Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Recorded today. Loathsome Dave.

>

> https://soundcloud.com/the_e_r_c/loathsome-dave-eccentronic-research-council-ft-maxine-peake


Good lord - it's like a recording from an post-pub Occupy meeting. Close your eyes and you can almost see them all sitting around making jazz hands at the end.

And with genuine reason.


I have spent the last 3 years in a job which was basically designed to implement the Coalition cuts in my local authority. We've cut down to the bone, whilst TRYING to still help people as much as possible. And now it's going to get worse (we've already been warned) and there isn't much left to cut away. My colleague is desperately looking for another job, and I am desperately hoping she finds one so that I might be more secure because I can't see us both surviving.


So yeah, I vent my spleen a bit on facebook when I see stupid dicks who work in the NHS and vive in the burbs going on about benefits cheats and immigrants. These people are stupid as far as I'm concerned.


But if you're not at any real risk and it gives you a good giggle then great. I find that a little bit twisted though quite frankly.

Well if you're talking about particular insensitive twats then go for it but I'm talking about the whole if you don't agree with me you're a thick cunt type comments. In actual fact I wasn't referring to you as in the interest of our friendship I unfollowed you for a while! I really hope you don't lose your job, but that goes without saying x

I don't THINK I've actually called anyone thick or anything (I might have but don't think so).


I've more just said how depressing I find it and how scary. My Mrs make a turkeys voting for Christmas comment but she works in the NHS and I think that was directed at people in her work place (and I think that's fair).

Have a read of mine, I just checked and I can't see anything that could cause offence except someone else's status which I shared.


I've mainly talked about where it went wrong for Labour rather than slagging anyone off.


The wife will say what she wants to say, and she'll stand by it, and it will be a cold day in hell before she changes her mind about the Tories.


When people vote based on blatant lies they are fed by the daily mail or the sun, then I don't think it's entirely unfair to question their intelligence (and yes same for those who believe everything they read in the Guardian).

I've been watching back over the night and more especially at the opinions spouted by the Labour elite. They seem to have spent most of the campaign looking in on themselves positively whilst dismissing the bigger picture. In other words, the urban intelligentsia are on a different planet to the rest of us. A very 'London Labour' view of the UK, totally out of line with the larger view. This has to be addressed over this coming parliament.


Two important points, firstly, a divided union. Scotland doesn't believe Labour (or Westminster in general) gives them a voice. For many Scots, the translation of this at the ballot box has been to vote SNP. Whether they believe Scotland should be independent or not. The Labour and left leaning Scottish electorate, rightly or wrongly, assume the SNP to be left of Labour. They are not in my opinion, but Sturgeon has run a wonderful and convincing campaign which has supported this assumption.


Secondly, in England (and to a lesser extent Wales), the traditional Labour voter outside of London is feeling quite a bit isolated. Across the heartlands a significant enough number is turning to UKIP primarily over fears about immigration and other working class issues that they feel the wealthy Labour elite is failing to recognise or be trusted on, and this is enough to push UKIP into runner up. In the marginals, the centre-left leaning voters are believing Labour will damage the economy and are too far to the left, and so are going over to or staying with the tories as a result.


The consequences of all of this are that Labour are seen as too far to the right in Scotland, and too far to the left in England. Labour now has to confront the rise of tribalism as a consequence of the swings on the political spectrum and the makeup of the new parliament. It will be a difficult job for the new leader.


Louisa.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson rather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...