Left Wing Idiots

[Fop 1]

You two make Fop smile with your on tap bile. But it's getting a bit predictable now, as you can't even seem to conjure up one attempt at refuting points before having to resort to pooey pants insults.

You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's. Its just absurd and therefore doesnt warrant anything other than ridicule.

 

"Society doesnt exist"

Where did Fop do that exactly?

Am i attributing something to you which you think you didnt say?

 

Naughty naughty me, wonder who taught me that trick?

 

(You did say it anyway).

(where? )

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=594824

 

So basically, despite your very best attempts to invent a strawman, Fop didn't do any such thing.

 

"I'd say New Labour are probably more right wing than the tories in many ways, in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown"

 

And where is:

 

"You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's."

 

in that? (apart from nowhere, of course )

 

Fop didn't "try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's", so again where did you think Fop did?

 

So there's a distinction to be made between 'general' policies and 'social' policies is there? Jesus wept.

 

Yes there's quite a MASSIVE distinction between "many general policies" and specifically comparing "Tory social policy with Labour's".

 

You could try to build a strawman by comparing Thatcher's underwear with Brown's too if you want (although that might backfire ), but it still wouldn't have anything at all to do with what Fop actually said.

[Guest alex]

You two make Fop smile with your on tap bile. But it's getting a bit predictable now, as you can't even seem to conjure up one attempt at refuting points before having to resort to pooey pants insults.

You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's. Its just absurd and therefore doesnt warrant anything other than ridicule.

 

"Society doesnt exist"

Where did Fop do that exactly?

Am i attributing something to you which you think you didnt say?

 

Naughty naughty me, wonder who taught me that trick?

 

(You did say it anyway).

(where? )

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=594824

 

So basically, despite your very best attempts to invent a strawman, Fop didn't do any such thing.

 

"I'd say New Labour are probably more right wing than the tories in many ways, in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown"

 

And where is:

 

"You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's."

 

in that? (apart from nowhere, of course )

 

Fop didn't "try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's", so again where did you think Fop did?

 

So there's a distinction to be made between 'general' policies and 'social' policies is there? Jesus wept.

 

Yes there's quite a MASSIVE distinction between "many general policies" and specifically comparing "Tory social policy with Labour's".

 

You could try to build a strawman by comparing Thatcher's underwear with Brown's too if you want (although that might backfire ), but it still wouldn't have anything at all to do with what Fop actually said.

Tbf, you haven't made that distinction clear by outlining which policies you were on about

[Renton 18038]

 

What boils my piss is why people feel the need to side with one party or another. Sometimes the conservatives have the best policies, sometimes it's labour. Why can some people not see that and feel the need for blind tribal faith in one party only.

 

I have only ever known (after 40 years), a labour council. They know they will always be in and therefore, I feel, more unaccountable with regard to how they spend money.

 

I find nothing democratic about local politics.

 

Point taken about local politics but I am fundamentally opposed to conservative 'values'. I cannot envision a time I would ever vote for them or trust them. I'm less sure about the liberal democrats who I can identify with but they seem like a wasted vote in all honesty.

[Renton 18038]

You two make Fop smile with your on tap bile. But it's getting a bit predictable now, as you can't even seem to conjure up one attempt at refuting points before having to resort to pooey pants insults.

You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's. Its just absurd and therefore doesnt warrant anything other than ridicule.

 

"Society doesnt exist"

Where did Fop do that exactly?

Am i attributing something to you which you think you didnt say?

 

Naughty naughty me, wonder who taught me that trick?

 

(You did say it anyway).

(where? )

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=594824

 

So basically, despite your very best attempts to invent a strawman, Fop didn't do any such thing.

 

"I'd say New Labour are probably more right wing than the tories in many ways, in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown"

 

And where is:

 

"You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's."

 

in that? (apart from nowhere, of course )

 

Fop didn't "try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's", so again where did you think Fop did?

 

So there's a distinction to be made between 'general' policies and 'social' policies is there? Jesus wept.

 

Yes there's quite a MASSIVE distinction between "many general policies" and specifically comparing "Tory social policy with Labour's".

 

You could try to build a strawman by comparing Thatcher's underwear with Brown's too if you want (although that might backfire ), but it still wouldn't have anything at all to do with what Fop actually said.

Tbf, you haven't made that distinction clear by outlining which policies you were on about

 

Social policies are the ones that matter most to me. I'm glad Fop has made it clear he agrees Labours are different to Conservatives after all.

[Meenzer 14136]

I have only ever known (after 40 years), a labour council. They know they will always be in and therefore, I feel, more unaccountable with regard to how they spend money.

 

I find nothing democratic about local politics.

I can understand that. It can change, of course - see the Lib Dems in Newcastle after however many years of Labour - but it tends to need a hell of a lot of perseverance by a consistent group of people in the face of a long struggle. Mind you, you'd think with Labour's ongoing national collapse that someone would be targeting other local councils. It'll be interesting to see how the Tyneside parliamentary seats shape up next year.

 

I tend to prefer local politics myself - I can get a handle on schools, potholes, dogshit and recycling collections far more than I can the broad strokes of nationwide policy statements - but I can fully understand any apathy towards it, particularly in places where voting doesn't offer any realistic prospect of change. You don't half get some nutjob councillors too.

[snakehips 0]

Forget about the differing social/general policies for one moment. Let's not forget the differing policies of Labour and New Labour.

 

Two cornerstones of socialism i.e. Nationalisation and, dare I even say it these days, the 'R' word seem nothing to do with New Labour at all.

 

Apathy in voters could well be a direct result of Blair and his cohorts changing the name/direction of the Labour party in the realiation that they were unelectable in their old guise. Their change in beliefs seem to have resulted in less of an obvious difference between Cons and New Labour. However, if the Conservatives are elected at the next election, there will be one massive difference for voters to observe: public spending will be slashed remarkably and the job losses in consequence will be for all to see quite clearly.

[Renton 18038]

Forget about the differing social/general policies for one moment. Let's not forget the differing policies of Labour and New Labour.

 

Two cornerstones of socialism i.e. Nationalisation and, dare I even say it these days, the 'R' word seem nothing to do with New Labour at all.

 

Apathy in voters could well be a direct result of Blair and his cohorts changing the name/direction of the Labour party in the realiation that they were unelectable in their old guise. Their change in beliefs seem to have resulted in less of an obvious difference between Cons and New Labour. However, if the Conservatives are elected at the next election, there will be one massive difference for voters to observe: public spending will be slashed remarkably and the job losses in consequence will be for all to see quite clearly.

 

Well put.

[Meenzer 14136]

Turnout at the next election will be fascinating. I can imagine there'll be a lot of shoulder-shrugging from people who won't vote Labour again but can't bring themselves to go with one of the other options. Wouldn't surprise me if we even get a couple of BNP MPs as a result.

[Guest alex]

I don't really think it's particularly helpful to use anecdotal examples as a justification for public spending cuts.

[Renton 18038]

Forget about the differing social/general policies for one moment. Let's not forget the differing policies of Labour and New Labour.

 

Two cornerstones of socialism i.e. Nationalisation and, dare I even say it these days, the 'R' word seem nothing to do with New Labour at all.

 

Apathy in voters could well be a direct result of Blair and his cohorts changing the name/direction of the Labour party in the realiation that they were unelectable in their old guise. Their change in beliefs seem to have resulted in less of an obvious difference between Cons and New Labour. However, if the Conservatives are elected at the next election, there will be one massive difference for voters to observe: public spending will be slashed remarkably and the job losses in consequence will be for all to see quite clearly.

 

Well put.

 

But surely there is a need for public spending to be cut. A budget is a budget and if you've only got so much to go round, you've got to be choosy where it goes. And thats not including the money thats been wasted over the last 12 months.

 

For example, should the NHS be paying for "Charvers" to get free taxis to hospital, when little old dears have to struggle to the bus stop.

 

I'm probably biased being a great believer and employee of the NHS. I think this would decimated under the tories. Your point about charvers is taken and is a can of worms for another debate really, undoubtedly for me New Labour's greatest failing.

[Park Life 71]

Politics is finished.

 

Money is finished.

 

History is finished.

[Park Life 71]

A new covenant must be made between the people and the Govt.

[Renton 18038]

Forget about the differing social/general policies for one moment. Let's not forget the differing policies of Labour and New Labour.

 

Two cornerstones of socialism i.e. Nationalisation and, dare I even say it these days, the 'R' word seem nothing to do with New Labour at all.

 

Apathy in voters could well be a direct result of Blair and his cohorts changing the name/direction of the Labour party in the realiation that they were unelectable in their old guise. Their change in beliefs seem to have resulted in less of an obvious difference between Cons and New Labour. However, if the Conservatives are elected at the next election, there will be one massive difference for voters to observe: public spending will be slashed remarkably and the job losses in consequence will be for all to see quite clearly.

 

Well put.

 

But surely there is a need for public spending to be cut. A budget is a budget and if you've only got so much to go round, you've got to be choosy where it goes. And thats not including the money thats been wasted over the last 12 months.

 

For example, should the NHS be paying for "Charvers" to get free taxis to hospital, when little old dears have to struggle to the bus stop.

 

I'm probably biased being a great believer and employee of the NHS. I think this would decimated under the tories. Your point about charvers is taken and is a can of worms for another debate really, undoubtedly for me New Labour's greatest failing.

 

 

Fair enough

 

But you must know better than most that the NHS is a bottomless pit and I think will only be looked after properly when some form of privatisation is brought in.

 

Well, no, it's not a bottomless pit at all, and yes, people will have to accept a degree of personal expenditure in the future to get the best treatments. It's a question of how you do this though, something I would never entrust to a tory government who fundamentally do not believe in social welfare.

 

You missed a great thread on this a few months back as it happens.

[Renton 18038]

Forget about the differing social/general policies for one moment. Let's not forget the differing policies of Labour and New Labour.

 

Two cornerstones of socialism i.e. Nationalisation and, dare I even say it these days, the 'R' word seem nothing to do with New Labour at all.

 

Apathy in voters could well be a direct result of Blair and his cohorts changing the name/direction of the Labour party in the realiation that they were unelectable in their old guise. Their change in beliefs seem to have resulted in less of an obvious difference between Cons and New Labour. However, if the Conservatives are elected at the next election, there will be one massive difference for voters to observe: public spending will be slashed remarkably and the job losses in consequence will be for all to see quite clearly.

 

Well put.

 

But surely there is a need for public spending to be cut. A budget is a budget and if you've only got so much to go round, you've got to be choosy where it goes. And thats not including the money thats been wasted over the last 12 months.

 

For example, should the NHS be paying for "Charvers" to get free taxis to hospital, when little old dears have to struggle to the bus stop.

 

I'm probably biased being a great believer and employee of the NHS. I think this would decimated under the tories. Your point about charvers is taken and is a can of worms for another debate really, undoubtedly for me New Labour's greatest failing.

 

 

Fair enough

 

But you must know better than most that the NHS is a bottomless pit and I think will only be looked after properly when some form of privatisation is brought in.

 

Well, no, it's not a bottomless pit at all, and yes, people will have to accept a degree of personal expenditure in the future to get the best treatments. It's a question of how you do this though, something I would never entrust to a tory government who fundamentally do not believe in social welfare.

 

You missed a great thread on this a few months back as it happens.

 

But times change dont they, policies change. Didnt Labour not used to want to ban the bomb and all that other malarky.

 

Its this branding of a group of people with no possibility of change that discourages me in polotics.

 

It should all be decided xfactor style with a public vote on the big issues.

 

True but after the 80s I could never trust the tories. I'd find it impossible to trust the Eton duo of Cameron and Osbourne under any circumstances. Plus I live in Tynemouth and know a few conservative councillors. I absolutely loathe them and what they stand for.

[ChezGiven 0]

Forget about the differing social/general policies for one moment. Let's not forget the differing policies of Labour and New Labour.

 

Two cornerstones of socialism i.e. Nationalisation and, dare I even say it these days, the 'R' word seem nothing to do with New Labour at all.

 

Apathy in voters could well be a direct result of Blair and his cohorts changing the name/direction of the Labour party in the realiation that they were unelectable in their old guise. Their change in beliefs seem to have resulted in less of an obvious difference between Cons and New Labour. However, if the Conservatives are elected at the next election, there will be one massive difference for voters to observe: public spending will be slashed remarkably and the job losses in consequence will be for all to see quite clearly.

 

Well put.

 

But surely there is a need for public spending to be cut. A budget is a budget and if you've only got so much to go round, you've got to be choosy where it goes. And thats not including the money thats been wasted over the last 12 months.

 

For example, should the NHS be paying for "Charvers" to get free taxis to hospital, when little old dears have to struggle to the bus stop.

 

I'm probably biased being a great believer and employee of the NHS. I think this would decimated under the tories. Your point about charvers is taken and is a can of worms for another debate really, undoubtedly for me New Labour's greatest failing.

 

 

Fair enough

 

But you must know better than most that the NHS is a bottomless pit and I think will only be looked after properly when some form of privatisation is brought in.

 

Well, no, it's not a bottomless pit at all, and yes, people will have to accept a degree of personal expenditure in the future to get the best treatments. It's a question of how you do this though, something I would never entrust to a tory government who fundamentally do not believe in social welfare.

 

You missed a great thread on this a few months back as it happens.

 

But times change dont they, policies change. Didnt Labour not used to want to ban the bomb and all that other malarky.

 

Its this branding of a group of people with no possibility of change that discourages me in polotics.

 

It should all be decided xfactor style with a public vote on the big issues.

 

True but after the 80s I could never trust the tories. I'd find it impossible to trust the Eton duo of Cameron and Osbourne under any circumstances. Plus I live in Tynemouth and know a few conservative councillors. I absolutely loathe them and what they stand for.

 

Evil Rotter?

[ChezGiven 0]

Did that pool have seawater in it?

 

In which case, what was the point of it?

[snakehips 0]

Did that pool have seawater in it?

 

In which case, what was the point of it?

 

Yes, it was seawater. Better class of blit in the pool than on the beach though.

[Renton 18038]

Did that pool have seawater in it?

 

In which case, what was the point of it?

 

It did aye. Was fucking freezing even in July. Probably warmer and cleaner than the surrounding sea though (and remember this was before there was clean sea water). I enjoyed it a lot as a kid. Can't believe they actually paid to make it look the way it does now! It's supposed to be an urban rockpool or something, but in reality is just a rat infested swamp now.

 

Re: Before, I don't know if Neville Trotter is still alive tbh, I was referring to Linda Arkley and her band of evil cohorts, aka the blue rinse brigade.

[Fop 1]

You two make Fop smile with your on tap bile. But it's getting a bit predictable now, as you can't even seem to conjure up one attempt at refuting points before having to resort to pooey pants insults.

You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's. Its just absurd and therefore doesnt warrant anything other than ridicule.

 

"Society doesnt exist"

Where did Fop do that exactly?

Am i attributing something to you which you think you didnt say?

 

Naughty naughty me, wonder who taught me that trick?

 

(You did say it anyway).

(where? )

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=594824

 

So basically, despite your very best attempts to invent a strawman, Fop didn't do any such thing.

 

"I'd say New Labour are probably more right wing than the tories in many ways, in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown"

 

And where is:

 

"You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's."

 

in that? (apart from nowhere, of course )

 

Fop didn't "try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's", so again where did you think Fop did?

 

So there's a distinction to be made between 'general' policies and 'social' policies is there? Jesus wept.

 

Yes there's quite a MASSIVE distinction between "many general policies" and specifically comparing "Tory social policy with Labour's".

 

You could try to build a strawman by comparing Thatcher's underwear with Brown's too if you want (although that might backfire ), but it still wouldn't have anything at all to do with what Fop actually said.

Tbf, you haven't made that distinction clear by outlining which policies you were on about

 

Social policies are the ones that matter most to me.

 

So which "social policies" matter so much to you then? And why don't you care about economic policies, health policies, housing policies, utility and public service policies etc. etc.?

 

I'm glad Fop has made it clear he agrees Labours are different to Conservatives after all.

Fop said from the beginning that New Labour is different to the Conservatives, in many ways New Labour is more right wing. (you really don't pay attention do you).

 

Although as Fop says in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown.

[ChezGiven 0]

What a tit housing, health, utility and public services policy are all social policy. As taxation is an economic policy, this is also a social policy as it can alleviate the burden on social classes.

 

Clueless tbh.

 

Define more right wing and which labour policy has been more right wing than an equivalent conservative policy.

[Guest alex]

Absolute nutcase.

[Renton 18038]

You two make Fop smile with your on tap bile. But it's getting a bit predictable now, as you can't even seem to conjure up one attempt at refuting points before having to resort to pooey pants insults.

You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's. Its just absurd and therefore doesnt warrant anything other than ridicule.

 

"Society doesnt exist"

Where did Fop do that exactly?

Am i attributing something to you which you think you didnt say?

 

Naughty naughty me, wonder who taught me that trick?

 

(You did say it anyway).

(where? )

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=594824

 

So basically, despite your very best attempts to invent a strawman, Fop didn't do any such thing.

 

"I'd say New Labour are probably more right wing than the tories in many ways, in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown"

 

And where is:

 

"You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's."

 

in that? (apart from nowhere, of course )

 

Fop didn't "try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's", so again where did you think Fop did?

 

So there's a distinction to be made between 'general' policies and 'social' policies is there? Jesus wept.

 

Yes there's quite a MASSIVE distinction between "many general policies" and specifically comparing "Tory social policy with Labour's".

 

You could try to build a strawman by comparing Thatcher's underwear with Brown's too if you want (although that might backfire ), but it still wouldn't have anything at all to do with what Fop actually said.

Tbf, you haven't made that distinction clear by outlining which policies you were on about

 

Social policies are the ones that matter most to me.

 

So which "social policies" matter so much to you then? And why don't you care about economic policies, health policies, housing policies, utility and public service policies etc. etc.?

 

I'm glad Fop has made it clear he agrees Labours are different to Conservatives after all.

Fop said from the beginning that New Labour is different to the Conservatives, in many ways New Labour is more right wing. (you really don't pay attention do you).

 

Although as Fop says in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown.

 

My definition of social policy is much boader than yours, clearly. What do you specifically mean by it?

[manc-mag 1]

Christ on a crutch.

[Fop 1]

What a tit housing, health, utility and public services policy are all social policy. As taxation is an economic policy, this is also a social policy as it can alleviate the burden on social classes.

 

Clueless tbh.

 

Define more right wing and which labour policy has been more right wing than an equivalent conservative policy.

 

Ah I see you think you can answer this one (how long have you been waiting )

 

 

No they have or can have aspects of social policy, but again that is a very different thing to some mythical "social policy" that you and Renty keep banging on about.

 

What "social policy" were you talking about by the way?

[Fop 1]

You two make Fop smile with your on tap bile. But it's getting a bit predictable now, as you can't even seem to conjure up one attempt at refuting points before having to resort to pooey pants insults.

You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's. Its just absurd and therefore doesnt warrant anything other than ridicule.

 

"Society doesnt exist"

Where did Fop do that exactly?

Am i attributing something to you which you think you didnt say?

 

Naughty naughty me, wonder who taught me that trick?

 

(You did say it anyway).

(where? )

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=594824

 

So basically, despite your very best attempts to invent a strawman, Fop didn't do any such thing.

 

"I'd say New Labour are probably more right wing than the tories in many ways, in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown"

 

And where is:

 

"You didnt make a point and anyone who was politically aware in the 80s would not try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's."

 

in that? (apart from nowhere, of course )

 

Fop didn't "try to compare Tory social policy with Labour's", so again where did you think Fop did?

 

So there's a distinction to be made between 'general' policies and 'social' policies is there? Jesus wept.

 

Yes there's quite a MASSIVE distinction between "many general policies" and specifically comparing "Tory social policy with Labour's".

 

You could try to build a strawman by comparing Thatcher's underwear with Brown's too if you want (although that might backfire ), but it still wouldn't have anything at all to do with what Fop actually said.

Tbf, you haven't made that distinction clear by outlining which policies you were on about

 

Social policies are the ones that matter most to me.

 

So which "social policies" matter so much to you then? And why don't you care about economic policies, health policies, housing policies, utility and public service policies etc. etc.?

 

I'm glad Fop has made it clear he agrees Labours are different to Conservatives after all.

Fop said from the beginning that New Labour is different to the Conservatives, in many ways New Labour is more right wing. (you really don't pay attention do you).

 

Although as Fop says in fact it's hard to see the difference in many general policies between Thatcher and Blair/Brown.

 

My definition of social policy is much boader than yours, clearly. What do you specifically mean by it?

 

You were the one talking about "social policy", not Fop, you should have some idea of what you were talking about.

 

Are you telling me you DON'T have any idea of what you were talking about?