one day.

That could be you one day.

bothered

I undesrtand this David, but the point i'm making is that you expect it with the Tories, but Labour are supposed to for the working man, that is supposed to be the essence of what the party is about.

 

... and that makes it ok?

bothered

 

This is not the jeremy Kyle show. Please respect the pipe and slippers ambience of the lounge.

... and that makes it ok?

 

It makes it MORE ok than when hypocritical "men of the working classes" like Denham shove their noses in the trough and claims £87,729 for a second home as well as £1,590 for two armchairs, £475 for an “Alana” rug and £474 for six kitchen chairs.

 

And as for the revoltingly obese Tom Watson:

 

Mr Watson, the minister for digital engagement, spent the maximum of £4,800 in a single year on food, and had his expenses cut after buying a set of dining room chairs that exceeded the limit set by the fees office.

He was forced to defend the appearance of a receipt for a "pizza wheel" on a Marks & Spencer receipt he submitted, saying ti was given as a free gift after he went on a £150 spending spree at the store.

He also used his parliamentary allowances, along with fellow Labour minister Iain Wright, to lavish more than £100,000 on a shared central London crash pad since the last general election.

Mr Wright, a junior housing minister, asked the Commons fees office if he could buy furniture at taxpayers' expense even before he had purchased a property, saying that he wanted to use up all his allowance for the year.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5429883/MPs-expenses-Tom-Watson-to-resign-from-Government.html

I undesrtand this David, but the point i'm making is that you expect it with the Tories, but Labour are supposed to for the working man, that is supposed to be the essence of what the party is about.

 

They are politicians and thus cut from the same cloth.

They are politicians and thus cut from the same cloth.

 

But Labour is supposed to be a party for the working class. They are supposed to be left wing - a party whose core value is wealth distribution. When you've got the likes of Denham waving this flag whilst gorging at the trough and buying expensive armchairs and alana rugs it makes them utter hypocrites. The fact people like him and Watson have not resigned in shame says it all about them. Self serving champagne Socialists is what they are.

It makes it MORE ok than when hypocritical "men of the working classes" like Denham shove their noses in the trough and claims £87,729 for a second home as well as £1,590 for two armchairs, £475 for an “Alana” rug and £474 for six kitchen chairs.

 

And as for the revoltingly obese Tom Watson:

 

Mr Watson, the minister for digital engagement, spent the maximum of £4,800 in a single year on food, and had his expenses cut after buying a set of dining room chairs that exceeded the limit set by the fees office.

He was forced to defend the appearance of a receipt for a "pizza wheel" on a Marks & Spencer receipt he submitted, saying ti was given as a free gift after he went on a £150 spending spree at the store.

He also used his parliamentary allowances, along with fellow Labour minister Iain Wright, to lavish more than £100,000 on a shared central London crash pad since the last general election.

Mr Wright, a junior housing minister, asked the Commons fees office if he could buy furniture at taxpayers' expense even before he had purchased a property, saying that he wanted to use up all his allowance for the year.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5429883/MPs-expenses-Tom-Watson-to-resign-from-Government.html

 

Rubbish. Just because you expect someone to do something wrong it doesn't make it any less wrong. Poor arguement Dune.

John Major (failed 1997), William Hague (failed 2001), Iain Duncan Smith (failed 2003), and Michael Howard (failed 2005).

 

Seeing them all together like that just demonstrates the appalling choices made by the Tory party for leader - variously weak, uncharistmatic, lacking in vision and in two cases - just plain slimy. The tories do have good and able MPs. Why do they keep choosing obvious losers?

Rubbish. Just because you expect someone to do something wrong it doesn't make it any less wrong. Poor arguement Dune.

 

It makes it more wrong when a Labour MP does it. Do you know what "left wing means"? I don't think you do. Denham and Watson don't IMO because if they did and they believed in it they would not have been so greedy. These two are worse than any tory who took the p/ss because what they did flies in the face of the political beliefs they clain to represent.

But Labour is supposed to be a party for the working class. They are supposed to be left wing - a party whose core value is wealth distribution. When you've got the likes of Denham waving this flag whilst gorging at the trough and buying expensive armchairs and alana rugs it makes them utter hypocrites. The fact people like him and Watson have not resigned in shame says it all about them. Self serving champagne Socialists is what they are.

 

I'm a socialist and yet live I perfectly normal middle class life. The two are perfectly compatible as are having working class tories.

 

You're attempting, weakly as it happens, to make an argument out of nowt.

I'm a socialist and yet live I perfectly normal middle class life. The two are perfectly compatible as are having working class tories.

 

You're attempting, weakly as it happens, to make an argument out of nowt.

 

The boy just doesn't understand that socialists just want EVERYONE to be able to buy nice things, to be healthy and to be well educated. He finds it incomprehensible that some people in the world really do care about EVERYONE having a chance in life. His lot just want to suppress a whole group of people.

I'm a socialist and yet live I perfectly normal middle class life. The two are perfectly compatible as are having working class tories.

 

You're attempting, weakly as it happens, to make an argument out of nowt.

 

The core belief of Socialism is wealth distribution. It is supposed to be about lifting the poorest people up. When you have the likes of Denham and Watson making claims that most people see as being greedy and self serving it shows them as being wolves in sheeps clothing. They are fakes. They say one thing and they do another. They speak for the Labour party yet they act like the aristocracy. This makes them far worse than any Tory.

The core belief of Socialism is wealth distribution. It is supposed to be about lifting the poorest people up. When you have the likes of Denham and Watson making claims that most people see as being greedy and self serving it shows them as being wolves in sheeps clothing. They are fakes. They say one thing and they do another. They speak for the Labour party yet they act like the aristocracy. This makes them far worse than any Tory.

 

All, of course, in your opinion.

The boy just doesn't understand that socialists just want EVERYONE to be able to buy nice things, to be healthy and to be well educated. He finds it incomprehensible that some people in the world really do care about EVERYONE having a chance in life. His lot just want to suppress a whole group of people.

 

The boy undesrtands perfectly well that the parliamentary Labour party is riddled with self serving nose in the trough fakes. Thankfully there are still some remaining decent Labour MP's like Dennis Skinner and Kate Hoey. They must despair at having the likes of Denham and Watson latching on to the party. They are parasites.

All, of course, in your opinion.

 

All FACT.

happy new year to you all and to the people that I have met from here...off out to enjoy the delights of plymouth

 

tara

I can cope with Tories looking after themselves, it's what they do. It's the Labour types that do it that annoy me.

 

Google "Tom Watson Expenses" and report back. Or google "John Denham Expenses" and tell me what it says. It's these snout in the trough Socialists that are the real hypocrites because they pupport to be representing the working classes.

 

 

I see you haven't discussed the 1829 people a day losing their jobs.....never mind. Let's concentrate on what really matters...2 guys on the take. It's OK form Tories to what they always do......what an intellect you are.

happy new year to you all and to the people that I have met from here...off out to enjoy the delights of plymouth

 

tara

Have a good one dell days

I want to know why Verbal wasn't given an honour for service to Internet forums.

I want to know why Verbal wasn't given an honour for service to Internet forums.

 

I know. It's ruined my day.

 

The core belief of Socialism is wealth distribution. It is supposed to be about lifting the poorest people up. When you have the likes of Denham and Watson making claims that most people see as being greedy and self serving it shows them as being wolves in sheeps clothing. They are fakes. They say one thing and they do another. They speak for the Labour party yet they act like the aristocracy. This makes them far worse than any Tory.

 

Oh dear - way, way too simplistic a view and too obviously gleaned from the pages of both the Mail and Sun but let's try and debunk the myth and try to lift the intellectual level of the discussion and add in a few non headline grabbing historical and philosophical truths?

 

The most basic premise of socialism is not wealth distribution or lifting the poorest people up...even if you were trying to make the point valid surely you would have thrown in the word 'equal'?

 

It's easy and cheap to trot out individual anecdotes of excess and I would not defend an MP from any party who abused their position yet one of your core arguments seem to be that it is expected of the Tories to cheat, rip-off and pillage both the parliamentary system and by logical thought process everything within their remit including the public purse and that's what a Tory voter should applaud?!

 

I digress - basic difference is that socialism is about for the good of the people whereas conservatism is about for the good of the person - ergo...if a system benefits society on an equal basis or on the basis of equal opportunity then the likelihood is that it has Socialist foundations...let me offer the NHS and the State schooling system as examples. If the system is geared to making an individual better off in preference to the good of society in general then the odds are it has Conservative beliefs behind it...I give you the banking sector and the stock market as examples.

 

Now - there has never been a fully Socialist nor a fully Capitalist based system in the history of politics that has worked...they have evolved, they have tried to have been put in place via revolutions but the only thing that history has proven is that neither can work on it's own and 'human nature' or 'natural progression' will always play a part and that there will always be strong leaders and greedy, power hungry exponents of both beliefs and the ebb and flow of this will lead the voting patterns of a country to the 'right' or 'left' but the reality will always be the blurred centre. Does anyone honestly believe that Blair was left wing? The difference in the philosophies however and the fact that he was a charismatic leader (coupled with the wide open own goals left in successive elections by the Tories as represented by Neil Hamilton, Jonathan Aitken and Harvey Proctor whilst your kicking anecdotal examples around) meant that employment went down, spending on the police, NHS and public services went up because that was the cornerstone of the Labour belief. Had Blair not taken the barely comprehensible decision to go to Iraq I suspect he would be viewed as a prime minister who achieved. It's difficult to make a comparison with the current coalition as they don't actually have a party mandate to govern so let the philosophical comparison be made with the Thatcher/Major governments whose majority was used to privatise the nationalised companies, sell council housing and steer the economy base toward a service and finance based model...all of which have massively benefited the shareholders who, coincidentally, are often their backers. Once again history has proven that this wasn't a great platform to build from and it could rightly be levelled that the unions had way too much power and influence in the seventies in particular but, philosophically, they were electedly representing a body of people not the wealth of an individual.

 

I'm trying to keep this simple so let me make two points - one indisputable and one anecdotal. Indisputably the Tory of 100, 50, 20 years ago would view Cameron as a raving Bolshevik, Communist or whatever the jargon of the day would have been so the tide is only flowing one way...we no longer put kids up chimneys nor have workhouses - there is a safety net (granted abused by some) so the path towards greater care of the people has rightly, in terms of basic humanity, taken it's course and will continue to do so...this is the real baseis of socialist beliefs. The anecdotal example would be that I do now and have run a number of companies yet would consider my beliefs to be socialist - the two are no more incompatible than the Victorian Tory philanthropists (two words not often seen together!) that recognised the obscenity of their own system and set about changing it. Regardless of the hiccups on the way - the socialist path is the one that has been proven to be favoured over the past two centuries because it's about people not individuals.

 

Here endeth my only slightly hungover New Year lesson.

Edited 1 January, 2012 by dronskisaint
spelling

You can't just say 'socialists main goal is wealth distribution'. Ideologies don't operate in vacuums, there are a lot of differences between revisionist socialism of Old Labour and the so called third way socialism of New Labour.

Rebecca Brooks you say? Yep trousers I would too!

It makes it more wrong when a Labour MP does it. Do you know what "left wing means"? I don't think you do. Denham and Watson don't IMO because if they did and they believed in it they would not have been so greedy. These two are worse than any tory who took the p/ss because what they did flies in the face of the political beliefs they clain to represent.

of coarse he knows what left wing is but your definition of left wing is atacking moderates and progressives rather than your far right nutty racists loving groups you support and your 1950s type mentality,it makes me laugh that you think your one of the elite the truth is my taxs pay for your unemployment benefits i expect to pander to your fantasy world .no wonder you attack the working people of this country. hope you enjoyed your cheap plonk and you got a bed for the night on new years eve .

The core belief of Socialism is wealth distribution. It is supposed to be about lifting the poorest people up. When you have the likes of Denham and Watson making claims that most people see as being greedy and self serving it shows them as being wolves in sheeps clothing. They are fakes. They say one thing and they do another. They speak for the Labour party yet they act like the aristocracy. This makes them far worse than any Tory.

 

Bwa-ha-ha. Dune's fragile grasp on politics is finally highlighted.

 

Broken down, Dune sees politics like this. Labour are the supposed good guys. Tories are the bad guys. Dune being dune, he has lined up behind the "bad guys". Moreover, he uses any deviation of the "good guys" from the true path of altruism as being proof that all their ideas are borken.

 

It makes PERFECT logical sense*.

 

* to a Commodore 64 that has just been hit by a meteorite.

I believe in a hand up, not a hand out. A belief that no doubt sends a shiver down the spine of someone from Liverpool - the bone idle dole waller capital of Britain.

I believe in a hand up, not a hand out. A belief that no doubt sends a shiver down the spine of someone from Liverpool - the bone idle dole waller capital of Britain.

 

Nice try on the old Liverpool thing mate. I was born in Southampton and spent the first 19 years of my life there. Still, it was worth a go. Why not log in as Turkish now and add some weight to your opinion?

Nice try on the old Liverpool thing mate. I was born in Southampton and spent the first 19 years of my life there. Still, it was worth a go. Why not log in as Turkish now and add some weight to your opinion?

 

I'm sure Turkbot will be be on later to agree.

I'm sure Turkbot will be be on later to agree.

 

I think it needs raw meat and nonsense to start its booting up cycle.

I believe in a hand up, not a hand out. A belief that no doubt sends a shiver down the spine of someone from Liverpool - the bone idle dole waller capital of Britain.

 

You must be a fan of the Third Way then... hand up, not a hand out is at the centre of all that. Said by Bill Clinton himself.

It makes it more wrong when a Labour MP does it. Do you know what "left wing means"? I don't think you do. Denham and Watson don't IMO because if they did and they believed in it they would not have been so greedy. These two are worse than any tory who took the p/ss because what they did flies in the face of the political beliefs they clain to represent.

 

So you're saying that Tories actually believe in fiddling expenses and robbing the public purse?

So you're saying that Tories actually believe in fiddling expenses and robbing the public purse?

 

Most politicians are self serving money grabbing c/nts, but at least with the Tories they don't try to hide it. When you've got the likes of Denham and Watson with their snouts in the trough it is worse because these people represent a party that is supposed to be left wing.

 

Oh for the days of real conviction politicians such as Enoch Powell - a Tory who was loved by his working class constituents and the nation.

Edited 3 January, 2012 by dune