Brown wastes more of our tax pounds on Labour propaganda website

SGE1

ad9898 wrote: »

SGE1, do you support the Labour party ?

In the sense that I would vote for them if there were a general election tomorrow, yes.

ad9898 wrote: »

I was being a bit smart:D, she( i think it's a she), was really offended when I mentioned Scargill, like it was her dad or something.:D

What's Scargill?

SGE1

handful wrote: »

Whatever gave you that idea??;)

It seems to me that the strain is starting to show on SGE1 and Rochdale Pioneers valiant attempts to support our illustrious leader. Chill out guys for god's sake.

Of course the strain is showing, there are two of us and about 14 of you. I'm not superwoman (today anyway).

mewbie_2

I don't suppose the website cost much. They probably got that student who did the WMD thesis (which took us into an illegal and unneccesary war) to do it.

dealsearcher

Well he was unelected so there!

The system is wrong in that case. We have a PM elected to a scottish constituency which has it's own devolved parliament. Scottish MP's can vote on english matters but english MP's can't vote on scottish matters. A PM that can take us to war on a lie and get away with it. A parliament that can vote itself allowances. A government that can stop freedom of information requests on what it does.

Certainly the system is not perfect. In fact there is a fair bit wrong with it. So yes the system is being followed by them, but they control how the system works. It may be legal but it ain't morally right.

nickmason

SGE1 wrote: »

I was going to for another round re the unelected comment, but handful has just admitted s/he was wrong, so I can lay the sword down (after this short rant below).

And re what people mean by unelected, I disagree. It's a very strong word, far more so than 'not directly elected', so I don't think it's fair to just let it pass. The reason I took such exception to it is because it's misleading to others. As you said, nothing unconstitutional has taken place, nothing even remotely unusual in fact, so let's be done with the childish "He's unelected!" cr*p. If I'm !!!!ed off about something, I say it, I don't shout a lie loud enough in the hope that it will somehow become true and then someone will come and fix it for me. And one can only be hoisted by one's own petard, if one is proved wrong; as I explained, my statement was accurate, though incomplete (if you're to be believed, you're probably only winding me up anyway), therefore I would argue that in trying to suggest that I have been hoist by my own petard, you have been hoist by that said petard which you alleged had hoisted me

I wasn't winding you up - I was trying to point out what I saw as your hypocrisy - the petard in question.

But this really has run its course, I think. We aren't going to get to the bottom of
a) whether a statement can be accurate but incomplete.
b) whether there's any value in the elected/unelected thing.

So anyhow, I'll try and climb down from wherever this petard that caught me unawares has put me, and sheath my sword, and hope that we all remain friends.

:beer:

nickmason

SGE1 wrote: »

Originally Posted by ad9898
SGE1, do you support the Labour party ?

In the sense that I would vote for them if there were a general election tomorrow, yes.

How about if I asked whether tha Labour party supported you?

Supplimentary question, if no to above; does the British taxpayer?

If that's too personal feel free to duck - I won't hound you for not answering - it's all meant in good nature.

SGE1

nickmason wrote: »

How about if I asked whether tha Labour party supported you?

Supplimentary question, if no to above; does the British taxpayer?

If that's too personal feel free to duck - I won't hound you for not answering - it's all meant in good nature.

Tha Labour party? Are you getting all ghetto on me now?

And about those questions, do you mean emotionally, or financially?

wigglebeena

matthewcb wrote: »

I know this doesn't add much to the thread, but I detest this Government with every part of my being.

The day they get banished from office will be a joyous, fantastic occasion. Even if the Tories aren't the greatest opposition (and they're not, frankly), *anything* is better that this corrupt bunch of wasters, in the death throes of office and trying to grab everything they can.

Gordon Brown cares only about being in power, and he doesn't give two hoots if future generations are still paying for it when he's six feet under. He's like a petulant child who will try anything to get what he wants.

I've learned my lesson, I will never vote Labour again. I feel ashamed that I fell for Blair's spin in '97.

I can't believe I voted for the murdering satanic war criminal c*** not once but twice. I apologise to everyone in the country. (Sorry. the NuLab t**** bring out the pottymouth in me. There is no obscenity which seems adequate to describe their vileness).

wigglebeena

I do enjoy thinking of the fiery scalding acid-drenched pit of hell awaiting Blair when he exits this mortal coil, though.

All his bungs and corrupt pals and directorships and Obama smiling at him through gritted teeth on the advice of diplomats and civil servants, won't help him then.

nickmason

SGE1 wrote: »

Tha Labour party? Are you getting all ghetto on me now?

And about those questions, do you mean emotionally, or financially?

LOL - and I just thanked Mewbie on another thread for picking up on your typo or misspelling. Well I thanked him for his funny way of doing it, rather than because it was you, I hasten to add.:o

I meant financially - I'm trying to remember; did you work for Labour for a while, then go to the private sector? Or are you actually know working in the Cabinet Office or suchlike?