Brown wastes more of our tax pounds on Labour propaganda website

lostinrates

SGE1 wrote: »

Stop being such a snob. The Government's providing information to citizens, since when has that been a bad thing? Or is it too low-brow for your superior intellect?

Slighty OT but are we citizens now? When did that happen..?:o

handful

SGE1 wrote: »

Stop being such a snob. The Government's providing information to citizens, since when has that been a bad thing? Or is it too low-brow for your superior intellect?

'Information'. Is that what you call it? I think the OP had used a more accurate description with propaganda.

BTW, I don't consider myself as being a snob or having superior intellect at all, I also don't consider it as low-brow, just untrue and another example of desperation from a spent and unelected PM.

boyse7en

Perhaps had he not been a member of the LibDems who were noisily throwing out the drunk then the old may he might have been given a bigger platform.

more likely that the media were too busy getting pictures of Brittney with no knickers on and the latest Big Brother controversy to bother reporting the 'scaremongering' of an opposition party spokesman.

beecher

What really infuriated me was the inclusion of issues which had nothing to do with Westminster, or Labour. For example, links to the council tax freeze in Edinburgh (devolved issue, Lib Dem/SNP council) and links to help for business (devolved issues, SNP government). I emailed them, received no reply but the links have now gone. Labour are great for taking the credit for other people's work, not so great at taking the blame.

SGE1

handful wrote: »

'Information'. Is that what you call it? I think the OP had used a more accurate description with propaganda.

BTW, I don't consider myself as being a snob or having superior intellect at all, I also don't consider it as low-brow, just untrue and another example of desperation from a spent and unelected PM.

Fine: I challenge you to find one lie on the website. A lie, by the way, is a factual inaccuracy, not just something you disagree with, just to be clear.

Oh and during a general election, citizens vote for their local representative. The leader of the party with the most representatives becomes PM. You really should learn how our parliamentary monarchy works, it weakens your credibility slightly when you spout the usual Daily Mail illinformed nonsense.

lynzpower

SGE1 wrote: »

Fine: I challenge you to find one lie on the website. A lie, by the way, is a factual inaccuracy, not just something you disagree with, just to be clear.

Oh and during a general election, citizens vote for their local representative. The leader of the party with the most representatives becomes PM. You really should learn how our parliamentary monarchy works, it weakens your credibility slightly when you spout the usual Daily Mail illinformed nonsense.

Do you think those banks are lending at 2007 levels? IM really not convinced.

MrDT

SGE1 wrote: »

Oh and during a general election, citizens vote for their local representative. The leader of the party with the most representatives becomes PM. You really should learn how our parliamentary monarchy works, it weakens your credibility slightly when you spout the usual Daily Mail illinformed nonsense.

The majority of voters vote for the "lead singer", not the band. And you know it.

Brown wasn't voted in by the people. Teflon Tone was.

handful

SGE1 wrote: »

Fine: I challenge you to find one lie on the website. A lie, by the way, is a factual inaccuracy, not just something you disagree with, just to be clear.

Oh and during a general election, citizens vote for their local representative. The leader of the party with the most representatives becomes PM. You really should learn how our parliamentary monarchy works, it weakens your credibility slightly when you spout the usual Daily Mail illinformed nonsense.

Now who's being the intellectually superior snob?? I understand why he is PM but it doesn't alter the fact he is unelected and has no mandate. As for spouting the usual Daily Mail illinformed nonsense....do you mean as opposed to your equally illinformed Daily Mirror nonsense??

(The emoticon is there to show I'm really not that bothered about getting into a personal attack as seems to be the order of the day at the moment!!)

nickmason

SGE1 wrote: »

Fine: I challenge you to find one lie on the website. A lie, by the way, is a factual inaccuracy, not just something you disagree with, just to be clear.

Oh and during a general election, citizens vote for their local representative. The leader of the party with the most representatives becomes PM. You really should learn how our parliamentary monarchy works, it weakens your credibility slightly when you spout the usual Daily Mail illinformed nonsense.

I believe that second paragraph to be a factual inaccuracy. I think you'll find the PM to be the individual MP who can obtain the permission/confidence of the house to form a government. Typically the leader of the party with a majority, but not always.

Obviously this doesn't help the earlier comment about unelected PM, as it illustrates that, constitutionally, the electorate (not citizens - urgh) are even more removed from the selection of the PM than you suggested.

Mind you, he's right - the PM is unelected. So I suppose he has earned more credibility than you...

SGE1

MrDT wrote: »

The majority of voters vote for the "lead singer", not the band. And you know it.

Brown wasn't voted in by the people. Teflon Tone was.

Perhaps - but I don't think that constitutes enough of a good reason. People know the rules, they tick the box next to a name that isn't that of the MP that becomes PM (unless they live in his contituency), people understand the system. People make their own decisions about why they chose to vote for xyz, but if they're voting in the PM by proxy, rather than their own MP, that doesn't constitute a legitimate reason to throw the whole process in the bin.